We won this case following a response to a Request for Evidence. Service requested further clarification on the "permanency" of the job offer, which was with a University. We submitted the HR policies/procedures documentation to show that the position was permanent and met the Service requirements. Letters from the HR as well as the Department were submitted to show that the position would continue and that funding was available to support this position.
I reached there around 4:30am. People were already lined up. First you have to get the form from one line and then wait in another line. Around 6:30am they asked people who are there for EAD to form another shorter line. I got the token and my no. was called around 8:30am. The required documents are :
1. I-485 receipt
2. I-765 receipt
3.information about any previous I-765, like receipt date
4. previous EAD Plastic card
5.California driver license and Passport for identification.
I went to the Miami office today to apply for a temporary work authorization card. This office no longer accepts walk ins as of two days ago. People can either make an appointment with the office on the web from home, or on site. The waiting time is approximately two weeks for an appointment. This is for any type of immmigration case.
"96 days after submitting the EAD application, Tampa refused to issue an interim EAD. Evidentially an appointment card had been mailed that same day.The appointment was set for 10 days later. Including 2 months wasted trying to get the initial appointment to submit the EAD application, it took 5.5 months to get this EAD renewal. The real tragedy was the loss a job and residual loss of income which lasted months. We will start this process again 6 months before this EAD expires. Hmm...that's pretty soon".
WASHINGTON — U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced that, as part of the adjustment of its international footprint to increase efficiencies, Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative, will only be processed domestically by USCIS or internationally by the Department of State in certain circumstances beginning Feb 1, 2020.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has published revised forms consistent with the final rule on the public charge ground of inadmissibility, which the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, including USCIS, will implement on Feb. 24, 2020. Beginning Feb. 24, 2020, applicants and petitioners must use new editions of the following forms below (except in Illinois, where the rule remains enjoined by a federal court):
USCIS is actively monitoring the effects of the public health emergency related to the 2019 coronavirus outbreak on agency operations.
According to U.S. Department of State guidance, USCIS is temporarily closing its field offices in Beijing and Guangzhou. USCIS will reschedule all affected appointments and will send new appointment notices to applicants.
Published by : The Times Of India - Date: February 08, 2020
Quotes and Excerpts from Rajiv on the article:
International students can breathe a sigh of relief. The USCIS has lost another case against its attempts to assault legal immigration. A federal court has held that its attempts to create artificial, three year or ten bars from reentry by students into the USA are illegal.
FAQs:
- H-4 visa stamping - problems with H-1B
- Sponsoring family based green card while living outside the US
- When is H-1B amendment required?
- Getting EB-1C based green card by moving out for one year
- Obtaining birth certificates
FAQs: Feb 20, 2020 Community Call
- I-140 issues - getting a copy of approval notice, leaving employer when I-140 approved less than 180 days
- Impact on H-4 - H-4 EAD if the H-1B holder changes jobs
- Promotion while PERM is pending or approved
- Birth Certificates
We won a case for a Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry as an Outstanding Researcher. This applicant had over 22 years of research experience in the field and was a noted expert. We submitted documentary evidence to show his multiple patents and the commercialization of his patented work. We also provided extensive documentation to show his significant publication record and the multitude of citations resulting from his innovative and pioneering work. This applicant also qualified as a reviewer for several international scientific journals.
We won a case for a surgeon who had over 31 years of research, teaching and surgical experience. This applicant was highly qualified and known in the field to be one of the few that have reached the highest level of success. He was very well published with over 90 publications and authorship of a multitude of book chapters. We provided extensive documentary evidence to show that he was one of the premier surgeons in his expertise. This applicant was frequently called upon as an invited speaker and presented his work worldwide.
We won a case for a Materials Scientist who had over 11 years of research experience. His expertise was in the field of solar and hydrogen powered energy. We provided documentary evidence to show that his extensive list of publications was in prestigious international journals with high impact factors. We also showed that as a result of his innovative and pioneering work, he was invited to present his findings at a large number of conferences/workshops and symposia.
This applicant had over 5 years of industry experience and 8 years of research experience. He was offered a job with a private company conducting antennae and microwave engineering research. His unique skills set him apart from other researchers in the field and as a result he received several significant awards for his outstanding achievement. He also published for the prestigious society, IEEE.
We won this case following a Request for Evidence, which included requests for further documentary evidence to show that the grant awards received were considered "highly competitive" and awarded based on the applicant's outstanding achievements. We provided documentation to show that the applicant was featured in major media for his innovative work. We provided additional expert letters that reiterated the applicant truly stood out amongst his peers and more than qualified for the category.
To give you folks an idea of what gets through easily. We won a case for a chemist with over 14 years of teaching and research experience. This applicant was the author of over 63 peer-reviewed research publications and presented his work at 17 conferences and symposia. He was also invited to present at a multitude of seminars. This applicant authored 5 book chapters and technical proceedings. He qualified for the category based on his extensive publication record as well as his acting as a judge of others' work.
We won this case following a response to a Request for Evidence. Service requested further clarification on the "permanency" of the job offer, which was with a University. We submitted an official job offer letter as well as the copies of the university personnel manual and administrative handbook. Service had requested additional evidence to show "international reputation" of the applicant.