us_employee
02-09 11:19 PM
Made $20.00 contribution just now through Paypal.
Unique Transaction ID #7HY45972ES075991A
Unique Transaction ID #7HY45972ES075991A
wallpaper Wallpaper Paladin WoW
JazzByTheBay
09-28 04:36 PM
Given the number of questions and concerns IV members have about AC21 in general and "what after EAD/AP", it makes sense to coordinate with USCIS (and lawmakers if required) on this and get some favorable responses that allay everyone's concerns.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
If EAD+AP are like a "provisional GC", USCIS should perhaps not delve too much into the job description of work done after the 180 days past AOS filing, imo. Just as in the case of GCs, the bar of intent to be employed in that job is met by working for that employer for 90-180 days (the latter to be on the safe side). The only reason this is such a huge issue is because of the unreasonable waiting time induced on the GC process due to retrogression.
As a result, folks from retrogression-affected countries suffer from these anxities, whereas those from unaffected countries get their GCs, and are free birds after the 90-180 day period.
It's unreasonable to expect folks from retrogressed countries to be employed in the same position, or to otherwise limit their options by imposing restrictions of new job being the same job description as the one on the approved labor cert.
jazz
First there is not enough AC21 cases to give feed back how their 485s were handled (approved/detail of RFE/denied) due to job change. Becase, almost all guys who used ac21 still in waiting game due to retrogression.
The main thing what I see here is, USCIS has not yet published the final regulation to interpret AC21 act, even after 7 years of passing AC21 act. They are issuing internal field office memo. These memos are non-binding. In other words, one cannot firmly relay on memos or challange the USCIS decision on AC21 portability according to these memos.
However, sofar, these memos are very favorable to workers, including allowing self-employment, one can port even before 140 approval ect...However, USCIS were cautioning in each memos, that the final regulation may be restrictive than memos. If they took restrictive position in final regulation, it will be a huge problem for most peoples, as they might have violated the final regulation.
Another issue is, definition of "same or similar occupational classification". This is going to be very subjective based on how uscis adjudicator going to compare old and new jobs. The memo says by comparing job duties both old and new jobs and based on SOC or ONET code of old and new job they have to decide both jobs are same or similar. As there is no clear regulation it is big issue to go howmuch level of similarity between jobs. For example one guy may think "database administrator" and "network administrator" are similar job to port. The USCIS may think it may not. It is not quantified.
I feel IV should advocate on liberal/quantifyable defintion for similar jobs in AC21 interpretation. For example, all computer professional jobs should be considered as similar jobs as well as all engineering jobs should be considered similar to port. For example mining engineer can port to chemical engineer job etc...
Also, if any one port to self employment in similar job, there is no much information available wheter one should open a company in his/her name or not (by just working in 1099 etc.. for multiple positions). This needs to have a flexible option for workers, like one can work in 1099 w/o opening a bussiness.
Also, IV should advocate on not to have any restrictive interpretation in final regulation.
glus
08-26 12:26 PM
Hi:
EAD applied 07/08/2008 - renewal -TSC
No Luds, no finger print notice, nothing....
Status: pending.
EB3.
EAD applied 07/08/2008 - renewal -TSC
No Luds, no finger print notice, nothing....
Status: pending.
EB3.
2011 World of Warcraft Wallpaper #4
pani_6
12-10 08:14 AM
My concern is that if CIR does not get taken up sooner that May07...it may be postponed to 09 due to election politics being a hot potato issue...what I would suggest is that we start working from the first day the congress starts and whether through QGA or through indiviual senators try to pass just non-contraversial benefits like ability to file EAD after I-140, recapture of Visa numbers and Spouse and kid not included in the Visa numbers and intorduce this bill and try to pass it.
What we need is a interim EB bill.
The first stpes may be to indentify all non-contraversial issues and then come to a common understanding on those...advise all state chapters meet thier senators about these same issue(ALL members are talking the same)
Intorduce these no later than End of Jan 07 for discussion. in senate..Lets explain to them that its going on getting postponed due to the fact senators are postponing the benefits to us syaing it will be included in the CIR...and so on...they have been very sincere in delaying this intentionally....
If we need to get started on the first day of congress I suggest we start getting organozed now...
What do you guys think!!
What we need is a interim EB bill.
The first stpes may be to indentify all non-contraversial issues and then come to a common understanding on those...advise all state chapters meet thier senators about these same issue(ALL members are talking the same)
Intorduce these no later than End of Jan 07 for discussion. in senate..Lets explain to them that its going on getting postponed due to the fact senators are postponing the benefits to us syaing it will be included in the CIR...and so on...they have been very sincere in delaying this intentionally....
If we need to get started on the first day of congress I suggest we start getting organozed now...
What do you guys think!!
more...
sunny1000
07-09 12:14 PM
Here is something to note:
Accepting I485 along with a pending I-140 is part of the rule making by USCIS and so they may choose to change the rule back to "not accept I485 until an I140 petition is approved" just like that good ol' days before 2002, if they want.
But, I don't think they would do that as they need all the money that is being generated by EAD/AP.:rolleyes:
Accepting I485 along with a pending I-140 is part of the rule making by USCIS and so they may choose to change the rule back to "not accept I485 until an I140 petition is approved" just like that good ol' days before 2002, if they want.
But, I don't think they would do that as they need all the money that is being generated by EAD/AP.:rolleyes:
geesee
09-21 12:31 PM
Checks got cashed today! Plz see signature for more details..
more...
saimrathi
07-13 06:36 AM
Is this posted somewhere? Is there a link?
Just woke up to NPR morning news ... nice coverage on the July bulletin.
Just woke up to NPR morning news ... nice coverage on the July bulletin.
2010 hair world of warcraft blood
rk07
09-26 01:44 PM
Hi ,
I have filed to NSC on August 2nd. Reached the cenetr on August 3rd. I see that many plp filed after me got RN's..anyone else in the same situation as me.
Thanks
Venkat
Your case might have got transfered to CSC.
Thanks,
-rk.
I have filed to NSC on August 2nd. Reached the cenetr on August 3rd. I see that many plp filed after me got RN's..anyone else in the same situation as me.
Thanks
Venkat
Your case might have got transfered to CSC.
Thanks,
-rk.
more...
feedfront
08-26 03:29 PM
Not sure if I got your question... .
I'm seeing lots of folks being greened whose PD is after us. Is it possible that they have PD on their 485 (because I-140 concurrently filed) and so it was picked up by officer? I guess it's not.
In response to infopass officer's request to expedite, I received letter from USCIS (within a week) . It shows my receipt# correct but shows filing date 10/10/2007. Actually, this is receipt date of case transfer to TSC from NSC.
I'm seeing lots of folks being greened whose PD is after us. Is it possible that they have PD on their 485 (because I-140 concurrently filed) and so it was picked up by officer? I guess it's not.
In response to infopass officer's request to expedite, I received letter from USCIS (within a week) . It shows my receipt# correct but shows filing date 10/10/2007. Actually, this is receipt date of case transfer to TSC from NSC.
hair girlfriend Paladin Wallpaper
vbkris77
07-19 10:49 PM
I am starting this new thread to discuss about EB visas spillover usage based on oldest priority date irrespective of category/country. Currently the spillover happens vertically(a top down approach) from EB1 -> EB2 -> EB3...etc. Instead it should be first used on cases with oldest priority date. This will not only give a good move to clear the backlog but will also be a fair rule for those who are patiently waiting in queue for a long time. I wrote my concern about this to my local congressman. I also request each one of you, who is impacted by this, or who is interested to help us out, to kindly contact your local congressman/woman to express your concern. In turn they can contact USCIS to implement this fair rule to help us all out.
Even though I am waiting under EB2, I support this initiative. However INA clearly tells CIS/DoS to follow their current approach. Otherwise, this would have been in our first question to administration. Read below the text from INA with emphasis added.
Now I don't think it is fair. So I think we need to ask IV Core to analyze the proposal of adding the required text to CIR to make the process level playing for everyone. Recapture of visas coupled with removal of country limits would actually clear the current backlog. But to avoid future backlog I think it is only fair to make Spillover of the visas available beyond 28.6 % of visas available for any category be applied to the applicants with oldest priority date irrespective of the priority category.
INA Sec 203
(b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C):
(A) Aliens with extraordinary ability. - An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation,
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability, and
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the United States.
(B) Outstanding professors and researchers. -An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien is recognized internationally as outstanding in a specific academic area,
(ii) the alien has at least 3 years of experience in teaching or research in the academic area, and
(iii) the alien seeks to enter the United States-
(I) for a tenured position (or tenure-track position) within a university or institution of higher education to teach in the academic area,
(II) for a comparable position with a university or institution of higher education to conduct research in the area, or
(III) for a comparable position to conduct research in the area with a department, division, or institute of a private employer, if the department, division, or institute employs at least 3 persons full-time in research activities and has achieved documented accomplishments in an academic field.
(C) Certain multinational executives and managers. An alien is described in this subparagraph if the alien, in the 3 years preceding the time of the alien's application for classification and admission into the United States under this subparagraph, has been employed for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation or other legal entity or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof and the alien seeks to enter the United States in order to continue to render services to the same employer or to a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in a capacity that is managerial or executive.
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraph (1), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, an d whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
(B) (i) 1/ 1a/ Subject to clause (ii), the Attorney General may, when the Attorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States.
(ii) (I) The Attorney General shall grant a national interest waiver pursuant to clause (i) on behalf of any alien physician with respect to whom a petition for preference classification has been filed under subparagraph (A) if--
(aa) the alien physician agrees to work full time as a physician in an area or areas designated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services as having a shortage of health care professionals or at a health care facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; and
(bb) a Federal agency or a department of public health in any State has previously determined that the alien physician's work in such an area or at such facility was in the public interest.
USCIS - I-Link Reference (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD&CH=act)
Even though I am waiting under EB2, I support this initiative. However INA clearly tells CIS/DoS to follow their current approach. Otherwise, this would have been in our first question to administration. Read below the text from INA with emphasis added.
Now I don't think it is fair. So I think we need to ask IV Core to analyze the proposal of adding the required text to CIR to make the process level playing for everyone. Recapture of visas coupled with removal of country limits would actually clear the current backlog. But to avoid future backlog I think it is only fair to make Spillover of the visas available beyond 28.6 % of visas available for any category be applied to the applicants with oldest priority date irrespective of the priority category.
INA Sec 203
(b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C):
(A) Aliens with extraordinary ability. - An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien has extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics which has been demonstrated by sustained national or international acclaim and whose achievements have been recognized in the field through extensive documentation,
(ii) the alien seeks to enter the United States to continue work in the area of extraordinary ability, and
(iii) the alien's entry into the United States will substantially benefit prospectively the United States.
(B) Outstanding professors and researchers. -An alien is described in this subparagraph if -
(i) the alien is recognized internationally as outstanding in a specific academic area,
(ii) the alien has at least 3 years of experience in teaching or research in the academic area, and
(iii) the alien seeks to enter the United States-
(I) for a tenured position (or tenure-track position) within a university or institution of higher education to teach in the academic area,
(II) for a comparable position with a university or institution of higher education to conduct research in the area, or
(III) for a comparable position to conduct research in the area with a department, division, or institute of a private employer, if the department, division, or institute employs at least 3 persons full-time in research activities and has achieved documented accomplishments in an academic field.
(C) Certain multinational executives and managers. An alien is described in this subparagraph if the alien, in the 3 years preceding the time of the alien's application for classification and admission into the United States under this subparagraph, has been employed for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation or other legal entity or an affiliate or subsidiary thereof and the alien seeks to enter the United States in order to continue to render services to the same employer or to a subsidiary or affiliate thereof in a capacity that is managerial or executive.
(2) Aliens who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or aliens of exceptional ability. -
(A) In general. - Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraph (1), to qualified immigrants who are members of the professions holding advanced degrees or their equivalent or who because of their exceptional ability in the sciences, arts, or business, will substantially benefit prospectively the national economy, cultural or educational interests, or welfare of the United States, an d whose services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business are sought by an employer in the United States.
(B) (i) 1/ 1a/ Subject to clause (ii), the Attorney General may, when the Attorney General deems it to be in the national interest, waive the requirements of subparagraph (A) that an alien's services in the sciences, arts, professions, or business be sought by an employer in the United States.
(ii) (I) The Attorney General shall grant a national interest waiver pursuant to clause (i) on behalf of any alien physician with respect to whom a petition for preference classification has been filed under subparagraph (A) if--
(aa) the alien physician agrees to work full time as a physician in an area or areas designated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services as having a shortage of health care professionals or at a health care facility under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; and
(bb) a Federal agency or a department of public health in any State has previously determined that the alien physician's work in such an area or at such facility was in the public interest.
USCIS - I-Link Reference (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.f6da51a2342135be7e9d7a10e0dc91a0/?vgnextoid=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fa7e539dc4bed010VgnVCM1000000ecd190a RCRD&CH=act)
more...
ragz4u
05-02 12:38 PM
I am not sure about that. Most of the EB3 guys have advance degrees (including me) but not necessarily with US degrees.
I would not agree that most folks in EB3 have advanced degrees. Most do not. They have lot of experience though
believe me...you would think that people with advanced degrees would have applied in EB2...but there are cases where people have had to apply in EB3 category even with an advanced degree
I disagree with this too. Here are a few examples
1) A couple of years ago, when there was no retrogression, most folks did not want to take a chance and thought EB3 was a safer bet
2) Many Advanced Degree holders from US Univs joined a firm and their GC was applied immediately. But since they did not have enough work ex, they applied in EB3
3) Lots of scrupulous employers heard about retrogression and were actually very happy. They purposely filed even highly qualified folks as EB3 so that their abuse can be prolonged
4) Incompetent lawyers who felt they would not be able to prove the necessity of EB2
5) Sheer ignorance on the part of the beneficiary
I would not agree that most folks in EB3 have advanced degrees. Most do not. They have lot of experience though
believe me...you would think that people with advanced degrees would have applied in EB2...but there are cases where people have had to apply in EB3 category even with an advanced degree
I disagree with this too. Here are a few examples
1) A couple of years ago, when there was no retrogression, most folks did not want to take a chance and thought EB3 was a safer bet
2) Many Advanced Degree holders from US Univs joined a firm and their GC was applied immediately. But since they did not have enough work ex, they applied in EB3
3) Lots of scrupulous employers heard about retrogression and were actually very happy. They purposely filed even highly qualified folks as EB3 so that their abuse can be prolonged
4) Incompetent lawyers who felt they would not be able to prove the necessity of EB2
5) Sheer ignorance on the part of the beneficiary
hot iphone wallpaper world of
gkattalu
08-28 07:24 PM
My wife and I submitted affidavits about the date of birth. We received our approvals 10 days without any RFEs about those affidavits.
-GK
For those who got approvals,
Were there any RFEs regarding birth certificates in the cases where an affidavit was submitted initially?
I submitted birth affidavit with my application, PD 24/March/06, goes current from 1/Sep.
I understand from my parents that it takes good effort and may take long time to get the birth certificate. It will be a great help if you can share your experience.
Thank you.
-GK
For those who got approvals,
Were there any RFEs regarding birth certificates in the cases where an affidavit was submitted initially?
I submitted birth affidavit with my application, PD 24/March/06, goes current from 1/Sep.
I understand from my parents that it takes good effort and may take long time to get the birth certificate. It will be a great help if you can share your experience.
Thank you.
more...
house ironforge wallpaper 1024x
jaocanada
07-10 02:53 PM
I have arranged to send the flowers so they reach USCIS on 10 July.
Incidentally, there was a townhall meeting with Senator Bob Casey in Pittsburgh. Thankfully i got to speak with him and personally put forth our story of endless waits for a greencard. Am not sure if it will genrate any tangible action from his end, but it certainly drew attention of the public present there, his staff and mostly importantly the Senator's mindshare.
Let's keep this effort on..
Incidentally, there was a townhall meeting with Senator Bob Casey in Pittsburgh. Thankfully i got to speak with him and personally put forth our story of endless waits for a greencard. Am not sure if it will genrate any tangible action from his end, but it certainly drew attention of the public present there, his staff and mostly importantly the Senator's mindshare.
Let's keep this effort on..
tattoo WoW Insider#39;s Secret Mage
jfredr
05-23 11:48 PM
sent 2 in NJ+10
more...
pictures for more WoW wallpapers.
mrsr
07-04 06:02 PM
I am not sure why we will they hold?
dresses The wallpaper features artwork
lc1978
07-20 11:41 AM
Pledging $100.
more...
makeup iphone wallpaper world of
gmpa
07-20 08:23 AM
Count me in.
girlfriend Paladin Concept by
PDOCT05
10-02 02:49 PM
I am just trying to make list of people stuck on July 3rd at 9:03 received by R.William. Appears that our box is lost.
Here is the information I got of people(July 3rd) still waiting
If there are more plz...added it to list
-----list-------
lutherpraveen
PDOCT05
i99
helpme1234
kingnaga
waitforgc123
Rohan99
Here is more added to the list
lutherpraveen
PDOCT05
i99
helpme1234
kingnaga
waitforgc123
Rohan99
gclongwaytogo
cool_cat
sivanu
GKBest
Here is the information I got of people(July 3rd) still waiting
If there are more plz...added it to list
-----list-------
lutherpraveen
PDOCT05
i99
helpme1234
kingnaga
waitforgc123
Rohan99
Here is more added to the list
lutherpraveen
PDOCT05
i99
helpme1234
kingnaga
waitforgc123
Rohan99
gclongwaytogo
cool_cat
sivanu
GKBest
hairstyles World of Warcraft - priest and
saimrathi
07-13 06:36 AM
Is this posted somewhere? Is there a link?
Just woke up to NPR morning news ... nice coverage on the July bulletin.
Just woke up to NPR morning news ... nice coverage on the July bulletin.
desi3933
06-27 03:30 PM
Dr. William:
My I-485 application based on I-140 of NIW has been approved finally, after an RFE replying. Is there any requirement of how long I can change job after the I-485 approval?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A:
According to USCIS previous requirement, a person is required to work for the sponsoring employer for at least one year after obtaining the Green Card. There may be a problem when you want to apply for U.S. citizenship later, if you leave the sponsoring employer in a short period of time after obtaining the Green Card.
The AC-21 rule does not clear the issue of a person who leaves its employer after the I-485 approval, but it is better to take a conservative way to reduce the potential risk later.
http://www.greencardapply.com/question/question04/question04_0519.htm
That was long time back and was changed in early 90s.
There is no requirement to work for 1 year.
Also, AC-21 allows to replace the GC employer to a new employer, but it does NOT change the intent to work for the employer after I-485 is approved.
I could not find a phone number on the site you mentioned.
Not a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Green Card holder since May 2002
My I-485 application based on I-140 of NIW has been approved finally, after an RFE replying. Is there any requirement of how long I can change job after the I-485 approval?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A:
According to USCIS previous requirement, a person is required to work for the sponsoring employer for at least one year after obtaining the Green Card. There may be a problem when you want to apply for U.S. citizenship later, if you leave the sponsoring employer in a short period of time after obtaining the Green Card.
The AC-21 rule does not clear the issue of a person who leaves its employer after the I-485 approval, but it is better to take a conservative way to reduce the potential risk later.
http://www.greencardapply.com/question/question04/question04_0519.htm
That was long time back and was changed in early 90s.
There is no requirement to work for 1 year.
Also, AC-21 allows to replace the GC employer to a new employer, but it does NOT change the intent to work for the employer after I-485 is approved.
I could not find a phone number on the site you mentioned.
Not a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Green Card holder since May 2002
yabadaba
03-09 12:40 PM
another story:
i have a close friend who has been here since 1991 with no GC. he came for his undergraduate studies in 1991..finished that...got a good job...met a girl...got married...girl was also an undergrad here then went to grad school...then lost his job..girl was still in school...lost almost everything
then he built his life back..got a job....started working his way up...girl graduated..worked in a small company and then changed jobs..started gc process for the 3rd time...luckily got ead and ap....girl changed jobs...bought a house...retrogression happened....and hes still waiting
can u beat that...hes been here for 16 years.
putting off decisions is very easy when it comes to gc...many times u just need to bite the bullet and live ur life. dont get me wrong.. i have put off getting my h1b stamped for over 3 yrs...havent been out of the country for 5 yrs...now i have decided its not worth it and will do it sometime this yr.
like russell peter's chinese person says "be a man...do the right thing"
i have a close friend who has been here since 1991 with no GC. he came for his undergraduate studies in 1991..finished that...got a good job...met a girl...got married...girl was also an undergrad here then went to grad school...then lost his job..girl was still in school...lost almost everything
then he built his life back..got a job....started working his way up...girl graduated..worked in a small company and then changed jobs..started gc process for the 3rd time...luckily got ead and ap....girl changed jobs...bought a house...retrogression happened....and hes still waiting
can u beat that...hes been here for 16 years.
putting off decisions is very easy when it comes to gc...many times u just need to bite the bullet and live ur life. dont get me wrong.. i have put off getting my h1b stamped for over 3 yrs...havent been out of the country for 5 yrs...now i have decided its not worth it and will do it sometime this yr.
like russell peter's chinese person says "be a man...do the right thing"
No comments:
Post a Comment