n2b
09-10 11:53 AM
They most of the approvals are of US Master degree and above as it is straight fwd EB2 no need to verify skill set etc..
My wife and I, we both have MS from US unversities....I think that's straight forward!!! But still waiting....:(
My wife and I, we both have MS from US unversities....I think that's straight forward!!! But still waiting....:(
wallpaper images couple kissing in rain.
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
08-11 04:08 PM
GoGreen,
You can't say that if you have just contrubuted may be $10 or $20.
Understand only you can spread the word around to contribute but can not say free riders.
One thing you need to know, if a new member joins here it takes a while for them to understand thecause of IV and contribute.
BTW Where do you fall under?
How many of us contribute to IV in terms of time, $ etc.
and how many are some free riders?
You can't say that if you have just contrubuted may be $10 or $20.
Understand only you can spread the word around to contribute but can not say free riders.
One thing you need to know, if a new member joins here it takes a while for them to understand thecause of IV and contribute.
BTW Where do you fall under?
How many of us contribute to IV in terms of time, $ etc.
and how many are some free riders?
Edison99
01-10 11:42 AM
Congrats
9years & vayumahesh! Enjoy the freedom...................
Finally a happy ending to my green card journey. Received our cards on Saturday. Thank You IV and I wish all the best for everyone.
9years & vayumahesh! Enjoy the freedom...................
Finally a happy ending to my green card journey. Received our cards on Saturday. Thank You IV and I wish all the best for everyone.
2011 couple kissing - passionate
gcfriend65
01-03 12:13 PM
Maybe they are referring to Notice date and not Receipt date.
I checked with NSC today regarding our AP filed on Oct 8th, 2007. I was told that they are processing September 16th right now and it would be few weeks before they get to mine.
Thanks
I checked with NSC today regarding our AP filed on Oct 8th, 2007. I was told that they are processing September 16th right now and it would be few weeks before they get to mine.
Thanks
more...
badluck
07-06 01:52 PM
Cmon stop the rumour. Just because some of you sent the application on 2nd doesnt mean that they will honour it. If and if they do , there will be much more serious and valid lawsuit, because they've already issued a revision from 2nd July. Under law they have to give everyone a fair and equal chance.
So pls stop cooking rumours from your lawyer. He simply doesn't want to pay back your fee and keeping your hope high..
2 cents
I think you sent your application after july 2...:D
So pls stop cooking rumours from your lawyer. He simply doesn't want to pay back your fee and keeping your hope high..
2 cents
I think you sent your application after july 2...:D
add78
06-20 10:30 AM
Is there no one here who has a few $ to donate to the organization that gave them so much back, just think about how lucky some of you were to be able to file 485 last july! That alone should be enough reason to donate! Please, please give back to the community that gives you so much in return!
Do what you can
At least do the action items and call the representatives.
Thousands of legal immigrants waiting in EB queues and yet we can't reach even $20K. Let's change this perspective. Please donate in your good conscience.
Thank You.
Do what you can
At least do the action items and call the representatives.
Thousands of legal immigrants waiting in EB queues and yet we can't reach even $20K. Let's change this perspective. Please donate in your good conscience.
Thank You.
more...
pappu
09-13 08:03 PM
here is the java code in case anyone wants to generate for different states..
each URL gets 100 mediaids..
i tried creating the file and attaching it but for some reason upload failed everytime. not sure why. So here you go...
public class GenerateClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
for (int j = 0; j < 65; j++) {
int startNum = j * 100;
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
for (int i = startNum; i < startNum + 100 ; i++) {
sb.append("&mediaid=").append(i);
}
System.out.println("http://capwiz.com/aila2/mail/compose/?type=ME&alertid=" + sb.toString());
System.out.println("\n\n");
}
}
}
please email the file to media at immigrationvoice.org with instructions how to implement/use it. This will be very useful.
each URL gets 100 mediaids..
i tried creating the file and attaching it but for some reason upload failed everytime. not sure why. So here you go...
public class GenerateClass {
public static void main(String[] args) {
for (int j = 0; j < 65; j++) {
int startNum = j * 100;
StringBuffer sb = new StringBuffer();
for (int i = startNum; i < startNum + 100 ; i++) {
sb.append("&mediaid=").append(i);
}
System.out.println("http://capwiz.com/aila2/mail/compose/?type=ME&alertid=" + sb.toString());
System.out.println("\n\n");
}
}
}
please email the file to media at immigrationvoice.org with instructions how to implement/use it. This will be very useful.
2010 Couple Kissing Photograph
sats123
06-12 04:30 PM
Did any one got DL renewed based on receipt notice in Arizona recently.
more...
JazzByTheBay
09-10 08:51 PM
It was naive for everyone, including those with PDs in 2006/2007 (and - here's the funny part.. even those who recently filed... ) to suddenly expect the tap to be flowing with full force and everyone's AOS being approved magically in the months of August and September 2008.
We have historical data about the USCIS' efficiencies - but for those who believed (and I'm not excluding myself here... ), it was probably a welcome break, full of hope. It was great while it lasted.
In the process, we've lost focus on the bigger goals - HR 5882 being one of them.
When things were "CURRENT", all we could think of was tracking LUDs and claiming superiority based on an earlier PD or a "U.S. Masters... ".
Again, it's time to take a hard look at past successes and failures, question why we're still in this country, and if you have no doubts about that - get back to the business of pushing for legislation, imho.
jazz
Please realize that HR 5882 is the only hope for now. I had mentioned in my previous posts that EB 2 I/C will retrogress in Oct (many said i was just saying this because i was EB3). This is not the time to be complacent or hope that USCIS will start dishing out visas and clear the backlogs. Help in working towards getting something done with the bills, the window of opportunity is very short.
We have historical data about the USCIS' efficiencies - but for those who believed (and I'm not excluding myself here... ), it was probably a welcome break, full of hope. It was great while it lasted.
In the process, we've lost focus on the bigger goals - HR 5882 being one of them.
When things were "CURRENT", all we could think of was tracking LUDs and claiming superiority based on an earlier PD or a "U.S. Masters... ".
Again, it's time to take a hard look at past successes and failures, question why we're still in this country, and if you have no doubts about that - get back to the business of pushing for legislation, imho.
jazz
Please realize that HR 5882 is the only hope for now. I had mentioned in my previous posts that EB 2 I/C will retrogress in Oct (many said i was just saying this because i was EB3). This is not the time to be complacent or hope that USCIS will start dishing out visas and clear the backlogs. Help in working towards getting something done with the bills, the window of opportunity is very short.
hair a couple kissing in the rain.
insbaby
07-06 01:02 AM
Any volunteers? Why don't I see a single volunteer! Seriously, can we have an election without candidates?!
Not Volunteers but Leaders...
Volunteer is a person who takes responsibility and does a single task. Here the question was raised to have new leaders who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening.
Not Volunteers but Leaders...
Volunteer is a person who takes responsibility and does a single task. Here the question was raised to have new leaders who can take a flight to Washington DC on Monday morning, change the law by noon to issue GC to every EB category, have a lunch at Olive Garden, come back monday evening.
more...
ashutrip
06-23 12:20 PM
i saw 2 approvals ( on 06/22) in for people who applied in feb starting ... just a fyi
-M
its disgusting
-M
its disgusting
hot tattoo couple kissing
ashutrip
06-21 11:36 AM
Checked with my lawyer. 20 cases pending since January. Atlanta..
My Labor was filed April 15th, 2007. EB2. 'In process'.
u mean 20 for the month of january?
My Labor was filed April 15th, 2007. EB2. 'In process'.
u mean 20 for the month of january?
more...
house young couple kissing in
singhsa3
09-11 05:10 PM
See http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15443
tattoo couple kissing
ssss
08-08 02:31 PM
My I-140 is approved,
RD is 07/30 at TSC concurrently filed. Seems that TSC is working :)
RD is 07/30 at TSC concurrently filed. Seems that TSC is working :)
more...
pictures Couple+kissing+images
nyte_crawler
04-26 12:38 PM
You have been calling H1 PD will be fair for some time now. I dont think it is. It is infact unfair for those who have the intention to immigrate. (Sorry to say this time and time again)
Let's say,
Person A comes in Jan 1999, works for several companies and infact jumped around for higher pay and better prospects and just before the 6th year is finished he/she applies for the GC process.
Person B comes in Dec 1999, works for a year and decides to settle and applies for the GC process and get stuck with the employer.
According to your argument, who gets a better deal, Person A. But is it fair. Absolutely Not. Lets say you walk into a grocery store, but want to stand infront of the queue in the check-out line just because you entered in the grocery store first does not makes sense. :)
Learning01, thanks for hijacking the topic to SS and Medicare. :)
I dont expect the wait to be any less longer .. But I would surely welcome priority date being based on H1 start date as it would be more fair method
Let's say,
Person A comes in Jan 1999, works for several companies and infact jumped around for higher pay and better prospects and just before the 6th year is finished he/she applies for the GC process.
Person B comes in Dec 1999, works for a year and decides to settle and applies for the GC process and get stuck with the employer.
According to your argument, who gets a better deal, Person A. But is it fair. Absolutely Not. Lets say you walk into a grocery store, but want to stand infront of the queue in the check-out line just because you entered in the grocery store first does not makes sense. :)
Learning01, thanks for hijacking the topic to SS and Medicare. :)
I dont expect the wait to be any less longer .. But I would surely welcome priority date being based on H1 start date as it would be more fair method
dresses yesterday Couple+kisses
by_the_bay
07-19 02:13 AM
Just did a paypal payment of $100
Confirmation Number: 42U11755V4035824R.
Great job, IV. I am proud to be a member of this community?
Where can I get an F5 key? :)
Confirmation Number: 42U11755V4035824R.
Great job, IV. I am proud to be a member of this community?
Where can I get an F5 key? :)
more...
makeup young couple kissing
hmehta
07-24 06:39 PM
Probably it differs by state, but DL has no ties with H1-B renewal or vice-versa, at least in CA. My wife's H1 expires in Apr 09, but she recently got her DL renewed until Sept. 2012!! If it was a federal law change (after 9/11), it would have to be applied to every state.
girlfriend Couple Kissing with Bubbles
watertown
03-04 10:31 AM
Guys,
My AP received date if Oct 31, 2007 and I called NSC 10 days back and requested expedited processing due to my dad's illness (Lung cancer). The lady IO was nice and she initiated the process and while on the phone she was typing the required info on their system. Finally she gave me a WTC number and told me to go to local DO if I didn't get the AP within 10 days!
I was so happy!! Following the phone I saw soft LUD on my AP case for 3 days and then stopped. Nothing happened!! I've made an Infopass appointment for local Boston office USCIS and will see what happens!!!!
Anybody got a WTC number?
My AP received date if Oct 31, 2007 and I called NSC 10 days back and requested expedited processing due to my dad's illness (Lung cancer). The lady IO was nice and she initiated the process and while on the phone she was typing the required info on their system. Finally she gave me a WTC number and told me to go to local DO if I didn't get the AP within 10 days!
I was so happy!! Following the phone I saw soft LUD on my AP case for 3 days and then stopped. Nothing happened!! I've made an Infopass appointment for local Boston office USCIS and will see what happens!!!!
Anybody got a WTC number?
hairstyles Mithuna Couple, Kissing
greyhair
04-30 09:25 PM
Sen. Kyl: Has also released a press statement, did not read it, asked me to check it on the senators webpage. Took my opinion though.
Senator Jon Kyl Press Office (http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=324534)
Kyl and Graham have released the press statement together -
Kyl, Graham Response to Partisan Democrat Immigration Proposal
WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senators Jon Kyl and Lindsey Graham today made the following statement in response to the immigration reform proposal announced by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and other Democratic Senators:
�A conceptual paper that promises everything to everyone is not the same as responsible legislation that compiles the best ideas from both sides of the aisle. The Senate Democrats� proposal is nothing more than an attempt to score political points. It poisons the well for those of us who are working toward a more secure border and responsible, bipartisan reform of our immigration laws.
�What is being billed as a comprehensive immigration and enforcement package, is actually far more permissive than the 2007 bill. It doesn�t provide the funding to ensure that the border is actually secured, it doesn�t end chain migration, and there is no real temporary worker program. Both of us have been involved in serious efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and believe, given the increase in violence along the border, that additional border security measures must be funded immediately.
�Since 2007, threats have increased, some border technology has failed, and the American people have lost confidence in the federal government�s ability to secure our borders. So it is our belief that Congress should focus on border security first and that will eventually allow Congress to seriously consider bipartisan immigration reform, instead of politically-motivated �conceptual papers.�
�Most of the border enforcement measures that have been proven effective can be achieved by appropriating necessary funding. We need to work on a bipartisan basis to get this done.�
Senator Jon Kyl Press Office (http://kyl.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=324534)
Kyl and Graham have released the press statement together -
Kyl, Graham Response to Partisan Democrat Immigration Proposal
WASHINGTON, D.C. � U.S. Senators Jon Kyl and Lindsey Graham today made the following statement in response to the immigration reform proposal announced by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid and other Democratic Senators:
�A conceptual paper that promises everything to everyone is not the same as responsible legislation that compiles the best ideas from both sides of the aisle. The Senate Democrats� proposal is nothing more than an attempt to score political points. It poisons the well for those of us who are working toward a more secure border and responsible, bipartisan reform of our immigration laws.
�What is being billed as a comprehensive immigration and enforcement package, is actually far more permissive than the 2007 bill. It doesn�t provide the funding to ensure that the border is actually secured, it doesn�t end chain migration, and there is no real temporary worker program. Both of us have been involved in serious efforts to pass comprehensive immigration reform, and believe, given the increase in violence along the border, that additional border security measures must be funded immediately.
�Since 2007, threats have increased, some border technology has failed, and the American people have lost confidence in the federal government�s ability to secure our borders. So it is our belief that Congress should focus on border security first and that will eventually allow Congress to seriously consider bipartisan immigration reform, instead of politically-motivated �conceptual papers.�
�Most of the border enforcement measures that have been proven effective can be achieved by appropriating necessary funding. We need to work on a bipartisan basis to get this done.�
mbawa2574
07-06 01:33 AM
IV will become ready for elections when we have real candidates with real faces. I request all real candidates to publish their photos and accomplishments, their ideas for the organization; so that we can choose the best person for the job.
Any volunteers? Why don't I see a single volunteer! Seriously, can we have an election without candidates?!
Pictures and videos will come out if we as an organization are ready/serious to hold elections. Otherwise this is not going anywhere. Everytime someone questions the stratergy and leadership, blaming back members for inaction is the standard excuse. Let's stop whining and do something. We are being funded and we have a great member base. Leadership and stratergy is the only deficiency.
Any volunteers? Why don't I see a single volunteer! Seriously, can we have an election without candidates?!
Pictures and videos will come out if we as an organization are ready/serious to hold elections. Otherwise this is not going anywhere. Everytime someone questions the stratergy and leadership, blaming back members for inaction is the standard excuse. Let's stop whining and do something. We are being funded and we have a great member base. Leadership and stratergy is the only deficiency.
raju123
06-01 04:00 PM
This might be useful to you.
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
Age-Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "Child Status Protection Act"
The "Child Status Protection Act", effective August 6, 2002, addresses the problems of minor children losing their eligibility for certain immigration benefits as a result of INS (now USCIS) processing delays. Prior to the passage of this law, a child's eligibility in Employment-Based Immigration situations to be part of his or her parent's application as a derivative beneficiary was based on the child's age at the time that the child's I-485 was adjudicated. Because of enormous backlogs and processing delays, many children turned 21 before the their I-485 applications were adjudicated. In such cases, the children "age-out" and are no longer considered to be part of the parent's application and lose their eligibility to obtain green cards as a derivative beneficiary.
Children who otherwise would have aged out may successfully adjust their status through the additional interplay of the new Concurrent Filing rule and the "Child Status Protection Act." According to the "Child Status Protection Act," the eligibility of these aging-out children will be determined by their age at the date a visa becomes available to them minus the number of days that the Employment-Based immigration petition was pending. Furthermore, these children must file for permanent resident status within one year of such availability. For a clearer illustration of this rule, please see the different scenarios below.
Example 1
The Labor Certification application that was submitted on John's behalf on January 1, 2000 was later approved on December 31, 2000. Afterwards, his employer submits an I-140 (EB-2) immigration petition on John's behalf on January 1, 2002. At that time, John's son, Junior, is 20 years and 7 months old. John's I-140 petition was pending for six months and was approved on July 1, 2002, one month after Junior turns 21 years of age. The visa number for EB-2 was available for John on July 1, 2002. Under the old law without the Child Status Protection Act, Junior has aged out because he is now 21 years old. However, under the new law, his age is fixed as of the date that a visa number becomes available minus the number of days that the I-140 was pending. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, these six months must be subtracted from Junior's age at the time the visa number became available on July 1, 2002. Subtracting six months from Junior's age of 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, Junior's age is fixed at 20 years and 7 months. Thus, even though he was already 21 years and one month on July 1, 2002, he is still considered a "child" for purposes of accompanying his parents in adjusting his status to permanent residence. However, Junior has to file his I-485 within one year from the date of I-140 approval, that is before July 1, 2003. The length of time that is takes the USCIS to adjudicate Junior's case is no longer important in these cases.
According to "Child Status Protection Act", if through the above calculation, the child's age is fixed at 21 or older, the child would be automatically reclassified to an appropriate category and retains the principal beneficiary's original priority date. Please see the next example below.
Example 2
Same facts as above except that Junior is 21 years and seven months old at the time of John's I-140 approval. Because John's I-140 was pending for six months, Junior's age will be fixed at 21 years and one month. Even with the Child Status Protection Act, Junior still ages out and may not adjust his status at this time. However, he will automatically be reclassified to an appropriate category, family-based 2B, and retain his father's original priority date, January 1, 2000, which is the date John's employer filed John's Labor Certification application.
Example 3
Richard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. Richard's son, Simon, is 21 years and one month old. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Richard filed his I-485 because the visa number was currently available for Richard at that time. However, Simon cannot file his I-485 with his father because he aged out.
Example 4
Howard's daughter, Rachel, is 20 years and 10 months old. Howard filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 1, 2002. According to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, Howard and Rachel filed their I-485 since the visa number was available for Howard at that time. Thus, according to the "Child Status Protection Act," no matter how much time Howard's I-140 is pending, Rachel will not age out.
Visa numbers are currently available to all EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3 categories. Thus, with the new Concurrent Filing rule, any person who is a beneficiary (or applicant) of an I-140 petition that has already been filed or is filing the I-140 at this time is now eligible to file the I-485 application as well. Family members will be eligible to file the I-485 along with the principal alien. However, since the Concurrent Filing rule became effective, visa numbers may become unavailable in the future because more eligible aliens will be filing their I-485. Thus, eligible aliens with aging-out children should file their I-485 as soon as possible. Please see next example.
Example 5
Jenny filed her I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on August 10, 2002. Jenny has a son, Benny, who is 20 years and eleven months old. However, due to the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule, many aliens have filed their I-140 and I-485 together and the visa number for EB-2 has been exhausted. However, the visa number will not be current until December 2002 when Benny will be 21 years and three months old. If Jenny's I-140 is pending for six months and will be approved in February 2003, these six months will be reduced from Benny's age in December 2002 when he is 21 years and three months old. Thus, his age is fixed as 20 years nine months. However, if Jenny's I-140 petition is pending for only two months and will be approved in October 2002, Benny's age will be fixed as 21 years and one month. Thus, Benny ages out in this scenario and must wait until his priority date under family-based 2B immigration becomes current.
Example 6
Jason filed his I-140 immigration petition (NIW) on June 30, 2002. Jason has a son, Ken, who is 20 years and ten months old at that time. According to the visa bulletin, an immigration visa number became available for Jason on July 31, 2002. Ken was 20 years and eleven months on July 31, and he is not in the U.S. but in his home country. Because of the new I-140 and I-485 Concurrent Filing Rule Jason filed his I-485 on August 10, 2002. If Jason's I-140 is pending for 6 months until December 31, 2002, one month pending period from June 30 to July 31, 2002 should be subtracted from Ken's age on July 31, 2002. Thus, Ken's age is fixed as 20 years and 10 months. Ken may apply for his immigrant visa through Consular Processing at U.S. Consulate in his home country within one year from July 31, 2002.
For more information about "Age Out", please click the following topics:
What is "Age Out"
Child Status Protection Act
If you are a USC, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
If you are an LPR or will be an LPR, does CSPA prevent your child from "aging out"?
Age Out Problems in Employment-Based Immigration
Age Out Problems under the Interplay of the Rule of Concurrent Filing and "CSPA"
Child of Asylee and Refugee
Unmarried Sons or Daughters of Naturalized Citizens
Effective Date of the CSPA
Hi All,
I want to know if my 19 year old son can be affected by aging out.
I have just received ALC certification and will now file I140 and I485 concurrently as my priority date NOV 22 2004 EB3 Rest of World will be current in June.
Can someone who understands the aging out rules tell me if my son may have a problem?
Thanks in advance...
No comments:
Post a Comment