My 140 got approved in 9 days ,great work from Rita and attorneys at Law offices of Rajiv .
The long wait still continues to file 485 .
I wish each and every one a very happy new year 2007 .
My previous employer didn't file for my wife H4 when they filed for my H1B, which made her out of status from Sep 2002. I got to know that Rajiv's office did help the clients with H4 issues. That is when I decided to try with them. We filed for my H1B (7th yr extension) and my wife H4 at the same time in Oct 05. We requested to give the status from Sep 02 - Jan 07. USCIS approved both H1B and H4. But they gave her status from Jan 06 - Jan 07, which means she was still out of status from Sep 02 - Jan 06. Then we decided to file for MTR and we filed MTR in Nov 05. USCIS responded to MTR in Sep 06 with RFE. We sent response to RFE and they gave status from Sep 02 - Jan 06, which means my wife got full status.
All this couldn't have happened with out strategic thought process Rajiv/Jitesh and their team has put together. We are extremely happy about how our case has been handled from day one we chose to hire Rajiv's law firm. My special thanks to Rajiv/Jitesh/Ursula/Anna and their team for answering all my questions at different stages of this. In future if I need any immigration help I would definitely go for Rajiv firm. If anybody has any help needed about immigration I would highly recommend Rajiv firm.
I want to thank you everyone with Rajiv Khanna. They are awesome people to work with. Timely response and great work.
My PERM application got certified in 3 days after application.
I specially want to thanks pramita and Anna for their kind support.
Rgds,
Jignesh
I got my 485 approved after filing WOM. Rajiv Khanna's office was very helpful, and their guidance in the whole case was always truthful and honest. Rajiv and Jitesh advised me in this case and filed WOM in DC Circuit Court.All filings related to this case were done on time, the arguments in the case were solid, and name check was cleared within a month of filing WOM.
We applied in late September; and my case for permanent resident status was approved last week. Mathew Chacko and Heather Crumb took care of all the paperwork and the process and were both extremely helpful, prompt and did a wonderful job. Couldnt have asked for a better service!
I have worked with numerous immigration lawyers in the past and no body (and I mean no body) gave the quick turn around time that I received from these guys. (Specifically Seema & Amrita). I was on my 7th year of H1-B so it was very important to get my application out on time. Seema and Amrita were very helpfull and their turn around time was amazing. They knew exactly what they needed to get done.
Whenever I had any query regarding my case, I was getting a lightening reply from Amrita. Thanks to the great work by Amrita. Amrita was always eager to help and is very pleasant Thanks a lot Amrita.
Thanks to Mr Khanna, Mathew & Kumuda for all the work on my case , it was handled very professionaly & and response time from them was very fast on every matter.
I got my 485 approved and our GC on the way. Rajiv Khanna's office was very helpful, and their guidance was always truthful and result oriented. On behalf of my wife and daughter, I am expressing my gratitude to Rajiv Khanna's team and specially all who works on my case like Mr Khanna, Mathew, Kumuda, Vani, Aruna, Heather, Subha, Raksha, Govinda. Thank you all. I must say when come to “Apply for Immigration” difference is “Immigration.com”.
I am reporting here comments from and my responses to a member of our community, "Julissa," regarding whether or how she could apply for a green card herself if she has a Master's degree. Do note, if a set of new immigration laws gets passed, all this could change.
We won a case for a Ph.D. in Accounting under the Outstanding Researcher and Professor Category. This individual had over nine years of teaching and research experience. He held a position as an Assistant Professor at a prestigious academic institution. He was noted for innovative and pioneering work in his field as well as significant contributions to accounting principles. This applicant was awarded for outstanding teaching each year from his students and fellow professors.
This applicant provided a 5-year contract for services in a medically underserved area, a copy of his J-1 residency requirement waiver, letters from the Health and Human Services office in his area requesting his services, documentation to reflect the statistics of the health professional shortage in his employment area as well as copies of his license to practice medicine.
We won a case following a Request for Evidence for a scientist considered extraordinary in his field. This Ph.D. was an internationally renowned scientist who is acclaimed and respected in the international research community for his expertise in the area of corneal innate immunity and microbial keratitis. His unique specialty set him apart from others in the field. He was invited to review for a high impact scientific journal. He also had an extensive publication list as well as presentations world-wide for his innovative and pioneering work.
We won a case for a physician who provided a contract for services for 5 years in a medically underserved area. This applicant also submitted copies of his degree, medical license, medical degree equivalency evaluation, USMLE Step 1, 2 and 3, status paperwork, letter from potential employer stating need, documentation of statistical data on medically underserved area and a letter from Bureau of Health Care Services.
We won a case for an Alien of Extraordinary Ability who qualified in numerous components of the category. We argued her contributions were significant as clearly documented by the multitude of reference letters supplied by leading experts in her field. She also had an extensive publication list as well as invitations to present this extraordinary work. Her research has had a significant impact in the field, and consequently the citation record of her work is far greater than most scientists with her years of educational and work experience.
We won a case for an Outstanding Researcher and Professor who was known world-wide for his expertise in hotel management. This applicant had over 19 combined years of industry and teaching experience. He was well-known as a remarkable professor. He served on many thesis committees and acted as a judge in numerous forums. This applicant had an extensive publication record and as a result was highly sought after to speak around the world regarding his contemporary research. He published book chapters and also obtained patents for portions of his research.
We won a case for an Outstanding Researcher who had over 23 years of research experience. She was considered one of the foremost experts in the field of medical research. She has an extensive publication record along with a multitude of presentations. This applicant was working on such illnesses as asthma, allergies and other lung ailments. Her innovative and pioneering work was recognized by the number of manuscripts accepted for publication in high impact journals.
We won a case for an Outstanding Researcher who worked for a private company. This applicant provided substantial evidence regarding the company's accomplishments and ability to pay as well as documentation of the 3 full-time researchers on staff. We were also able to provide evidence that the applicant qualified by providing his publications, patented work, membership in a prestigious professional society, extensive presentation listing as well as years of industry experience.
We won a case for an Outstanding Researcher with over seven years of research experience. This applicant received a multitude of academic awards for his outstanding work. He had an extensive publication record and authored book chapters. He was known world-wide as a leading expert in his field. Upon receipt of an RFE regarding his employment offer, additional supporting evidence was submitted confirming the permanency of his job offer. His case was approved in less than a week from Services' receipt of the response letter to RFE.
WASHINGTON—Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Treasury Jacob J. Lew, White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Director Alejandro Mayorkas will help USCIS celebrate our nation’s 237th birthday as the agency welcomes more than 7,800 new citizens during more than 100 naturalization ceremonies across the country and overseas from July 1 to July 5.
Statement from Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano:
Immigration Reform 2013 Status
I wanted to give you quick overview of where we are as of today in the immigration reform effort. As you know the comprehensive immigration bill labeled S.744 was passed by Senate, and the voting in the Senate reflected what kind of support there is generally amongst the two parties (Senate and House of Republicans (House)) for this reform effort.
The composition of the Senate is currently 54 Democrats, one Independent and 45 Republicans. A total of 100 Senators. When the bill was voted upon, it was passed 68 to32. All Democrats voted for it, one Independent voted for it, but only 13 Republicans in the Senate voted for the bill. So less than one third (of Republicans voted for passage). This means that Democrats overwhelmingly support the reform, the immigration bill S. 744. But Republicans are not by any means, or in any way shape or form overwhelmingly or even in a majority in favor of the reform as it was proposed.
So, now bill has been passed the Senate. 68 to 32. It’s a good margin, but the problem situation in the House is totally different. The politics of the situation is that the Latino, Hispanic vote is becoming in proportion much larger. It is exponentially expanding. The Republicans leaders rightly believe that they must curry favor or must be considered a friend to the Hispanic industry of immigration. A lot of Republicans also believe that they have no incentive to pass an amnesty bill. One thing I would say that as far as reform of the legal immigration is concerned I don't think we have too much controversy about that. Both parties agreed that certain things need to be done, like we need skilled immigration professional. Special provisions for PhDs, physicians, people who have Master’s degrees, people with STEM degrees. We need all that and some way to remove the backlog, which is horrendous for many countries. For instance, India has nine to ten years of backlog waiting for a Green Card. So there is consensus among both parties on legal immigration. It is the amnesty part, the enforcement and border protection, which are the key areas of disagreement.
If you look on the Republicans composition, only 24 out of 234 House Republicans represent districts that have any appreciable numbers of Hispanic voters, more than 25 percent. So, only 24 out of 234. Where is the incentive for them to pass an immigration bill with amnesty? In fact, many of the Republicans come from districts that actually oppose amnesty. Republican Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) was speaking in Lynchburg, Virginia yesterday and passions were really running high against the amnesty.
So in the House even if Democrats all get together, the problem is how do we move the reform forward. House is controlled by Republicans, 234 to 201. House Speaker, John Boehner (R-OH) has said that he won't bring the Senate bill up for a vote if he does not have the support of a majority of the House Republicans (known as Hastert Rule). He says, I will not even allow this Senate bill to be voted on in the House unless a majority of House Republicans support the bill. And if we look at the cross-section of the voting that occurred in Senate, less than one third of Republicans support. It’s not good sign to get that kind of support.
So, it appears at least at this stage that the Senate bill will have very tough time going through the House as today’s politics stand.
What are the options?
Four obvious options, the fourth option is very unlikely, which is House leadership brings up the the Senate bill up for vote.
There are four options, but again it’s important to understand what happens if there are two separate bills addressing some of the same areas or all of the same areas, and there are controversies among those bills, then it goes into something called “conference”. When we get into conference, the idea is representatives from Senate and the representative from House will meet together and they will iron out their differences. A lot of times if you want to effect the Senate bill, all you have to do is pass something in the House and then it goes into the conference where you can work on one bill or the other, agree, negotiate and then take the negotiated version back to both chambers for voting Senate and House. So, option number one is House passes its own bill or bills. Actually, here we are talking about comprehensive, some kind of comprehensive set of bills, then it goes for conference. Option two, the House passes any bill, it does not have to be comprehensive bill, something that effects or contradicts the Senate version again we go into conference.
Another interesting option and normally this would not be a really good option but here may be worth considering. I doubt it, but I am not a political pundit just a lawyer. House can actually vote on the Senate bill without the House Speaker’s support. If 218 house members vote for a discharge petition, which means we don’t care what the Speaker says, we are going to vote on this bill anyway. That means House Democrats need 17 votes from Republicans to get a discharge petition and vote on the Senate bill.
So, what are the four options again:
1. Comprehensive bill by House;
2. Any bill by House;
3. Discharge petition; and
4. House leadership brings up the Senate bill to vote which is unlikely.
Let us talk about a comprehensive bill. House had its own “Gang of Eight” people working on a comprehensive immigration bill. Their focus was a lot more on enforcement, on border security, etc. But then one of the Congressman, Raul Labrador (R-ID), quit. The now “Gang of Seven” still might produce a comprehensive House bill. If such a bill is produced, we will get into conference, negotiate and then finally vote on the negotiated bill. So number one is Comprehensive bill.
Number two is any bill. As I mentioned Rep. Goodlatte from Virginia, the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, has produced a series of immigration related bills. House Democrats do not like it because it’s a piecemeal approach and there are all kinds of very extreme positions taken by Bob Goodlatte that House Democrats feel are inimical or enemies of immigration reform. But one of the ways, this series of bills, could be just a device to force matters into conference. If any of these bills pass in the Republican controlled House, then we will all get into conference anyway, where we can negotiate based upon the Senate version of the bill and make changes to it and then go back with the compromise. So the passage of a series of extreme bills could be a way to force matter into conference.
Option three is a discharge petition. Discharge petition normally its considered to be very bad form. If a Republican votes for a discharge petition it’s disloyal, it’s considered to be bad form. But here, Speaker Boehner himself and many other leaders, who are perhaps more in tune with the needs of the time, have said that they want immigration reform. But it looks like there is very strong opposition from certain elements within the Republican Party, which is basically muting some of these more moderate or more aware. I would not call them moderate but more aware members of the Republican Party. So normally a Republican will not vote for a discharge petition, but here who knows. Maybe this is the choice.
The key date to watch is 10th July. On 10th July there will be conference, the House Republican conference, and they meet in the basement of the Capitol to decide how they want to move forward. So that's when we will hear about the final strategy. Once again, right now we don’t know which way House is going to go, but on 10th July we should have better idea of the direction.
I live in Bulgaria and I have a Master's Degree in Veterinary Medicine. My question is can I get a EB-2 visa if I work as a veterinary assistant in the USA ?
You can qualify for EB2 only if two conditions are met:
1. Your degree is equivalent to a U.S. advanced degree (a credentials evaluation service needs to assess that under proper standards); and
2. The job requires an advanced degree or equivalent experience.
1. Certification of Decisions to the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO)
Purpose
This policy memorandum (PM) and accompanying revisions to the Adjudicator’s Field Manual (AFM) guide officers on the proper use of the decision
certification mechanism described in 8CFR 103.4. This PM revises Subchapters 3.5, 10.7, 10.8, 10.14 and 10.18 of the AFM ;AFM Update AD13 -08.
Scope
Unless specifically exempted herein, this PM applies to and binds all U.S.Citizenship and Immigration Services(USCIS)employees
All Readers, I quote from my latest msg. to Mr. Rajiv Khanna's office. Please make yourself more aware on your issues by visiting his web-site (and positively contributing to it) and get advice from his office for your particular needs. All cases are NOT the same. Quote Dear Mr Khanna I barely get time to go to your web-site, though I know it is an ocean of information for all those awaiting their immigration process at some stage or the other. Today I happened to spend an hour there and learnt that your Office had done me good!! I live in an area which lacks Indian neighbors and in my Office too, I am the only Indian working in my whole division! Therefore, there is seldom any interaction with people who are at a similar stage as me in the Immigration process. When my I-140 was filed, your Legal Assistant Nimia Aranibar informed me of the CP option. Though I might have surprised her with my lack of knowledge on this process, she explained the process to me and answered my doubts. And she did as I opted for. No suggestions or implications or other discussion. She was very professional in giving me the information and in answering my questions on the issue. She even understood my concerns with the CP process and offered to clarify my doubts and suggested the recourse to this choice if I needed a recourse at a later date. After reading the chat-site on your web-site, I now realise that the lady was giving me good information at the right time. There are so many people on the web who feel have been un-informed of this process. I, on the contrary, have got the right information from your office and am very happy about this. Thank you and best regards Prateek Rishi Nimia, reading in copy, thank you very much for the time taken to explain me the two processes.