x1050us
06-26 05:03 PM
My attorney says the real problem is, chennai wants a copy of primary applicants valid visa stamp if applying separately. Which means I have to get out of the country to get a visa stamp for sake of my spouse. I am thinking of flying to India and get my visa stamped along with my wife (don't know if vfs will allow me to add an application now). Any other suggestions?
wallpaper WWE JOHN CENA Embroidered
EBX-Man
04-30 02:31 PM
Hi,
I am lost trying to find information on this.
Here's the situation for adding my wife to my I-485 application (we are from India). We DO have her 100% correct birth certificate we got issued last month.
However, since the issue date on it is April 2011, our lawyer insists that we need affidavits from her parents as well (perhaps to avoid RFEs). Further the lawyer insists that the Foreign Affairs Manual for India states that these be sworn in front of a first class magistrate of India.
When her parents went to the local court and request the first class magistrate, the court officer is demanding that we have a sealed copy of the requesting authority (USCIS) that clearly states that a first class magistrate's signature is required!
Questions:
(i) Is the affidavit supposed to be sworn in front of first class magistrate? Even if we have a corrected birth certificate?? Or can it be signed by an 'Executive Magistrate' or maybe even just notarized??
(ii) If yes, did someone else face a similar issue?
(iii) If yes, is there a USCIS document I could send to satisfy their demand?
I did try to find a USCIS document but all it states is that ... IF the birth certificate is unavailable ... then "sworn affidavits" need to accompany non-availability certificate from a competent local government authority.
Please advise :(
PS: FYI, they went to the Palghar court in Maharashtra, India.
The rule is
If you dont have a birth certificate
- You need affidavites from both parents
If you have a birth certificate issued after 1 year of date of birth
- You need affidavites from both parents
If you have a birth certificate issued within 1 year of date of birth
- You do not need affidavites
Dont worry i applied for birth certificate in 2005 in india and submitted that along with affidavites from parents and the documents were accepted
I am lost trying to find information on this.
Here's the situation for adding my wife to my I-485 application (we are from India). We DO have her 100% correct birth certificate we got issued last month.
However, since the issue date on it is April 2011, our lawyer insists that we need affidavits from her parents as well (perhaps to avoid RFEs). Further the lawyer insists that the Foreign Affairs Manual for India states that these be sworn in front of a first class magistrate of India.
When her parents went to the local court and request the first class magistrate, the court officer is demanding that we have a sealed copy of the requesting authority (USCIS) that clearly states that a first class magistrate's signature is required!
Questions:
(i) Is the affidavit supposed to be sworn in front of first class magistrate? Even if we have a corrected birth certificate?? Or can it be signed by an 'Executive Magistrate' or maybe even just notarized??
(ii) If yes, did someone else face a similar issue?
(iii) If yes, is there a USCIS document I could send to satisfy their demand?
I did try to find a USCIS document but all it states is that ... IF the birth certificate is unavailable ... then "sworn affidavits" need to accompany non-availability certificate from a competent local government authority.
Please advise :(
PS: FYI, they went to the Palghar court in Maharashtra, India.
The rule is
If you dont have a birth certificate
- You need affidavites from both parents
If you have a birth certificate issued after 1 year of date of birth
- You need affidavites from both parents
If you have a birth certificate issued within 1 year of date of birth
- You do not need affidavites
Dont worry i applied for birth certificate in 2005 in india and submitted that along with affidavites from parents and the documents were accepted
xbohdpukc
09-21 02:18 PM
I think we need the limit to go or at least double. I think the best way to make the congress and also the american voters happy is to NOT increase the visa numbers or bring in SKILL bill but to increase the existing 7% limit. This way they will be happy as the same number of ppl are getting PR and we will be happy as the priority dates will move forward.
without rising the current cap, increasing existing 7% limit will only lead to a worse retrogression in the ROW category.
without rising the current cap, increasing existing 7% limit will only lead to a worse retrogression in the ROW category.
2011 john cena new wwe champion
smuggymba
09-30 03:04 PM
mods - please delete
more...
JunRN
07-18 07:19 AM
schedule a isn't available anymore since feb 2007.
Schedule A visa is not available. Schedule A simply means that we are exempted from LC. All we need is to file I-140 concurrent with I-485/EAD/AP.
Our visa is also EB3.
Now, the question is whether we need to get July priority date or we can get an August priority date and also qualified under this scheme?
Schedule A visa is not available. Schedule A simply means that we are exempted from LC. All we need is to file I-140 concurrent with I-485/EAD/AP.
Our visa is also EB3.
Now, the question is whether we need to get July priority date or we can get an August priority date and also qualified under this scheme?
dixie
08-23 06:55 PM
We all know very well by now that the house of representatives is THE mover when it comes to passing any pro-legal immigration bill.Given that half of those representatives may loose their jobs in the coming election, I dont see much point in contacting them now if they have already made up their mind not to do anything on immigration until the elections. But we will have to double our efforts as soon as the new congress settles in so that our agenda gets highlighted to the new members of congress.
But look at the positive side. We have more time to contact the law makers.
But look at the positive side. We have more time to contact the law makers.
more...
deafTunes123
09-10 09:43 AM
There is one more option. Calculate all the time you are out of US over the past 5 years and sum them up.
Eg., If you are 5 months out of country, then you can recapture those 5 months and add it to your 6th year limit. In which case you may fall in the category of applying your Labor before start of 6th. Your Lawyer should be aware of this. I know one person who did this successfully.
The other option is take 3 or 4 months off (out of country) and recapture if necessary.
Good Luck.
Eg., If you are 5 months out of country, then you can recapture those 5 months and add it to your 6th year limit. In which case you may fall in the category of applying your Labor before start of 6th. Your Lawyer should be aware of this. I know one person who did this successfully.
The other option is take 3 or 4 months off (out of country) and recapture if necessary.
Good Luck.
2010 WWE RAW John Cena Edge dektop
laborpains
12-09 03:35 PM
At last my turn comes in January.....now the real fight begins.....any information abt how to get name check status....etc. my FP was done in Sep 2007....did not receive any new FP request...any insight on that gurus.
Happy holidays
~dask:confused:
EB-3-I
PD:Jan 31st 2002
Hey Dask, I am a 31 JAN 2002 PD too! Did not not receive any FP notice recently.
Happy holidays
~dask:confused:
EB-3-I
PD:Jan 31st 2002
Hey Dask, I am a 31 JAN 2002 PD too! Did not not receive any FP notice recently.
more...
gc_bulgaria
10-12 12:20 PM
I am planning for my visa in Jan at Mumbai consulate. I do not have any relatives in either mumbai/pune who can submit my documents 3 days before the appointment.
Has anyone faced this issue? I have sent them an email asking if I can mail the documents to them. Lets see what they reply. Does anyone has experience what to do in situation like this?
Thanks
You can mail your's. make sure its registered /fed ex receipt and send them a followup email to check if they received it.
Has anyone faced this issue? I have sent them an email asking if I can mail the documents to them. Lets see what they reply. Does anyone has experience what to do in situation like this?
Thanks
You can mail your's. make sure its registered /fed ex receipt and send them a followup email to check if they received it.
hair new photos of John Cena i
Vishal2007
02-04 06:33 PM
i was totaly upse about this post, here is my correct entry
definitely your entry should be denied, you are not capable to solve your domestic problem, how come you are going to do good to this country by getting GC. (I agree these people are not good as you, but before they start domestic violence there are on citizen/GC (either one of them),
definitely your entry should be deneid, you are not uncapale to solve your domestic problem, how come you are going to do good to this country by getting GC. (I agree these people are not good as you, but before they start domestic voilence there are on citizen/GC (either one of them),
definitely your entry should be denied, you are not capable to solve your domestic problem, how come you are going to do good to this country by getting GC. (I agree these people are not good as you, but before they start domestic violence there are on citizen/GC (either one of them),
definitely your entry should be deneid, you are not uncapale to solve your domestic problem, how come you are going to do good to this country by getting GC. (I agree these people are not good as you, but before they start domestic voilence there are on citizen/GC (either one of them),
more...
rb_248
10-05 01:41 PM
Most likely....they are trying to play both side of the vote politics. That way they can say we tried earnestly but didn't happen because of republican opposition.
On the other hand they can avoid annoying center and independent voters.
I agree. They are playing to get Hispanic votes in the 2010 elections. "No health care for illegals" indirectly contradicts "green cards for all undocumented". Obama is cleverer than LALLU. Watch out. He is a very intelligent player with words.
On the other hand they can avoid annoying center and independent voters.
I agree. They are playing to get Hispanic votes in the 2010 elections. "No health care for illegals" indirectly contradicts "green cards for all undocumented". Obama is cleverer than LALLU. Watch out. He is a very intelligent player with words.
hot New Wallpaper Of John Cena
desidas
02-01 12:06 PM
Looking for a Good Attorney in Texas, please - thanks .
more...
house JOHN CENA NEW T-SHIRT
saji007
05-02 02:50 PM
1. New employer while filing for H1 Transfer will get 3 year
2. You can start PERM when ever you like. Better to start early, just in case if Priority date becomes current, you can apply for 485
2. You can start PERM when ever you like. Better to start early, just in case if Priority date becomes current, you can apply for 485
tattoo New Wallpaper Of John Cena
satishku_2000
01-18 07:29 PM
I log in every day to see whats happening with my I-140 , Mine filed in september and the processing date moved only 15 days in last month. It took 2.5 years to complete the labor and I think I am struck in I-140 here...
Any one received I-140 approvals recently ? I just want to know what is your receipt date
Any one received I-140 approvals recently ? I just want to know what is your receipt date
more...
pictures John Cena clutches second
kirupa
07-27 02:59 PM
Ah - glad you found the answer. I was thinking that because ShowDialog is a modal dialog, it may be blocking any operations that are going on in the background. I failed to realize that OpenFileDialog does not have a non-modal Show method which displays the dialog without forcing it to have all of the app's attention.
:)
:)
dresses Randy Orton and John Cena make
Rb_newsletter
09-03 10:16 PM
Anybody who works for consulting co. got extension approved ? without RFE ?
In one of my friend's case they approved H1 for 6 months, because he had contract only for 6 months. He just completed 3 years and this is his first extension request. :eek: Who the hell in this world writes contract for more than 6 months even if they have requirements for next 2 years.
Another case I heard was immigration officer at POE granted only 1 year I-94 even though he had 2 years left in his visa. It seems IO spoke to candidates manager and advised him to hire someone locally and get him trained within a year.
Are we in real United States of America? So much of hate around.
In one of my friend's case they approved H1 for 6 months, because he had contract only for 6 months. He just completed 3 years and this is his first extension request. :eek: Who the hell in this world writes contract for more than 6 months even if they have requirements for next 2 years.
Another case I heard was immigration officer at POE granted only 1 year I-94 even though he had 2 years left in his visa. It seems IO spoke to candidates manager and advised him to hire someone locally and get him trained within a year.
Are we in real United States of America? So much of hate around.
more...
makeup John-cena-new-
drirshad
03-13 04:31 PM
03/13/2009: Senate Bill, S. 577 to Punish Immigration Sharks Defrauding and Victimizing Immigrants and Related Parties
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
Senate Dianne Feinstine from California, cosponsored by Senator Ted Kennedy, introduced this bill in the Senate yesterday. The full text of the bill is as follows:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Immigration Fraud Prevention Act of 2009''.
SEC. 2. SCHEMES TO DEFRAUD ALIENS.
(a) Amendments to Title 18.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 47 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:``�1041. Schemes to defraud aliens
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully and knowingly executes a scheme or artifice, in connection with any matter that is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws or any matter the offender willfully and knowingly claims or represents is authorized by or arises under Federal immigration laws, to--
``(1) defraud any person; or
``(2) obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, promises, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
Here is the background for this bill: The Immigration Fraud Prevention Act would prevent and punish fraud and misrepresentation in the context of immigration proceedings. The act would create a new Federal crime to penalize those who engage in schemes to defraud aliens in connection with Federal immigration laws. Specifically, the act would make it a Federal crime to wilfully and knowingly defraud or obtain or receive money or anything else of value from any person by false or fraudulent pretences, representations, or promises; and to wilfully, knowingly, and falsely represent that an individual is an attorney or accredited representative in any matter arising under Federal immigration law. Violations of these crimes would result in a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both. The bill would also authorize the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security to use task forces currently in existence to detect and investigate individuals who are in violation of the immigration fraud crimes as created by the bill. The act would also work to prevent immigration fraud by requiring that Immigration Judges issue warnings about unauthorized practice of immigration law to immigrants in removal proceedings, similar to the current law that requires notification of pro bono legal services to these immigrants; requiring the Attorney General to provide outreach to the immigrant community to help prevent fraud; providing that any materials used to carry out notification on immigration law fraud is done in the appropriate language for that community; and requiring the distribution of the disciplinary list of individuals not authorized to appear before the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, BIA, currently maintained by the Executive Office of Immigration Review, EOIR. Unfortunately, the need for Federal action to prevent and prosecute immigration fraud has escalated in recent years as citizens and non-citizens attempt to navigate the immigration legal system. Thus far, only States have sought to regulate the unauthorized practice of immigration law. Since immigration law is a federal matter, I believe the solution to such misrepresentation and fraud should be addressed by Congress. By enacting this bill, Congress would help prevent more victims like Vincent Smith, a Mexican national who has resided in California since 1975. His wife is an American citizen, and they live with their 6 U.S. citizen children in Palmdale, CA. Mr. Smith would likely have received a green card at least two different times during his stay in California. However, in attempting to get legal counsel, Mr. Smith hired someone whom he thought was an attorney, but was not. As a result, Mr. Smith was charged more than $10,000 for processing his immigration paperwork, which was never filed. Mr. Smith now has no legal status and faces removal proceedings. Another victim of immigration fraud is Raul, a Mexican national, who came to the United States in 2000. He also married a U.S. citizen, Loraina, making him eligible to apply for a green card. Raul and his wife went to Jose for legal help. Jose's business card said he had a ``law office'' and that he was an ``immigration specialist.'' But Jose was not a specialist and charged Raul $4,000 to file a frivolous asylum petition. While Raul thought he was going to receive a green card, he was instead placed into removal proceedings. From California to New York, there are hundreds of stories like these. Many immigrants are preyed on because of their fears--others on their hope of realizing the American dream. They are charged exorbitant fees for the filing of frivolous paperwork that clog our immigration courts and keep families and businesses waiting in limbo for years. Law enforcement officials say that many fraudulent ``immigration specialists'' close their businesses or move on to another part of the state or country before they can be held accountable. They can make $100,000 to $200,000 a year and the few who have been caught rarely serve more than a few months in jail. Often victims of such crimes are deported, sending them back to their home countries without accountability for the perpetrator of the fraud. Most recently, hundreds of immigrants were exploited by Victor M. Espinal, who was arrested for allegedly posing as an immigration attorney. Nearly 125 of Mr. Espinal's clients attended the New York City Bar Association's free clinic to address their legal and immigration options. According to prosecutors, Mr. Espinal falsely claimed on his business cards that he was licensed and admitted to the California bar as well as the bar in the Dominican Republic. Organizations such as the Los Angeles Country Bar Association, National Immigration Forum, American Immigration Lawyers Association, and American Bar Association have been documenting this exploitation for many years.
girlfriend wwe-john-cena-pictures-new-
indiablues
12-26 09:25 AM
Hi,
I stumbled across this thread and this seems to be a great initiative that is managed professionally.
I browsed though the IV website and forums and have few questions regarding who IV is representing among the employment based immigrants:
1. I've a 3 yrs baccalaureate degree from India and have filed GC in EB3 category. How do IV initiatives helps me?
2. My friend have 4yr engineering degree from India and have filed GC in EB3 category. How do IV initiatives helps him?
3. My boss has Masters Degree from India and has 10 yr of experience. He filed his GC in EB2 category. Is IV for him?
4. One of my colleagues has just graduated from an US university and he filed his GC this year in EB3 category. Is IV for him?
5. My other colleague has completed his MS from an US university and he filed his GC in EB2 category. IS IV for him?
I would appreciate if someone can answer the above questions.
Thanks,
IB
I stumbled across this thread and this seems to be a great initiative that is managed professionally.
I browsed though the IV website and forums and have few questions regarding who IV is representing among the employment based immigrants:
1. I've a 3 yrs baccalaureate degree from India and have filed GC in EB3 category. How do IV initiatives helps me?
2. My friend have 4yr engineering degree from India and have filed GC in EB3 category. How do IV initiatives helps him?
3. My boss has Masters Degree from India and has 10 yr of experience. He filed his GC in EB2 category. Is IV for him?
4. One of my colleagues has just graduated from an US university and he filed his GC this year in EB3 category. Is IV for him?
5. My other colleague has completed his MS from an US university and he filed his GC in EB2 category. IS IV for him?
I would appreciate if someone can answer the above questions.
Thanks,
IB
hairstyles John Cena
crystal
08-16 02:36 PM
You are saying u have applied F1 after filing I-485 or before filing? What was the gap between them ? All I know is that the less the duration between them the more the trouble.
please do reply .I am waiting.
please do reply .I am waiting.
waitingmygc
10-23 08:46 PM
One correction in wandmaker above response, if it helps
B.Sc (3 years) + MCA (3years) = US Masters or Even M.E
B.Sc (3 years) + MCA (3years) = US Masters or Even M.E
Ruta
07-17 05:38 PM
Office of Communications
www.uscis.gov
July 17, 2007
Contact: Office of Communications
202-272-1200
USCIS Update
USCIS Announces Revised Processing Procedures for
Adjustment of Status Applications
WASHINGTON�U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that,
beginning immediately, it will accept employment-based applications to adjust status (Form I-
485) filed by aliens whose priority dates are current under the July Visa Bulletin, No. 107.
USCIS will accept applications filed not later than August 17, 2007.
On July 2, 2007, USCIS announced that it would not accept any additional employment-based
applications to adjust status. USCIS made that announcement after receiving an update from the
Department of State that it would not authorize any additional employment-based visa numbers
for this fiscal year. After consulting with USCIS, the Department of State has advised that
Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for
purposes of determining employment visa number availability, and that Visa Bulletin #108
(dated July 2) has been withdrawn.
�The public reaction to the July 2 announcement made it clear that the federal government�s
management of this process needs further review,� said Emilio Gonzalez, USCIS Director. �I
am committed to working with Congress and the State Department to implement a more efficient
system in line with public expectations.�
USCIS�s announcement today allows anyone who was eligible to apply under Visa Bulletin No.
107 a full month�s time to do so. Applications already properly filed with USCIS will also be
accepted. The current fee schedule will apply to all applications filed under Visa Bulletin No. 107
through August 17, 2007. (The new fee schedule that becomes effective on July 30, 2007, will
apply to all other applications filed on or after July 30, 2007).
-USCIS
www.uscis.gov
July 17, 2007
Contact: Office of Communications
202-272-1200
USCIS Update
USCIS Announces Revised Processing Procedures for
Adjustment of Status Applications
WASHINGTON�U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that,
beginning immediately, it will accept employment-based applications to adjust status (Form I-
485) filed by aliens whose priority dates are current under the July Visa Bulletin, No. 107.
USCIS will accept applications filed not later than August 17, 2007.
On July 2, 2007, USCIS announced that it would not accept any additional employment-based
applications to adjust status. USCIS made that announcement after receiving an update from the
Department of State that it would not authorize any additional employment-based visa numbers
for this fiscal year. After consulting with USCIS, the Department of State has advised that
Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for
purposes of determining employment visa number availability, and that Visa Bulletin #108
(dated July 2) has been withdrawn.
�The public reaction to the July 2 announcement made it clear that the federal government�s
management of this process needs further review,� said Emilio Gonzalez, USCIS Director. �I
am committed to working with Congress and the State Department to implement a more efficient
system in line with public expectations.�
USCIS�s announcement today allows anyone who was eligible to apply under Visa Bulletin No.
107 a full month�s time to do so. Applications already properly filed with USCIS will also be
accepted. The current fee schedule will apply to all applications filed under Visa Bulletin No. 107
through August 17, 2007. (The new fee schedule that becomes effective on July 30, 2007, will
apply to all other applications filed on or after July 30, 2007).
-USCIS
No comments:
Post a Comment