ppt.b
07-17 06:37 PM
not as long as I see it on USCIS website..
Thisis Murthy website...
Thine wish is granted! Check USCIS website
Thisis Murthy website...
Thine wish is granted! Check USCIS website
wallpaper Horiyosh Vivid Koi
whitecollarslave
02-12 12:28 AM
As valid an argument it may be, buying a house as a bargaining tactic will create a lot of bad publicity and would be counter-productive. I think if we want to do gandhigiri, lets send flowers to Senator Grassley. If you want to make an impact, do the unusual.
Imagine how media will report something like that. Even when Grassley is dead against EB people, those very same people are sending flowers to him, not asking for anything, not demanding anything, just respectfully reminding him that not all immigrants are bad, some are really instrumental to making this country great.
We should write a simple, short, positive, and respectful message without sarcasm and without asking for anything. Instead of saying how we can be helpful *if* we have a green card, lets just focus on how we are already a positive contribution to American economy and national interest despite the clouds of uncertainty. Some things are better left unsaid to get the message across. Instead of us saying it, let the media report it - imagine how much more their contribution could be if they had green card.
Here are some suggestions for short messages -
I am a physician with NIW working in town/area which is medically under served. I am not taking away any American jobs.
I am foreign but not cheap. I earn xxx. My income is x% above average wage in my profession; x% above the higher end of prevailing wage standards set by DOL. In addition, my employer is paying 10-20K in immigration costs, some of which goes to train more Americans in STEM.
I am doing research in some field of humanitarian or national interest. e.g. bio medicine, green technologies, etc.
Imagine how media will report something like that. Even when Grassley is dead against EB people, those very same people are sending flowers to him, not asking for anything, not demanding anything, just respectfully reminding him that not all immigrants are bad, some are really instrumental to making this country great.
We should write a simple, short, positive, and respectful message without sarcasm and without asking for anything. Instead of saying how we can be helpful *if* we have a green card, lets just focus on how we are already a positive contribution to American economy and national interest despite the clouds of uncertainty. Some things are better left unsaid to get the message across. Instead of us saying it, let the media report it - imagine how much more their contribution could be if they had green card.
Here are some suggestions for short messages -
I am a physician with NIW working in town/area which is medically under served. I am not taking away any American jobs.
I am foreign but not cheap. I earn xxx. My income is x% above average wage in my profession; x% above the higher end of prevailing wage standards set by DOL. In addition, my employer is paying 10-20K in immigration costs, some of which goes to train more Americans in STEM.
I am doing research in some field of humanitarian or national interest. e.g. bio medicine, green technologies, etc.
indianabacklog
12-04 03:40 PM
I fail to see why these cases you are referring to are any worse off than many others.
I filed my I485 in May 2007, have been current for more than a third of the interim period and still waiting.
I have filed two service requests, two congressional enquiries and nothing. So have other people and it has not helped them either.
We are all in a black hole hoping for our cases to see the light of day some time just like the WAC cases you refer to.
I filed my I485 in May 2007, have been current for more than a third of the interim period and still waiting.
I have filed two service requests, two congressional enquiries and nothing. So have other people and it has not helped them either.
We are all in a black hole hoping for our cases to see the light of day some time just like the WAC cases you refer to.
2011 Frank, Dragon Koi Tattoo by
mallu
02-07 01:25 AM
Hi,
I am on H1B visa. My parents due to a medical condition cannot take care of themselves. They need someone to be present with them 24 hrs a day. Can I get them on H4 visa as dependent? I would like to keep them for 2-3 years in US and take care of them. Please let me know my options.
Thanks in advance.
CG
Parents are not considered dependents . So i am not sure they can come on H4 visa. I can understand the situation ( being the only son of my parents with deteriorating health ). Once in a while i think of getting rid of this stay in USA and heading back home and caring for the ones who raised me to adult hood.
There may be more avenues , let more knowledgeable people in this forum comment.
I am on H1B visa. My parents due to a medical condition cannot take care of themselves. They need someone to be present with them 24 hrs a day. Can I get them on H4 visa as dependent? I would like to keep them for 2-3 years in US and take care of them. Please let me know my options.
Thanks in advance.
CG
Parents are not considered dependents . So i am not sure they can come on H4 visa. I can understand the situation ( being the only son of my parents with deteriorating health ). Once in a while i think of getting rid of this stay in USA and heading back home and caring for the ones who raised me to adult hood.
There may be more avenues , let more knowledgeable people in this forum comment.
more...
gondalguru
07-26 06:38 PM
Just on the lighter note I wonder if even USCIS ignores that mistake and give you and your co-worker's wife a GC.
And if your co-worker's wife is from a county which is not retrogressed then you can get GC early based on alternate chargebility. Mistake can become boon many times. Just kidding.
Probably you will get RFE and not rejection.
And if your co-worker's wife is from a county which is not retrogressed then you can get GC early based on alternate chargebility. Mistake can become boon many times. Just kidding.
Probably you will get RFE and not rejection.
gondalguru
07-06 12:01 PM
As part of Class action lawsuit can we ask for recapturing of all unused visa numbers? I believe the number is at least 300K, it covers the green cards for 2003, 2004 and 2005. 2006 can go with 2008 quota. So everyone will be happy.
I believe this is the provision we should fight for instead of CIRcus.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks
Sree
Since 2000, a total of 182,694 work-based visas have not been given out because the immigration agency had fallen behind in processing applications, according to the 2007 report of the immigration agency�s ombudsman.
as per ny times report...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
I believe this is the provision we should fight for instead of CIRcus.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks
Sree
Since 2000, a total of 182,694 work-based visas have not been given out because the immigration agency had fallen behind in processing applications, according to the 2007 report of the immigration agency�s ombudsman.
as per ny times report...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
more...
cinqsit
10-10 07:55 AM
I have requested again for the screenshot mentioning the same and waiting on a response. You do seem to have an idea how it looks like, if you dont mind, would you be able to post a screenshot with all information greyed out. With that handy, if they come back with, 'no way' I can go back at them hard saying they are BS'ing me and call their bluff.
Thanks again!
If I were you I wont try and get confrontational with the employer HR or attorneys as
you will need their help in the future. They cant "sell" your approved labor(as in the past), it belongs to you and you only. Your priority date would be the day you filed your labor so that doesnt change. Just keep politely pestering them with case info give then reasonable (or more than reasonable time) before you give up. Sorry I cant be much of help here and no unfortunately cant post any screenshot only the HR and attorney has access to the system. Good luck!
Thanks again!
If I were you I wont try and get confrontational with the employer HR or attorneys as
you will need their help in the future. They cant "sell" your approved labor(as in the past), it belongs to you and you only. Your priority date would be the day you filed your labor so that doesnt change. Just keep politely pestering them with case info give then reasonable (or more than reasonable time) before you give up. Sorry I cant be much of help here and no unfortunately cant post any screenshot only the HR and attorney has access to the system. Good luck!
2010 koi tattoo designs free. koi
prout02
07-30 12:26 PM
I have read in this forum frequent questions about this - legality/enforceability of noncompete clause. Here's a recent court decision from Kansas. It talks about physician practices. No idea if it is applicable to other professions. But the four factors cited in the decision seem relevant.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
more...
yestogc
05-05 04:24 PM
yes 100% true, more salary is no concern. Designation and job roles is the key.
For marriage, attach
Marriage certificate, any joint accounts that you may have, marriage photos
For marriage, attach
Marriage certificate, any joint accounts that you may have, marriage photos
hair Catch Fish Tattoos Designs
pcs
07-19 03:44 PM
As long your affidavit of language competency is notarized... you are fine
more...
LostInGCProcess
09-20 12:13 AM
Look at this guys..Spain sending the Immigrants back to Home country because they dont want to pay the unemploment benefits in bad economy..
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26792948/
I like this plan...lumpsum amount and a ticket to your home country, and can get back after 3 years...wow! its a good plan. :D
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26792948/
I like this plan...lumpsum amount and a ticket to your home country, and can get back after 3 years...wow! its a good plan. :D
hot Free koi tattoo designs back
permfiling
08-09 09:59 PM
If he is done with FP, I don't see any issue. Typically USCIS allows grace period as long as you are within the 180 period but since this case is > 180 days, then consult a lawyer to file 245k
NOT True.. they will give and come after you just to deny/revoke it.
NOT True.. they will give and come after you just to deny/revoke it.
more...
house Free koi tattoo designs back
gnrajagopal
08-19 02:16 AM
Your concern seems valid.
gnrajagopal, i would call USCIS customer service and talk to them about this.. better to get it confirmed.
I am inclined to believe that you are approved.. they just haven't updated their system yet or mabybe the system didn't get updated somehow.
Spoke to a friend of mine. He said he recieved his 140 approval but till this date the system shows that the case is pending. I will probably call uscis tomorrow.
Does anybody know the easiest way to reach a customer service rep at NSC?
gnrajagopal, i would call USCIS customer service and talk to them about this.. better to get it confirmed.
I am inclined to believe that you are approved.. they just haven't updated their system yet or mabybe the system didn't get updated somehow.
Spoke to a friend of mine. He said he recieved his 140 approval but till this date the system shows that the case is pending. I will probably call uscis tomorrow.
Does anybody know the easiest way to reach a customer service rep at NSC?
tattoo Koi Tattoo (Group)
NKR
11-11 11:24 AM
I would love to trade places with you if I could buddy, so just relax� on the other hand I sympathize with you, a 2001 PD seems so old to me. Being current is the boon, for you to have to stick with the same employer is the curse.
more...
pictures Free koi tattoo designs back
kumaabh
02-06 03:08 PM
Ask your company to demote you to developer position once u get ur green card. GC is for a future job position.
dresses Lee#39;s sakura and koi tattoo.
RadioactveChimp
04-16 02:02 AM
yes yes I know...let's leave this in the past alright? :lol:
more...
makeup Koi Tattoo Designs · Click
dixie
01-25 11:25 AM
Nuke bill was an agreement between two nations - India and USA - hence Indian govt had a legtimate interest to lobby for it. Lobbying to change the immigration laws of a sovereign nation by a foreign govt is another cup of tea altogether, and will definitely give a bad name to our cause. You have seen what happened when Vincente Fox lobbied for CIR: even americans who were otherwise sympathetic to CIR were hostile to the idea of a foreign head of state telling them what to do with their immigration laws, and quite understandably so. This is a dead horse anyways - what is the point of flogging it further ?
If the govt can lobby for nuke bill, why they cannot do it for techs?
Govt well know that a big chunk of money is gonna come from NRIs and even bigger will come from future NRIs. To sustains India's growth they need it big time.
In my opinion it would be a good idea to seek Govt of India's help..
thx
babu
If the govt can lobby for nuke bill, why they cannot do it for techs?
Govt well know that a big chunk of money is gonna come from NRIs and even bigger will come from future NRIs. To sustains India's growth they need it big time.
In my opinion it would be a good idea to seek Govt of India's help..
thx
babu
girlfriend naruto tattoo designs java.io.
dxldad
05-18 12:29 PM
While waiting for my GC i have completed my Management program from Northwestern University and now i got myself ported to EB2. Knowing i cant got anywhere helped me focus on my Masters and get it completed. Now i am waiting to get the GC before i look for a new job. I think porting from EB3 to EB2 is going to help people in the EB3 queue who are not supported by their companies to covert to EB2.
The only scenario where porting from EB3 to EB2 would help someone else in the EB3 queue is when the person who ported does not use the regular allotment of the EB3 and hence another EB3 person gets it. But then, a lot of EB3 folks get in front of other EB3s by moving to EB2 and this reduces the chance of the extra visa numbers reaching EB3. I would say porting is not good for the EB3 people staying in EB3 except a few situations.
The only scenario where porting from EB3 to EB2 would help someone else in the EB3 queue is when the person who ported does not use the regular allotment of the EB3 and hence another EB3 person gets it. But then, a lot of EB3 folks get in front of other EB3s by moving to EB2 and this reduces the chance of the extra visa numbers reaching EB3. I would say porting is not good for the EB3 people staying in EB3 except a few situations.
hairstyles Labels: KOI free tattoo design
rajeshalex
03-17 11:06 PM
This is normal. Preliminary processing means all documents are there and looks good. It doesnt mean it is complete. My wifes appln has been moved to MO with same message and I am the primary applicant. I got a mail yesterday saying my appln has been moved to a local office for interview.
So the above means nothing but it looks good.
So the above means nothing but it looks good.
gc_on_demand
03-19 11:52 AM
I came in USA on H1 visa and continued in that status till 2008 (six years). Company A sponsored a green card for me in 2003 for a position different than the one on my H1B based on future employment opportunity/position. My I-140 was approved in early 2007 and after applying for my I-485, I got my EAD and AP in August 2007. However since I was working on H1B with another company at that time, which was valid till June 2008, I did not use my EAD and worked till my H1B lasted. As my H1B expired, my status while living in US as per my lawyer changed to AOS pending.
I took a couple of months off and visited India. Came back to US without a problem using my AP. Looked to start a business but did not succeed due to economic condition. I still maintained an honest intent to join the sponsoring employer when I get my GC and vice- versa with regard to the sponsoring employer. To earn living therefore, I joined another company for a couple months in a similar field using my EAD but did not use AC21 (as a full time primary job). That job did not last long and now I am again looking for employment opportunity.
I visited my lawyer recently with current situation and a few questions and he said I can be in deep trouble - being unemployed mostly since leaving my H1B status and having worked for another company for those few weeks in a job capacity that was a bit different than the one on my petition. He said I could be deported too if my luck is bad in this case. I request you to advise me whether what happened was really wrong and if I can correct it anyway? As corrective measure, my lawyer says that with immediate effect either I should join the green card sponsoring employer or find another employer with similar job offer (willing to port my Green card) - to avoid hard quuestions with USCIS. In this economy, nobody wants to take extra burden. But I spoke with my GC sponsor. He said the job is there for me like before and he is willing to write a letter of intent to hire me on permanent basis currently or in future if required to whosoever concerned but would prefer to wait a few months giving the crunch in business these days.
WHAT SHOULD I DO? Would the letter suffice the honest intent on both sides regarding the employment offer? Can I afford to take a little more time find a simmilar job? PLEASE SUGGEST.
if you want help update profile first
I took a couple of months off and visited India. Came back to US without a problem using my AP. Looked to start a business but did not succeed due to economic condition. I still maintained an honest intent to join the sponsoring employer when I get my GC and vice- versa with regard to the sponsoring employer. To earn living therefore, I joined another company for a couple months in a similar field using my EAD but did not use AC21 (as a full time primary job). That job did not last long and now I am again looking for employment opportunity.
I visited my lawyer recently with current situation and a few questions and he said I can be in deep trouble - being unemployed mostly since leaving my H1B status and having worked for another company for those few weeks in a job capacity that was a bit different than the one on my petition. He said I could be deported too if my luck is bad in this case. I request you to advise me whether what happened was really wrong and if I can correct it anyway? As corrective measure, my lawyer says that with immediate effect either I should join the green card sponsoring employer or find another employer with similar job offer (willing to port my Green card) - to avoid hard quuestions with USCIS. In this economy, nobody wants to take extra burden. But I spoke with my GC sponsor. He said the job is there for me like before and he is willing to write a letter of intent to hire me on permanent basis currently or in future if required to whosoever concerned but would prefer to wait a few months giving the crunch in business these days.
WHAT SHOULD I DO? Would the letter suffice the honest intent on both sides regarding the employment offer? Can I afford to take a little more time find a simmilar job? PLEASE SUGGEST.
if you want help update profile first
Rolling_Flood
09-22 09:17 PM
Anyone got a generic response to an I-485 Service Request that "your case is awaiting standard security checks required for everyone who applies for this immigration benefit"?
More importantly, did anyone get an approval for their I-485 after being stuck in such a check?
Thanks much.
More importantly, did anyone get an approval for their I-485 after being stuck in such a check?
Thanks much.
No comments:
Post a Comment