tnite
07-19 10:14 AM
By "resident" you mean its an AOS case and not Counsulate processing right? Meaning he is in US and submitting AOS application right? yes, he has been here for 5 yrs on h1b and his wife was on H4 when he claimed some of her tuition under 8863
For IRS tax purposes one is considered a resident if they pass the substantial presence test (http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=96352,00.html). i e. you pay the same taxes every other resident pays and you get the same deductions, exemptions others get.
There is nothing to worry about in your friends case.
If they had a home, they would have deducted their interest from the taxes, if they had medical expenses more than 8% of their income then they would have deucted that too.
As a resident tax filer, these are some of the advantages.
I dont understand why your friends are worried about this.
check this out (http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc851.html)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since resident and nonresident aliens are taxed differently, it is important for you to determine your status. You are considered a nonresident alien for any period that you are neither a United States citizen nor a United States resident alien.
You are considered a resident alien if you met one of two tests for the calendar year.
The first test is the "green card test." If at any time during the calendar year you were a lawful permanent resident of the United States according to the immigration laws, and this status has not been rescinded or administratively or judicially determined to have been abandoned, you are considered to have met the green card test.
The second test is the "substantial presence test." To meet this test, you must have been physically present in the United States on at least 31 days during the current year, and 183 days during the 3 year period that includes the current year and the 2 years immediately before. To satisfy the 183 days requirement, count all of the days you were present in the current year, and one–third of the days you were present in the first year before the current year, and one–sixth of the days you were present in the second year before the current year. Do not count any day you were present in the United States as an "exempt individual" or commute from Canada or Mexico to work in the United States on more than 75% of the workdays during your working period. An exempt individual may be anyone in the following categories:
A foreign government–related individual,
A teacher or trainee with a J or Q visa who substantially complies with the requirements of the visa,
A student with an F, J, M, or Q visa who substantially complies with the requirements of the visa; or
A professional athlete temporarily present to compete in a charitable sports event.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since your friend and his wife are on H Visa for the last 5 yrs, they are considered resident aliens for tax purposes and they can claim deductions , benefits , hope credit , life time learning credit etc.
For IRS tax purposes one is considered a resident if they pass the substantial presence test (http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=96352,00.html). i e. you pay the same taxes every other resident pays and you get the same deductions, exemptions others get.
There is nothing to worry about in your friends case.
If they had a home, they would have deducted their interest from the taxes, if they had medical expenses more than 8% of their income then they would have deucted that too.
As a resident tax filer, these are some of the advantages.
I dont understand why your friends are worried about this.
check this out (http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc851.html)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since resident and nonresident aliens are taxed differently, it is important for you to determine your status. You are considered a nonresident alien for any period that you are neither a United States citizen nor a United States resident alien.
You are considered a resident alien if you met one of two tests for the calendar year.
The first test is the "green card test." If at any time during the calendar year you were a lawful permanent resident of the United States according to the immigration laws, and this status has not been rescinded or administratively or judicially determined to have been abandoned, you are considered to have met the green card test.
The second test is the "substantial presence test." To meet this test, you must have been physically present in the United States on at least 31 days during the current year, and 183 days during the 3 year period that includes the current year and the 2 years immediately before. To satisfy the 183 days requirement, count all of the days you were present in the current year, and one–third of the days you were present in the first year before the current year, and one–sixth of the days you were present in the second year before the current year. Do not count any day you were present in the United States as an "exempt individual" or commute from Canada or Mexico to work in the United States on more than 75% of the workdays during your working period. An exempt individual may be anyone in the following categories:
A foreign government–related individual,
A teacher or trainee with a J or Q visa who substantially complies with the requirements of the visa,
A student with an F, J, M, or Q visa who substantially complies with the requirements of the visa; or
A professional athlete temporarily present to compete in a charitable sports event.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since your friend and his wife are on H Visa for the last 5 yrs, they are considered resident aliens for tax purposes and they can claim deductions , benefits , hope credit , life time learning credit etc.
wallpaper nicki minaj booty before and
needhelp!
02-12 10:59 AM
purgan,
This is a good idea. Can you create a thread with poll and we can see what percentage bought a house in US vs invested in property elsewhere. (or both)
I signed as well.
I also might point out another important angle to this mortgage issue. In the past 2 years since I was still waiting for my green card, I purchased 2 apartments in India. My dollar savings got diverted abroad since I saw no point purchasing in a country where my presence is uncerrtain.
I am sure there are many others who invested abroad instead of the USA. IV can perhaps institute a poll to see how many people bought abroad and how much they invested. This way there will be a quanfifiable impact of dollars diverted. I am sure it will be in the hundreds of millions atleast.
This is a good idea. Can you create a thread with poll and we can see what percentage bought a house in US vs invested in property elsewhere. (or both)
I signed as well.
I also might point out another important angle to this mortgage issue. In the past 2 years since I was still waiting for my green card, I purchased 2 apartments in India. My dollar savings got diverted abroad since I saw no point purchasing in a country where my presence is uncerrtain.
I am sure there are many others who invested abroad instead of the USA. IV can perhaps institute a poll to see how many people bought abroad and how much they invested. This way there will be a quanfifiable impact of dollars diverted. I am sure it will be in the hundreds of millions atleast.
stxvr
07-20 02:24 PM
7% limit is for the each category (like EB 7%) then seperate 7% for FB.
Can the EB used all the numbers of india (25,620) OR it can use only 7% of the EB only means (9800)
Can the EB used all the numbers of india (25,620) OR it can use only 7% of the EB only means (9800)
2011 nicki minaj fake ooty efore
dealsnet
02-26 10:31 AM
Don't give advise, if you are not sure.
Nobody can file AOS, if they are out of status.
If it was the case every one will make it that way.
Your advise is good, if she is in status. Filing I-485, AP, EAD ....ETC.
She need to consult a reputed immigration lawyer first before the marriage.
Out of status more than 6 months will trigger a ban from 3 to 10 years.
CONSULT A LAWYER.
If you get married to him you shouldn't have any issue. After you get married you should have him file an immigrant petition (I-130) along with the adjustment of status (I-485). You will also have to file a biographic information sheet (G-325) along with an affidavit of support (I-864) and medical examination (I-693). You can also file for employment authorization (EAD), form I-765 if you want to work and Advance parole (I-131) if you need to travel outside the US. Supporting documents such as birth certificates, marriage certificate and photos will be required.
All these forms are available at the USCIS website.
They will ask you to come for fingerprining at a biometric center in a few weeks.
After a few months, you will be called for an interview to determine if your marriage is bonafide. If successful, you will be given what's called a conditional residency. 90 days before the two year anniversary of your conditional residency, you and your husband have to jointly apply for removal of conditions (form I-751), upon which you will be granted full permanent residency. After the third year, if you're still married, you can apply for US Citizenship.
Goodluck with the process !
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and the advice in this post no way constitutes any kind of legal advice and I accept no liability for any of the advice in this post.
Nobody can file AOS, if they are out of status.
If it was the case every one will make it that way.
Your advise is good, if she is in status. Filing I-485, AP, EAD ....ETC.
She need to consult a reputed immigration lawyer first before the marriage.
Out of status more than 6 months will trigger a ban from 3 to 10 years.
CONSULT A LAWYER.
If you get married to him you shouldn't have any issue. After you get married you should have him file an immigrant petition (I-130) along with the adjustment of status (I-485). You will also have to file a biographic information sheet (G-325) along with an affidavit of support (I-864) and medical examination (I-693). You can also file for employment authorization (EAD), form I-765 if you want to work and Advance parole (I-131) if you need to travel outside the US. Supporting documents such as birth certificates, marriage certificate and photos will be required.
All these forms are available at the USCIS website.
They will ask you to come for fingerprining at a biometric center in a few weeks.
After a few months, you will be called for an interview to determine if your marriage is bonafide. If successful, you will be given what's called a conditional residency. 90 days before the two year anniversary of your conditional residency, you and your husband have to jointly apply for removal of conditions (form I-751), upon which you will be granted full permanent residency. After the third year, if you're still married, you can apply for US Citizenship.
Goodluck with the process !
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and the advice in this post no way constitutes any kind of legal advice and I accept no liability for any of the advice in this post.
more...
allybarbar
06-22 05:18 PM
I worked in Boston. I was laid off Friday. I have been advised by 2 immigration lawyers that it is ok to file for Unemployment benefits. I filed today. I will let you know the outcome. The lady at Unemployment office seems to think there is no reason i won't get it, but shes really just a data entry person really. Fingers crossed i hear nothing.
Specifics of my case are i am an EB3 doing the i-140 and the 485 at the same time. The notice on the i140 is feb 2008 recieved april 2007, the i485 notice is oct 2007. I received an RFE in late May but it was only for the medical which they have lost. I have done that, mailed it back in and heard nothing more. When you fill out the unemployment form in MA though there is a space for your USCIS A#. That would possibly be where the information gets back to the USCIS to request a proof of employment. My lawyer said there is an outside chance i will get another RFE but its unlikely. My company has been advised to send a notice of termination to the USCIS for my old H1B anyway so unemployment is the least of my worries. We'll see. If that happens my fiance and I will have to head to the registry office earlier than the reception day we paid for. I really hope they do not ask. I know hopes not the best course, but thats what I chose to do.
Specifics of my case are i am an EB3 doing the i-140 and the 485 at the same time. The notice on the i140 is feb 2008 recieved april 2007, the i485 notice is oct 2007. I received an RFE in late May but it was only for the medical which they have lost. I have done that, mailed it back in and heard nothing more. When you fill out the unemployment form in MA though there is a space for your USCIS A#. That would possibly be where the information gets back to the USCIS to request a proof of employment. My lawyer said there is an outside chance i will get another RFE but its unlikely. My company has been advised to send a notice of termination to the USCIS for my old H1B anyway so unemployment is the least of my worries. We'll see. If that happens my fiance and I will have to head to the registry office earlier than the reception day we paid for. I really hope they do not ask. I know hopes not the best course, but thats what I chose to do.
imm_pro
05-20 01:13 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26605
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
more...
meridiani.planum
06-15 02:07 PM
hi,
Can someone help me with the situation i'm in.
I had H1B Visa validityfrom X company from 06/2004 - 12/2007.Applied for extension in June 2007. I had
query on it and i got status update in Feb 2008,stating request for evidence(RFE) documents.
X company send the documents but got denial on May 2 , 2008. I had 2 options at this point of time
first one was make an appeal with right documents. second one was to leave the country in 30
days which i has NOT choosen obviously.
In the mean time, i have applied for H1-B Transfer with new company with premium processing. Also made appeal with old company (X) , I'm waiting for the decision of appeal. but now, i got
APPROVAL on my H1-B Transfer with new company.
I-94 that i have on my passport is with Old company(X) .
Question is:
I need to revalidate my visa that was expired in December 2007. I received my H1B extention last week
when i met Immigration officer close to where i live. she said u r good to travel with new I#94 number (which is same as old one). but without visa how would it be possible.
Do i really need stamping to go out of US to visit my native country?
Pls advise. Any answers would be appreciated
+ you need a new visa stamp to re-enter the country. New approval notice alone is not enough.
+ did you get an I-94 with the new companys H1 approval notice? When you applied that H1, what did you specify as your old employer? company X or the company whose H1 was denied and is now under appeal? Because that makes the intermediate H1 a 'bridge' petition, and opens up potentical complications.... read the following:
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5176
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/ch021808_P.html
Can someone help me with the situation i'm in.
I had H1B Visa validityfrom X company from 06/2004 - 12/2007.Applied for extension in June 2007. I had
query on it and i got status update in Feb 2008,stating request for evidence(RFE) documents.
X company send the documents but got denial on May 2 , 2008. I had 2 options at this point of time
first one was make an appeal with right documents. second one was to leave the country in 30
days which i has NOT choosen obviously.
In the mean time, i have applied for H1-B Transfer with new company with premium processing. Also made appeal with old company (X) , I'm waiting for the decision of appeal. but now, i got
APPROVAL on my H1-B Transfer with new company.
I-94 that i have on my passport is with Old company(X) .
Question is:
I need to revalidate my visa that was expired in December 2007. I received my H1B extention last week
when i met Immigration officer close to where i live. she said u r good to travel with new I#94 number (which is same as old one). but without visa how would it be possible.
Do i really need stamping to go out of US to visit my native country?
Pls advise. Any answers would be appreciated
+ you need a new visa stamp to re-enter the country. New approval notice alone is not enough.
+ did you get an I-94 with the new companys H1 approval notice? When you applied that H1, what did you specify as your old employer? company X or the company whose H1 was denied and is now under appeal? Because that makes the intermediate H1 a 'bridge' petition, and opens up potentical complications.... read the following:
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5176
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/ch021808_P.html
2010 nicki minaj booty before and
meridiani.planum
05-20 04:00 PM
Its the same story everytime, they will use the AgJobs and effectively kill everything. We, a significantly impacted minority, will end up getting screwed because members were more interested in reading the forums instead of educating the lawmakers.
Recapture does not increase the number of visas, it simply uses the unallocated visas. If they cannot understand this simple argument then what hope do we have. The anti immigrant forces make it sound like the bill will unleash a wave of immigrants.
yup. same old mess. Try to get ONE thing for EB immigrants, and first the nurses lobby jumps on the bandwagon.. atleast its all still legal immigration at that point. Suddenly agjobs and DREAM also board the train bringing the 'tainted' illegal immigration angle into this picture and soon its a big fat mess that no one wants to touch. sad state of affairs.
Recapture does not increase the number of visas, it simply uses the unallocated visas. If they cannot understand this simple argument then what hope do we have. The anti immigrant forces make it sound like the bill will unleash a wave of immigrants.
yup. same old mess. Try to get ONE thing for EB immigrants, and first the nurses lobby jumps on the bandwagon.. atleast its all still legal immigration at that point. Suddenly agjobs and DREAM also board the train bringing the 'tainted' illegal immigration angle into this picture and soon its a big fat mess that no one wants to touch. sad state of affairs.
more...
pdx_Soft_Eng
07-10 12:33 AM
as far as I know, since she had H1B already with her previous company, she can get a new H1B right now. She doesn't have to wait for Oct 2007. However, the time she spent on H4 is also used against her H1B time since H1 and H4 are both H visas and everybody gets 6 years in total. You should use this info at yor own risk. Double check with a lawyer. Maybe other members can confirm my response as well...
hair nicki minaj fake ooty before
bkam
01-31 03:15 AM
Dear "colleagues in faith" :-), there is only one way to change the things with this immigration trap - we have to win the public opinion!
Currently 350,000 highly qualified professionals working for this country are in a legal limbo which continues for years. Our current legal status is that of slaves. Yes, slaves! Nowadays it takes anywhere between 5 - 10 years from applying to receiving of a GC. We cannot change our employers within this period, the members of our families cannot work (at least legally) and our spouses lose their professional carrier; if our kids get in college they are treated as "aliens" (full tuition, no student loans, no scholarship); the loans we get are with higher interest rate (for "protection"); at the borders we are treated as "intruders" etc.
The average Americans are honest hardworking people. If they are aware of the immigration problems faced by 350,000 hardworking professionals in this country, they will raise their voice and will help for resolving of this issue. They just need to know that. I believe that in addition to talking to senators etc., we have to find ways our issues to reach the media - newspapers, magazines and so on. An article in Times may lead to a lot of positive changes in the immigration system.
Currently 350,000 highly qualified professionals working for this country are in a legal limbo which continues for years. Our current legal status is that of slaves. Yes, slaves! Nowadays it takes anywhere between 5 - 10 years from applying to receiving of a GC. We cannot change our employers within this period, the members of our families cannot work (at least legally) and our spouses lose their professional carrier; if our kids get in college they are treated as "aliens" (full tuition, no student loans, no scholarship); the loans we get are with higher interest rate (for "protection"); at the borders we are treated as "intruders" etc.
The average Americans are honest hardworking people. If they are aware of the immigration problems faced by 350,000 hardworking professionals in this country, they will raise their voice and will help for resolving of this issue. They just need to know that. I believe that in addition to talking to senators etc., we have to find ways our issues to reach the media - newspapers, magazines and so on. An article in Times may lead to a lot of positive changes in the immigration system.
more...
ameryki
10-02 11:06 PM
murthy just sent out this info in his newsletter that went out today.
Delayed EADs - Ombudsman's Suggestions to Expedite
The current regulations on Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) require the USCIS to adjudicate EAD applications within 90 days. As many are aware, this does not always occur. The problem is compounded by the fact that it is no longer possible to obtain interim EADs at the local USCIS offices. Information on this matter was included in our previous article, available on MurthyDotCom, Interim EAD Problems at USCIS District Offices (Dec 14, 2007). The first CIS Ombudsman, Prakash , began making efforts on this matter that are continuing through the current CIS Ombudsman, Michael Dougherty. The Ombudsman's office released updated suggestions on September 19, 2008, for individuals who are experiencing EAD delays.
Option 1 : Call the NCSC
It is suggested that an individual first call the USCIS National Customer Service Center (NCSC) at 1.800.375.5283. It is important to note the date and time of the call, as well as the name / number of the person who answers the call. It is possible to explain that the EAD has been delayed beyond the 90 days permitted for processing, and ask for a "service request." This is supposed to result in issuance of the EAD or some other type of response within a week, according to the Ombudsman's update. Alternatively, it is possible to ask the customer service representative to request the EAD. This, too, should result in either receipt of the card or some other type of response within a week. The Ombudsman's update refers to the interim EAD, even though this is no longer issued by the local offices. At the Murthy Law Firm, it has been our experience that the requests described in the update primarily have resulted in the issuance of standard EADs.
Option 2 : INFOPASS Appointment
If the EAD has been delayed beyond 90 days, then it is possible to make an appointment at the local USCIS through the INFOPASS system. At that appointment, it is possible to request the EAD, even though EADs are not actually issued at the local offices. The local office should review the case for eligibility, and then forward the request to the USCIS service center where the case is pending. This should also result in a response or EAD issuance within a week.
It should be noted that, while the one-week estimate may be a bit optimistic, we at the Murthy Law Firm have found that this approach is generally successful. Our recommendation is to make the appointment a week or two in advance, for the 91st day after filing. The reason for this is that local offices often have waiting times for appointments and if one waits until the 90th day to make the appointment it may result in more delay while waiting for an available appointment time. As with the call to the NCSC, it is best to document the date and time of the appointment, as well as the name of the officer.
Option 3: Contact the Ombudsman if Other Options Do Not Work
If an individual has completed both options 1 and 2 above, and the EAD has not been issued, then a third option is to eMail the Ombudsman's office at cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov. It is necessary to include the dates and times of the call to the NCSC, as well as the officer's identification information. Corresponding details on the INFOPASS appointment should also be provided.
Delayed EADs - Ombudsman's Suggestions to Expedite
The current regulations on Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) require the USCIS to adjudicate EAD applications within 90 days. As many are aware, this does not always occur. The problem is compounded by the fact that it is no longer possible to obtain interim EADs at the local USCIS offices. Information on this matter was included in our previous article, available on MurthyDotCom, Interim EAD Problems at USCIS District Offices (Dec 14, 2007). The first CIS Ombudsman, Prakash , began making efforts on this matter that are continuing through the current CIS Ombudsman, Michael Dougherty. The Ombudsman's office released updated suggestions on September 19, 2008, for individuals who are experiencing EAD delays.
Option 1 : Call the NCSC
It is suggested that an individual first call the USCIS National Customer Service Center (NCSC) at 1.800.375.5283. It is important to note the date and time of the call, as well as the name / number of the person who answers the call. It is possible to explain that the EAD has been delayed beyond the 90 days permitted for processing, and ask for a "service request." This is supposed to result in issuance of the EAD or some other type of response within a week, according to the Ombudsman's update. Alternatively, it is possible to ask the customer service representative to request the EAD. This, too, should result in either receipt of the card or some other type of response within a week. The Ombudsman's update refers to the interim EAD, even though this is no longer issued by the local offices. At the Murthy Law Firm, it has been our experience that the requests described in the update primarily have resulted in the issuance of standard EADs.
Option 2 : INFOPASS Appointment
If the EAD has been delayed beyond 90 days, then it is possible to make an appointment at the local USCIS through the INFOPASS system. At that appointment, it is possible to request the EAD, even though EADs are not actually issued at the local offices. The local office should review the case for eligibility, and then forward the request to the USCIS service center where the case is pending. This should also result in a response or EAD issuance within a week.
It should be noted that, while the one-week estimate may be a bit optimistic, we at the Murthy Law Firm have found that this approach is generally successful. Our recommendation is to make the appointment a week or two in advance, for the 91st day after filing. The reason for this is that local offices often have waiting times for appointments and if one waits until the 90th day to make the appointment it may result in more delay while waiting for an available appointment time. As with the call to the NCSC, it is best to document the date and time of the appointment, as well as the name of the officer.
Option 3: Contact the Ombudsman if Other Options Do Not Work
If an individual has completed both options 1 and 2 above, and the EAD has not been issued, then a third option is to eMail the Ombudsman's office at cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov. It is necessary to include the dates and times of the call to the NCSC, as well as the officer's identification information. Corresponding details on the INFOPASS appointment should also be provided.
hot nicki minaj booty before and
mlkedave
03-07 03:48 PM
ok eilsoe, i love u
more...
house nicki minaj booty before and
sc3
09-08 07:17 PM
USCIS has deliberately created circumstances for 7.5 million applications. For eg. why can 485 receipt not act as an Advance Parole and EAD ? It looks like they want more applications and then claim that they are very busy.
EAD, AP has time limits, your 485 receipt does not. USCIS needs to constantly monitor the applicants to make sure that anyone denied is leaving the country or turns into illegal. Otherwise, lawyers will be very happy to say that "their" client did not receive the denial notice and had therefore continued to live in the US legally.
EAD, AP has time limits, your 485 receipt does not. USCIS needs to constantly monitor the applicants to make sure that anyone denied is leaving the country or turns into illegal. Otherwise, lawyers will be very happy to say that "their" client did not receive the denial notice and had therefore continued to live in the US legally.
tattoo nicki minaj before after
alpa
02-24 04:36 PM
I have few questions regarding the visa and green card process.
1. Which documents are required to convert H1 to H4 while being in USA?
2. As per my understanding if I convert to H4, I can use my H1 at a later point of time. Is it true? What are the preconditions for this?
3. What happens to my green card process if I convert to H4? I have my I-140 approved.
4. Assuming that my understanding in point-2 is correct what is the process to convert back to H1?
Thanks and Regards,
Alpa
1. Which documents are required to convert H1 to H4 while being in USA?
2. As per my understanding if I convert to H4, I can use my H1 at a later point of time. Is it true? What are the preconditions for this?
3. What happens to my green card process if I convert to H4? I have my I-140 approved.
4. Assuming that my understanding in point-2 is correct what is the process to convert back to H1?
Thanks and Regards,
Alpa
more...
pictures nicki minaj booty before and
ilikekilo
09-18 06:02 PM
hey thanks for your response, i appreciate it
where di u file? and did u efile?
where di u file? and did u efile?
dresses nicki minaj fake ooty before
reverendflash
10-21 02:29 AM
:asian: :cool: :cowboy: :ninja: :pirate:
cakes are fun... :P :P
plus they taste good... =)
Rev:elderly:
cakes are fun... :P :P
plus they taste good... =)
Rev:elderly:
more...
makeup nicki minaj fake ooty before
Munna Bhai
11-09 09:21 AM
I am collecting all the documents and I will do premium processing but would like to get clarification regarding the rule.
I heard that " Labour should be filed 365 days before, whether approved or not" and that will automatically allow you to have 1 year extension.
Is this correct?
-M
I heard that " Labour should be filed 365 days before, whether approved or not" and that will automatically allow you to have 1 year extension.
Is this correct?
-M
girlfriend makeup nicki minaj fake ooty
lskreddy
07-30 10:11 AM
Pappu - I agree with you in totality that it is an opportunity wasted when people focus on the individual issues. But, after listening in on a couple of calls, I find the whole call to be not much of use as they always defer the question with 'we have asked the TSC to find out' or 'that is for the USCIS to answer'.
I appreciate a channel of communication and a watchdog for USCIS activities but when communicating regarding problems with USCIS, I see ombudsman's office as a level of indirection. They seem to identify problems, pass on as a report that gets nowhere or gets partially addressed.
If USCIS took cues and had allowed a conference call with the USCIS leadership directly, or if one of us (could be me but I need some ideas as to how to approach) could do such a thing, we could see far more benefit in gathering more significant problems and getting them answered.
I would rather hear the news from the 'horse's mouth' than listening to someone who barely has an influence. I would gladly stand corrected if history has shown otherwise.
I appreciate a channel of communication and a watchdog for USCIS activities but when communicating regarding problems with USCIS, I see ombudsman's office as a level of indirection. They seem to identify problems, pass on as a report that gets nowhere or gets partially addressed.
If USCIS took cues and had allowed a conference call with the USCIS leadership directly, or if one of us (could be me but I need some ideas as to how to approach) could do such a thing, we could see far more benefit in gathering more significant problems and getting them answered.
I would rather hear the news from the 'horse's mouth' than listening to someone who barely has an influence. I would gladly stand corrected if history has shown otherwise.
hairstyles with rapper Nicki Minaj.
venky_handsy
09-10 10:31 PM
your employer while applying the h1b , they did not applied for change of status to h1b. they just applied for h1b only. so you did not got the i-94.
so until you out of the country and get it stamped h1b and re-enter you h1b will not be activated.
since you have your f1 valid until december...you can go for stamping before that date or you can also amend h1b for change of status thru your employer also.
hope this helps
so until you out of the country and get it stamped h1b and re-enter you h1b will not be activated.
since you have your f1 valid until december...you can go for stamping before that date or you can also amend h1b for change of status thru your employer also.
hope this helps
apnair2002
02-16 09:15 AM
The Backlog centers should be ashamed of themselves. They make the state DMVs look like an efficient government departments.
18 more months!!! And they congratulate themselves?
You know, there is a saying "If you have infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters for an infinite amount of time, eventually they would come up with the exact creation of Shakespeare".
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/
I hope they are sincere in meeting the 18 month timeline. That would have to mean the certifications are bound to come one after another starting in 2-3 months max.
18 more months!!! And they congratulate themselves?
You know, there is a saying "If you have infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters for an infinite amount of time, eventually they would come up with the exact creation of Shakespeare".
http://www.foreignlaborcert.doleta.gov/
I hope they are sincere in meeting the 18 month timeline. That would have to mean the certifications are bound to come one after another starting in 2-3 months max.
purgan
11-11 10:32 AM
Randell,
Congratulations on getting the attention of the Times, and your tireless efforts in spreading word of the broken legal immigration system.
===
New York Times
Immigration, a Love Story
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/fashion/12green.html
WHEN Kenneth Harrell Jr., an Assemblies of God minister in South Carolina, invited Gricelda Molina to join his Spanish ministry in 2000, it didn’t take him long to realize he had found the woman he had been waiting for. On the telephone and during romantic strolls they talked about their goals, their commitment to God and how many children each would like to have. Six months flew by, and he asked her to marry him.
“She’s a beautiful woman with a beautiful spirit, very gentle, very sincere,” Mr. Harrell said. But Ms. Molina, a factory worker, was also an undocumented immigrant from Honduras, who had crossed into the United States twice, having once been deported. Mr. Harrell, the pastor of Airport Assembly of God church in West Columbia, said he was not too concerned. “Whatever came, we would walk through this path together,” he said.
Mr. Harrell and Ms. Molina, both 35, married in 2001, in a large wedding attended by family from both sides and blessed by pastors in English and Spanish. But the Harrells no longer live together, not because of divorce, but because Mrs. Harrell, now the mother of two sons and four months pregnant with their third child, has been deported. She had applied for legal residency, or a green card, with her new husband as her sponsor, Mr. Harrell said, but she was sent back to Honduras 20 months ago because of her illegal entries and told she would have to wait 10 years to try again.
“Illegals are pouring over the border,” said Mr. Harrell, who has visited his family five times. “We meet them, we fall in love with them, we marry them. And then the government tears your family apart, and they take no responsibility for letting them in, in the first place.”
Falling in love and marching toward marriage is not always easy, but a particular brand of heartache and hardship can await when one of the partners is in this country illegally. The uncertainty of such a union has only been heightened by the national debate over illegal immigration. Whether the new Democratic leadership in Congress will help people like the Harrells remains to be seen.
It is hard to quantify how many people find themselves in Mr. Harrell’s situation, but with stepped-up enforcement in recent years, deportations have increased, and so have fears of losing a loved one in that way. (There were 168,310 removals in 2005, compared with 108,000 in 2000, immigration officials said.)
And that is only one byproduct of love between two people with such uneven places in society, immigration lawyers say. Many relationships strain under the financial burden of hiring lawyers for what can turn into years of visiting government offices, producing pictures, tax records and other evidence of a legitimate marriage in the quest for legalization. And while instances of immigrants faking love for a green card are in the minority, according to immigration officials, some couples feel pressure to marry before they are ready, hoping that marriage will prevent a loved one’s deportation.
Raul Godinez, an immigration lawyer in Los Angeles, said: “I ask people, ‘How much do you love this person? Because immigration is going to test your marriage.’ If you don’t feel it’s going to be a strong marriage, I wouldn’t do it.”
Many people may still believe that obtaining legal status through marriage is easy, because of periodic reports of marriage scams. In a three-year investigation called Operation Newlywed Game, immigration and customs enforcement agents caught more than 40 suspects in California for allegedly orchestrating sham marriages between hundreds of Chinese or Vietnamese nationals and United States citizens. But such fraud occurs in only a minority of cases, federal officials said.
In reality, immigration lawyers said, marrying a citizen does not automatically entitle the spouse to a green card and is only the first step in a long bureaucratic journey. The lawyers noted that changes in the law in the last five years have made this legalization path increasingly difficult, one worth choosing only if true love is at stake. (Other routes include sponsorship by immediate family members or an employer.)
The Harrells said they had no idea how difficult it could be and were shocked when Mrs. Harrell’s application for permanent residence was turned down, leaving them only 12 days to prepare for her departure. In that time, Mr. Harrell said, they decided that the children, now 4 and 3, would go with her. So Mr. Harrell obtained passports for them, and the church held a farewell service.
“It was very traumatic,” he said. “Our whole world was crashing around us.”
In Yoro, in north central Honduras, where Mrs. Harrell and the children live with her parents, she said the older boy constantly asks for his father, begging, “Let’s go to my papa’s house.” She has coped with her own dejection, too. “I know how much work he has over there,” she said by telephone. “He needs his wife.”
But even in the best of circumstances, when an immigrant enters the country legally, couples may have to rearrange their lives and defer their dreams.
Paola Emery, a jewelry designer, and her husband, Randall Emery, a computer consultant in Philadelphia, said they delayed having children and buying a house for the nearly four years it took the government to complete a background check for Mrs. Emery, who had entered the country from Colombia with a tourist visa and applied for permanent residency after they married in 2002.
Mrs. Emery, 27, said lawyers advised them it was not wise for her to risk trouble by visiting her close-knit family in Colombia and then trying to re-enter this country. She said she was absent through weddings, illnesses and even the kidnapping and rescue of an uncle.
“I felt like I was in jail,” Mrs. Emery said.
Officials with the Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Homeland Security Department say that delays lasting years are rare, but some immigration lawyers say they see clients who wait three to four years for security clearance. Mrs. Emery and her husband, 34, sued Homeland Security over the delays, and she was finally cleared last May. By then Mr. Emery had helped form American Families United, a group of citizens who have sponsored immediate family members for immigration, and which advocates immigration-law change to keep families together. Immigration Services officials say they are not out to impede love or immigration. Nearly 260,000 spouses of citizens received permanent residency through marriage last year, out of 1.1 million people who became permanent residents, according to the Immigration Services office. “The goal is to give people who are eligible the benefit,” said Marie T. Sebrechts, its spokeswoman in Southern California. She said the agency does not comment on individual cases.
When a legal immigrant is sponsored by an American spouse, she said, the green card can be obtained in as little as six months. But with complications like an illegal entry, laws are not that benevolent, Ms. Sebrechts said. In those cases, the immigrant usually must return to the home country and wait 3 to 10 years to apply for residency, though waivers are sometimes granted.
Such obstacles are far from the minds of couples when they meet. And for some, so is the idea to question whether the beloved feels equally in love with them.
Sharyn T. Sooho, a divorce lawyer and a founder of divorcenet.com, a Web site for divorcing couples, said she has represented American spouses who realized too late that the person they married was more interested in a green card than in living happily ever after. “They feel conflicted, used and abused,” she said. “It’s a quick marriage, and suddenly the person who was so sweet is turning into a nightmare.”
But more often, said Carlina Tapia-Ruano, the president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, couples marry before they are ready because “there’s fear that if you don’t do this, somebody is going to get deported.”
Krystal Rivera, 18, a college student in Los Angeles, and her boyfriend fall into this group. Ms. Rivera is set on marrying in April 2008, even as she worries that it may put too much pressure on the relationship.
“I never wanted to follow the Hispanic ritual of getting married early,” said Ms. Rivera, a native of Los Angeles whose parents emigrated from Mexico.
She said she fell in love at 13 with a Mexican-born boy who sang in the church choir with her. “He started poking me, and I said ‘Stop it!’ ” she remembered.
Ms. Rivera is still in love with the boy, now 19, who was brought into the country illegally by his mother when he was 12. He goes to college and wants to become a teacher, while she hopes to become a doctor.
But for those plans to work, Ms. Rivera said, she needs to help him legalize his status. She said she has witnessed his frustration as he dealt with employers who didn’t pay what they owed him or struggled to find better jobs than his current one as a line cook. Because of his illegal status, he is unable to get a driver’s license or visit the brothers he left in Mexico. “We want to be normal,” Ms. Rivera said.
The Harrells, too, have decided to take charge. After months of exploring how to reunite the family and spending thousands of dollars on lawyers, Mr. Harrell has decided to leave his small congregation, sell his house and join his wife in Honduras. He will be a missionary for his church for a fraction of the $40,000 a year he makes as a minister.
Congratulations on getting the attention of the Times, and your tireless efforts in spreading word of the broken legal immigration system.
===
New York Times
Immigration, a Love Story
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/12/fashion/12green.html
WHEN Kenneth Harrell Jr., an Assemblies of God minister in South Carolina, invited Gricelda Molina to join his Spanish ministry in 2000, it didn’t take him long to realize he had found the woman he had been waiting for. On the telephone and during romantic strolls they talked about their goals, their commitment to God and how many children each would like to have. Six months flew by, and he asked her to marry him.
“She’s a beautiful woman with a beautiful spirit, very gentle, very sincere,” Mr. Harrell said. But Ms. Molina, a factory worker, was also an undocumented immigrant from Honduras, who had crossed into the United States twice, having once been deported. Mr. Harrell, the pastor of Airport Assembly of God church in West Columbia, said he was not too concerned. “Whatever came, we would walk through this path together,” he said.
Mr. Harrell and Ms. Molina, both 35, married in 2001, in a large wedding attended by family from both sides and blessed by pastors in English and Spanish. But the Harrells no longer live together, not because of divorce, but because Mrs. Harrell, now the mother of two sons and four months pregnant with their third child, has been deported. She had applied for legal residency, or a green card, with her new husband as her sponsor, Mr. Harrell said, but she was sent back to Honduras 20 months ago because of her illegal entries and told she would have to wait 10 years to try again.
“Illegals are pouring over the border,” said Mr. Harrell, who has visited his family five times. “We meet them, we fall in love with them, we marry them. And then the government tears your family apart, and they take no responsibility for letting them in, in the first place.”
Falling in love and marching toward marriage is not always easy, but a particular brand of heartache and hardship can await when one of the partners is in this country illegally. The uncertainty of such a union has only been heightened by the national debate over illegal immigration. Whether the new Democratic leadership in Congress will help people like the Harrells remains to be seen.
It is hard to quantify how many people find themselves in Mr. Harrell’s situation, but with stepped-up enforcement in recent years, deportations have increased, and so have fears of losing a loved one in that way. (There were 168,310 removals in 2005, compared with 108,000 in 2000, immigration officials said.)
And that is only one byproduct of love between two people with such uneven places in society, immigration lawyers say. Many relationships strain under the financial burden of hiring lawyers for what can turn into years of visiting government offices, producing pictures, tax records and other evidence of a legitimate marriage in the quest for legalization. And while instances of immigrants faking love for a green card are in the minority, according to immigration officials, some couples feel pressure to marry before they are ready, hoping that marriage will prevent a loved one’s deportation.
Raul Godinez, an immigration lawyer in Los Angeles, said: “I ask people, ‘How much do you love this person? Because immigration is going to test your marriage.’ If you don’t feel it’s going to be a strong marriage, I wouldn’t do it.”
Many people may still believe that obtaining legal status through marriage is easy, because of periodic reports of marriage scams. In a three-year investigation called Operation Newlywed Game, immigration and customs enforcement agents caught more than 40 suspects in California for allegedly orchestrating sham marriages between hundreds of Chinese or Vietnamese nationals and United States citizens. But such fraud occurs in only a minority of cases, federal officials said.
In reality, immigration lawyers said, marrying a citizen does not automatically entitle the spouse to a green card and is only the first step in a long bureaucratic journey. The lawyers noted that changes in the law in the last five years have made this legalization path increasingly difficult, one worth choosing only if true love is at stake. (Other routes include sponsorship by immediate family members or an employer.)
The Harrells said they had no idea how difficult it could be and were shocked when Mrs. Harrell’s application for permanent residence was turned down, leaving them only 12 days to prepare for her departure. In that time, Mr. Harrell said, they decided that the children, now 4 and 3, would go with her. So Mr. Harrell obtained passports for them, and the church held a farewell service.
“It was very traumatic,” he said. “Our whole world was crashing around us.”
In Yoro, in north central Honduras, where Mrs. Harrell and the children live with her parents, she said the older boy constantly asks for his father, begging, “Let’s go to my papa’s house.” She has coped with her own dejection, too. “I know how much work he has over there,” she said by telephone. “He needs his wife.”
But even in the best of circumstances, when an immigrant enters the country legally, couples may have to rearrange their lives and defer their dreams.
Paola Emery, a jewelry designer, and her husband, Randall Emery, a computer consultant in Philadelphia, said they delayed having children and buying a house for the nearly four years it took the government to complete a background check for Mrs. Emery, who had entered the country from Colombia with a tourist visa and applied for permanent residency after they married in 2002.
Mrs. Emery, 27, said lawyers advised them it was not wise for her to risk trouble by visiting her close-knit family in Colombia and then trying to re-enter this country. She said she was absent through weddings, illnesses and even the kidnapping and rescue of an uncle.
“I felt like I was in jail,” Mrs. Emery said.
Officials with the Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Homeland Security Department say that delays lasting years are rare, but some immigration lawyers say they see clients who wait three to four years for security clearance. Mrs. Emery and her husband, 34, sued Homeland Security over the delays, and she was finally cleared last May. By then Mr. Emery had helped form American Families United, a group of citizens who have sponsored immediate family members for immigration, and which advocates immigration-law change to keep families together. Immigration Services officials say they are not out to impede love or immigration. Nearly 260,000 spouses of citizens received permanent residency through marriage last year, out of 1.1 million people who became permanent residents, according to the Immigration Services office. “The goal is to give people who are eligible the benefit,” said Marie T. Sebrechts, its spokeswoman in Southern California. She said the agency does not comment on individual cases.
When a legal immigrant is sponsored by an American spouse, she said, the green card can be obtained in as little as six months. But with complications like an illegal entry, laws are not that benevolent, Ms. Sebrechts said. In those cases, the immigrant usually must return to the home country and wait 3 to 10 years to apply for residency, though waivers are sometimes granted.
Such obstacles are far from the minds of couples when they meet. And for some, so is the idea to question whether the beloved feels equally in love with them.
Sharyn T. Sooho, a divorce lawyer and a founder of divorcenet.com, a Web site for divorcing couples, said she has represented American spouses who realized too late that the person they married was more interested in a green card than in living happily ever after. “They feel conflicted, used and abused,” she said. “It’s a quick marriage, and suddenly the person who was so sweet is turning into a nightmare.”
But more often, said Carlina Tapia-Ruano, the president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, couples marry before they are ready because “there’s fear that if you don’t do this, somebody is going to get deported.”
Krystal Rivera, 18, a college student in Los Angeles, and her boyfriend fall into this group. Ms. Rivera is set on marrying in April 2008, even as she worries that it may put too much pressure on the relationship.
“I never wanted to follow the Hispanic ritual of getting married early,” said Ms. Rivera, a native of Los Angeles whose parents emigrated from Mexico.
She said she fell in love at 13 with a Mexican-born boy who sang in the church choir with her. “He started poking me, and I said ‘Stop it!’ ” she remembered.
Ms. Rivera is still in love with the boy, now 19, who was brought into the country illegally by his mother when he was 12. He goes to college and wants to become a teacher, while she hopes to become a doctor.
But for those plans to work, Ms. Rivera said, she needs to help him legalize his status. She said she has witnessed his frustration as he dealt with employers who didn’t pay what they owed him or struggled to find better jobs than his current one as a line cook. Because of his illegal status, he is unable to get a driver’s license or visit the brothers he left in Mexico. “We want to be normal,” Ms. Rivera said.
The Harrells, too, have decided to take charge. After months of exploring how to reunite the family and spending thousands of dollars on lawyers, Mr. Harrell has decided to leave his small congregation, sell his house and join his wife in Honduras. He will be a missionary for his church for a fraction of the $40,000 a year he makes as a minister.
No comments:
Post a Comment