Back in 2007 I started dating my now ex husband back in high school. In 2010 we got married, we were 18 at the time. The Process was estressful because the IO thought we got married for the papers, we had 30 days to prove it was a bonafide marriage, we hired a lawyer, sent the proof, waited for a long time, finally got the permanent green card after 2 years. A month after he left, he said wasn't happy anymore, we didn't get a divorce but 5 months later I met someone, and then 3 months after I got pregnant, my ex and I ended up getting a divorce in December 2016. Could they use it against me applying now for my citizenship after being a resident for 5 years? Could they use that they thought it was fraud before (even though it was proven otherwise) against me because of everything that happened after(us separating, him leaving, me getting pregnant)?
Watch the Video on this FAQ: Denial of naturalization/citizenship applications - the new trend
Video Transcript
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
I went to the US in May 2014 on H1-B working for Employer A. In Feb 2016, I moved to work for Employer B (small US based company, on other offices) with H1-B transfer receipt.
The new job was remote work, so I started working from home for Employer B. I received RFE in April 2016 and I went to India the same month. While I was in India, the transfer got approved in June 2016 and I came back to the US with the approval notice as proof. My visa was getting expired in Sep 2016, so extension was filed with Employer B. The extension also got approved after RFE and extended till Sep 2019. <br>
Current Situation:<br>
Now, I came to India in Jan 2017 for my marriage. I went for visa stamping in Delhi with my wife (for H4) in Feb 2017. The visa officer asked me about my Role, client, and other common questions which I answered correctly. VO then collected my documents (I-129, client letter etc) and handed me 221(g) letter saying that he needs some time to review the documents. We left the embassy and the wait started.
In March 2017, I received an email from embassy asking for the latest LCA which I promptly provided.
After that there was no response for a few months, and I started working from India in US hours. Since my employer is a small company, they did not hire any attorney and did the processing themselves. They also did not seem to put any effort to expedite or help the process.
In July 2017 (after 5 months), I received a call to collect the passport. On collecting the passport, the stamping was not done and I received a letter stating that my stamping is being refused and visa is sent to consulate for revocation.
This came as a shock. I notified my employer, they were disappointed and did not know what can be done about this case. When I enquired, they said they don't want to spend more resources on this case and are fine with me continue working from India (reduced salary).
<br>1. Is it possible to have the case reconsidered and to know the exact reason for refusal? If yes, how would I go about it without the support of my employer?<br>
2. If this is only for stamping, how long will my extended visa be valid? Can I try the stamping again with this employer or find a new employer from India and use the same visa with them?<br>
3. What happens to my assets (personal stuff, bank accounts, etc) in US?<br>
4. If I can legally work for the same employer, how does it affect my taxes? Do I now pay taxes in India and in US both? Since when I can be considered liable to pay tax in India (when I came to India or stamping refusal date etc)?
Video Transcript
1. Not until a notice of intent to revoke is sent.
2. This case is going back to USCIS.
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) resumed premium processing today for all H-1B visa petitions subject to the Fiscal Year year (FY) 2018 cap. The FY 2018 cap has been set at 65,000 visas. Premium processing has also resumed for the annual 20,000 additional petitions that are set aside to hire workers with a U.S. master’s degree or higher educational degree.
Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke has determined that conditions in Sudan no longer support its designation for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) after reviewing country conditions, and after Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials’ consultations with the appropriate U.S. government agencies. Acting Secretary Duke is extending benefits for beneficiaries of Sudan TPS for 12 months to allow for an orderly transition before the designation terminates on Nov. 2, 2018.
We are being informed that EB-5 investments in regional centers are now possible until December. The date has been extended. <br>
1) Is this true?<br>
2) Given that a green card is available years after the initial investment, in the current volatile immigration climate, how safe is an EB-5 ?
True. The EB-5, the religious visa programs and Conrad 30 waives for foreign physicians have been extended until 8 December 2017 pursuant to H.R. 601 – Continuing Appropriations Act, 2018 and Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Requirements Act, 2017.
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
Example Scenario: H1-B EB3. Candidate is in US for 10 years and extending his H1-B using approved I-140.<br>
If a Candidate’s Priority Date is Current can the Candidate file I-485 after 4 years of the Priority Date being Current? Is it allowed without problems?
Is there any specific limitation on the timing of filing (like I-485 should be filed within a specific time period after the priority date becoming current)
Video Transcript:
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is no longer accepting petitions from U. S. employers seeking to hire temporary nonagricultural workers under the one-time increase to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 H-2B cap announced in July.
For the first time, in May, Congress delegated its authority to the Secretary of Homeland Security to increase the number of temporary nonagricultural work visas available to U.S. employers through FY 2017.
On Sept. 5, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated the orderly phase out of the program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).
Beginning Sept. 18, 2017, employers must use Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, with revision date 07/17/17 N, to verify the identity and work eligibility of every new employee hired after Nov. 6, 1986, or for the reverification of expiring employment authorization of current employees (if applicable).
Discussion Topics, Sept 21, 2017
EB2 to EB1 conversion - F-1 to H-1B - L-1 to H-1B - Travel on H-1B - H-4 EAD - Fiancee Visa
WASHINGTON—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has awarded nearly $10 million in grants to 45 public and private non-profit organizations across the country to help lawful permanent residents prepare for naturalization.
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.
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
Rajiv Ji, Glad to inform you that we got our GCs couple weeks ago. It has been a pleasure working with your office for almost 11 years now. I sincerely thank Rajiv Khanna and Prerna Mehta for their excellent support and prompt turnaround with the queries and process related documentation for getting our Green Cards.