Yes indeed which includes other dual intent visas.
You must read Spec's latests posts defining "status"
Thank You Mr.mysterious
Originally Posted by vgraj1
Yes indeed which includes other dual intent visas.
You must read Spec's latests posts defining "status"
Thank You Mr.mysterious
Last edited by Kanmani; 02-10-2012 at 05:58 PM.
Great work Spectator! Thanks!
There is no ambiguity that Parolee is not considered as lawfully admitted. The main question that is not clear is whether the lawful admission should be prior to filing 485 or at the time of adjudication.
Yes, awesome analysis indeed! Thanks Spectator & Q.
Attn: Reader (page 5 of the same memo)
Failed to Maintain a Lawful Status and/or Violated the Terms of a Nonimmigrant Visa.
General. Expiration, revocation, or violation of status puts a nonimmigrant out of status, and the alien remains out of status until some adjudication restores status or the alien departs the United States.
In most cases, the 180-day counting period commences on the date the alien’s status expires, is revoked, or is violated following the alien’s most recent admission. In addition, with the exception of a dual intent nonimmigrant, a nonimmigrant is only required to maintain his or her nonimmigrant status until the time he or she properly files an adjustment of status application with USCIS, because most nonimmigrants who apply for adjustment of status are presumed to be intending immigrants and are no longer eligible to maintain a nonimmigrant status. Therefore, for purposes of the 180-day counting period, calculation of the number of days for failing to maintain status or violating a nonimmigrant visa will stop as of the date USCIS receives a properly filed adjustment of status application.
Notwithstanding, a properly filed adjustment of status application, in and of itself, does not accord lawful status or cure any violation of a nonimmigrant visa. For example, if an alien applied for adjustment of status three days prior to the expiration of his or her nonimmigrant status and the adjustment of status application was eventually denied, the alien will not be considered to be in lawful status after the expiration of the nonimmigrant status. Consequently, if the same alien files a second application for adjustment of status, the period after which the nonimmigrant status expired and during which the first adjustment of status application was pending counts against the 180-day period when considering
eligibility for relief under 245(k) in the adjudication of the second adjustment of status application.
If USCIS approves person extension of stay with new I94, then I wonder why that can not be taken as inherent proof that person maintained status till the date EoS got approved ? After all it's part of EoS process to check if applicant was in status at time of applying. All these laws are too complicated.
Last edited by suninphx; 02-10-2012 at 07:32 PM.
EAD/AP approved for self
PD 2/8/2008
RD 12/15/2011
FP 1/25/2012
EAD/AP 2/10/2012
Congrats bro !
Wondering if it is possible to take a sabbatical for 3 months to go back to school while on EAD. I haven't filed for 485 yet, but doing some long-term planning.
If you are guaranteed a job when you come back, I believe it's fine. Although I probably wouldn't do it till 180 days past 485 RD.
sabbatical by definition promises the job when you rejoin. So I think that should cover it.
However if I am not wrong - USCIS expects the candidate to take up the promised job relatively soon (i.e. couple of months max) since the approval of 485. So if you become a student and the lag time is going to be 1 or 2 years since 485 approval; that would clearly be a problem.
What you can possibly do is - as soon as 485 is approved join the employer for 6 months and then again resume sabbatical 6 months later.
p.s. - I would be curious to know when you get a firm answer on this. I am sure many people on the forum would be interested.
Last edited by qesehmk; 02-11-2012 at 11:32 AM.
I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.
Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread
Based on my preliminary discussion with Univ's legal people, being on sabbatical means that you are currently on the payroll - so it is equivalent to you being "on the job". Sabbatical does not mean that you have left the employment - so it has no effect on your immigration status. I am specifically talking about tenured or tenure track faculty sabbatical here - I am not sure whether similar interpretation exists outside academia.
EB2I NSC | PD: 08/07/2009 | Forum Glossary
Q and Viz,
Thanks for the quick replies. I will definitely revert back to the forum when there is a clear-cut answer from the attorneys. But first things first - gotta file for 485. I have seen a few of my colleagues doing this, so it should comply with the HR policies. I have been doing a part-time degree for the past few years, but it been so slow that I can't possible imagine finishing it any time soon. So the sabbatical would me more of an expediting step to graduate - and not more than a semester long.
Most importantly my wife needs to approve. I guess that's the toughest part.
Received "CARD PRODUCTION" ordered email for me,wife and daughter at 9AM.
PD:Oct 28, 2007
RD:Nov 1, 2011
ND:Nov 4,2011 :
SC:TSC
I wish you good luck and peace to everybody. My special prayers for Teddy, Nishant, Leo and indiaeb2.
Thank you Q for this forum. Followed you from your first post in **, You and Teddy helped me see the future with a measured optimism. Thank you.
Got our EAD / AP approval today - hopefully will get the card in the next few days.
Lots of Jan filers are getting their EAD Approval , which also means that the turn around time for EAD approvals is anytime between 30 - 35 days , I think thats quick enough.
I think the wait game has now begin , I hope we the Jan filers start getting approval in a couple of months to come.
Thank you for your support so far . I pray to god that everyone should get GC on time.
imdeng - i think you are right. But from USCIS perspective - they might be looking at whether a person is "gainfully employed" i.e. salary and benefits - since they require payslips. However Spec and Kanmani might know better from legal standpoint.
I know from my previous employer's prespective - sabbatical would be a promise to make your job available when you come back. So I had a VP on my team who was called on military duty in Iraq every few years. She would go and come back and the company would allow her to be absent. I think but I am not sure - that she wouldn't be paid for her absence. However she would accrue the years absent towards her pension and retirement benefits. In other words company wouldn't pay a single dime towards her payroll or payroll taxes. However when she retires they wouldn't reduce the active military duty years from the formula for pension benefits. I think you should check w your univ. They probably do the same. And that is what they may be calling "being employed".
needid - thanks for the kind words and hearty congratulations for your GC and all the best for future!
I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.
Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread
Congrats Desperate8. Can you please share your details RD, FP, and Sc ? Thanks
You line of thinking seems reasonable Q. One quick thought - USCIS actually does not require payslips - what they do require is an EVL. The 485 instructions ask for an EVL by name, does not mention payslips.
EB2I NSC | PD: 08/07/2009 | Forum Glossary
Friends, please help me with this question. For my wife, when she moved to her next project in another state, the LCA was amended, but her H1 was not amended. Do you think USCIS will have the visibility into the new worksite if the H1 petition that they have is still attached to the previous LCA?
i think i answered this to my ability a few pages back.
I no longer provide calculations/predictions ever since whereismyGC.com was created.
I do run this site only as an administrator. Our goal is to improve clarity of GC process to help people plan their lives better.
Use the info at your risk. None of this is legal advice.
Forum Glossary | Forum Rules and Guidelines | If your published post disappeared, check - Lies and Misinformation thread
Hi everyone,
Question for those that might have been through this. We're getting ready to file 485 and my form 683 has not been signed by the doc since a chest x ray is reqd due to positive ppd and due to pregnancy, it has to be pending for the next few months.
My question is - what delays does this cause? Does it result in a certain RFE or does it mean that Ead will come in time but not 485 approval? Or does it only delay GC issuance? Can someone who's been through this shed some light? Thanks!
Pls go through the threads in the Live Discussion section of the forum - the matter has been discussed there. From what I remember, there is a process for pregnant women to continue the application without undue delay - but I don't remember the specifics.
In general, any insufficiency in documentation only delays the 485 approval (through RFE) and not EAD/AP.
EB2I NSC | PD: 08/07/2009 | Forum Glossary
updating timeline
PD : 4/10/2009 (Current in 2/12)
Docs Sent: 2/1/2012
ND: 2/7/2012
Received mails from USCIS: 2/11/2012
Question: When can I check my status online using SRC** numbers? I tried after getting these mails but site says could not find the case.
Q, Thanks. My question specifically is whether USCIS has any info on the second work location because the LCA is available with only DOL unless it is filed with H1 petition. Is my understanding correct?
Common Problem with H1B Employee's Relocation
H1B LCA Update vs. H1B Amendment
As described above, one of the common problems faced by H1B consulting employees is a USCIS site visit following work relocation. The USCIS is not made aware of the filing of a new LCA for the new worksite location, and the investigator, therefore, goes to the original worksite.
It is becoming increasingly clear that it is no longer safe to rely solely on updating the LCA in many instances when an H1B employee changes work locations. In addition to concerns about site visits, we have also begun to see new wording in USCIS requests for evidence (RFEs), asking for proof of H1B amendments for any relocation of the employee during the H1B petition validity period. The General Counsel of the USCIS California Service Center also has publicly indicated the opinion that an amended H1B is required in addition to obtaining a new LCA. It is possible that more definitive guidance on this matter will be released by the USCIS later in 2012, but this is not a certainty.
Background on Filing LCA Amendments for H1Bs
The legal issues on the appropriate procedures for relocating H1B employees are somewhat complex and beyond the scope of this article. For many years it generally was understood that H1B workers could be relocated based on updated LCAs. The USCIS policy, however, is clearly moving to a more restrictive interpretation.
When planning for 2012 and beyond, therefore, employers who do not wish to battle the USCIS on this matter should shift from the traditional practice of relying on LCA updates when moving their employees. Many companies are reluctant to adopt the practice of filing an H1B amendment, as it is often administratively impractical, and is significantly more expensive. However, without an H1B amendment, there is increased legal exposure for both the employer and the employee if the USCIS determines that an employer should have amended the petition.
Reader,
You can READ the full article here http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html VOL. XVIII, no. 06; Feb 2012, week 2)
Some more information here ....http://www.murthy.com/news/n_revamh.html
Last edited by Kanmani; 02-12-2012 at 11:33 AM.
There are currently 10 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 10 guests)
Posting Permissions
