yabadaba
06-29 02:13 PM
bumpabaump
wallpaper JENNIFER LOPEZ photo
surabhi
10-17 03:14 PM
apart from payroll tax is'nt the employer suppose to pay employer tax which I suppose is anywhere between 8 to 12 % depending on the state it is operating? or is payroll tax same as employer tax? what other taxes does an employer has to pay if he hires a person on W2? appreciate inputs on this.
Payroll tax is same as employer tax. There are 2 or 3 components of the taxes that employer pays such as Social security ( employer portion), unemployment tax, Medicare ( employer portion)
also employer will need to pay for payroll company such as ADP a fee to maintain payroll, do filings
Payroll tax is same as employer tax. There are 2 or 3 components of the taxes that employer pays such as Social security ( employer portion), unemployment tax, Medicare ( employer portion)
also employer will need to pay for payroll company such as ADP a fee to maintain payroll, do filings
bekugc
12-11 08:00 PM
as for Mohits qn. i agree with pragirs' answer.
during AC21, if new job description is similar to orig LC thing, and if the new cmpany can put that on paper in offer or empl letter, this shud be enuf... a colleague of mine, who was a developer had his LC as a programmer, after 485 apply/180days/Ead etc, he lost his client and my company waited for 3 weeks & laid him off...he used ac21 and joined a small company, who gave him a QA job, but on paper it was put exactly as what orig LC said. in the july flood, he got his GC, no qns asked.
as for difference in salary, i remember in one of the free teleconf calls done by a prominent attorney , he said if u move from one geographic loc to another, then diff in stds of living etc will allow for same job desc to have pretty diff salary ranges. but if u chg in same geography and have significantly diff salary, it may raise eyebrow...but again what significant means is Gray...
during AC21, if new job description is similar to orig LC thing, and if the new cmpany can put that on paper in offer or empl letter, this shud be enuf... a colleague of mine, who was a developer had his LC as a programmer, after 485 apply/180days/Ead etc, he lost his client and my company waited for 3 weeks & laid him off...he used ac21 and joined a small company, who gave him a QA job, but on paper it was put exactly as what orig LC said. in the july flood, he got his GC, no qns asked.
as for difference in salary, i remember in one of the free teleconf calls done by a prominent attorney , he said if u move from one geographic loc to another, then diff in stds of living etc will allow for same job desc to have pretty diff salary ranges. but if u chg in same geography and have significantly diff salary, it may raise eyebrow...but again what significant means is Gray...
2011 hair jennifer lopez makeup.
rampabbaraju
02-09 07:47 PM
When I was entering into US with a passport valid for next 9 months, I showed my new H1B(I797) document to the immigration officer in the airport. I got I-94 based on the date in my H1B document not by the passport expiration date.
I had similar issue and went upto the local Deferred Inspection Office but couldn't get it done there. So I travelled upto Mexico border, didn't even have to enter into Mexico. I went upto the office and the officer had an idea about my situation and issued new I-94. I found (while searching through posts on other threads) that some DI offices do realize about this problem and they issue I-94 within U.S.
I'd say try at one of your DI offices if not you can travel upto the border. Call the border to make sure if they do issue I-94 for such cases.
I had similar issue and went upto the local Deferred Inspection Office but couldn't get it done there. So I travelled upto Mexico border, didn't even have to enter into Mexico. I went upto the office and the officer had an idea about my situation and issued new I-94. I found (while searching through posts on other threads) that some DI offices do realize about this problem and they issue I-94 within U.S.
I'd say try at one of your DI offices if not you can travel upto the border. Call the border to make sure if they do issue I-94 for such cases.
more...
go_guy123
03-30 02:06 PM
A former colleague of mine from B'Desh got his GC in 14 weeks.
ROW EB2 are talking in terms of weeks, not even months. We, on the other hand are talking in terms of decades, not even years.
That is exactly the reason why per country quota removal is a difficult task. ROW has lots at stake in ensuring that per country quota is not removed. Fighting for a bigger pie is easier than fighting for a greater slice of the pie.
ROW EB2 are talking in terms of weeks, not even months. We, on the other hand are talking in terms of decades, not even years.
That is exactly the reason why per country quota removal is a difficult task. ROW has lots at stake in ensuring that per country quota is not removed. Fighting for a bigger pie is easier than fighting for a greater slice of the pie.
nanneh
04-30 01:29 PM
Can some one help me on this subject please......
more...
smuggymba
09-17 10:53 PM
Does any one on this forum know under what section of law family to emp based spill over happens ? Last year DOS allocated some 10k family visas ( unused) to emp quota but it was distributed.
Just checking if this allocation is by book of law or interpretation of DOS based on some law. There are some chances that this year family based quota could be more and if DOS make them to fall down from Eb1 -- > Eb2 --> Eb3 -- > Eb4 -- > Eb5. then it could make C for all EB2 and those visas can fall down to Eb3 and this way in Oct 2010 atleast EB3 India get some 10-15 k extra visas. but if DOS allocate them across all category from day one then Eb2 row and Eb1 , 4, 5 keep consuming them and during last quarter spill over come down less..
Lets find out if there is any thing in law.
how much spillover are we talking about? In the other predictions threat ppl posted that 40K is needed just to get to July 2007.
Just checking if this allocation is by book of law or interpretation of DOS based on some law. There are some chances that this year family based quota could be more and if DOS make them to fall down from Eb1 -- > Eb2 --> Eb3 -- > Eb4 -- > Eb5. then it could make C for all EB2 and those visas can fall down to Eb3 and this way in Oct 2010 atleast EB3 India get some 10-15 k extra visas. but if DOS allocate them across all category from day one then Eb2 row and Eb1 , 4, 5 keep consuming them and during last quarter spill over come down less..
Lets find out if there is any thing in law.
how much spillover are we talking about? In the other predictions threat ppl posted that 40K is needed just to get to July 2007.
2010 Jennifer Lopez
lostinbeta
10-04 12:18 AM
I use the rectangle marquee tool. I guess it all depends on personal preference. If you use the rectangle shape tool you will have to right click on the layer and hit "Rasterize Layer" to be able to edit the object.
If you use the marquee tool you just have to fill it with paint and everything is set.
Not to mention, if you use the shape tool, it automatically creates the shape on a new layer, but if you use the marquee tool, your fill color will end up on the layer you currently have selected.
Let me know how everything goes :)
If you use the marquee tool you just have to fill it with paint and everything is set.
Not to mention, if you use the shape tool, it automatically creates the shape on a new layer, but if you use the marquee tool, your fill color will end up on the layer you currently have selected.
Let me know how everything goes :)
more...
Desertfox
04-28 04:11 PM
The new administration has definitely something to do with this. Being an AZ resident for a while, I noticed how popular Janet Napolitano was here as a governor, even in this strongly republican state. I am sure her nomination as DHS secretary will bring more positive changes for us.
hair But Spring 2010 is all about
ashutrip
06-04 11:19 AM
The one you are seeing is being replaced one section at a time..So I assume its incomplete.
when is the voting on this bill?
when is the voting on this bill?
more...
himu73
07-07 10:12 PM
Vinay has just began living life. He has begun his career as a doctor in Boston and was recently married to Rashmi. But his dreams for the future have been out on hold. Vinay, 28 years old, is diagnosed with AMI (Acute Myeloid Leukemia).
Please visit www.helpvinay.org for information how you can help if found a match for bone marrow.
Registration is very simple and we have lot of drives going on right now.
Please visit this site since he needs to a match with a south asian and has very less time on hand.
I know this post is out of context but please dont remove till July 09 which the deadline to get him the match.
Please visit www.helpvinay.org for information how you can help if found a match for bone marrow.
Registration is very simple and we have lot of drives going on right now.
Please visit this site since he needs to a match with a south asian and has very less time on hand.
I know this post is out of context but please dont remove till July 09 which the deadline to get him the match.
hot brown hair with highlights
desi3933
05-11 05:11 PM
Hello Attorney,
About Myself:
=============
Myself EB2 Mar-06 now in I485.
deeply concerned about the current retrogression of eb2 priority date to 2000.
Background:
===========
Currently CIS and Statedept count ebdependents / derivatives under ebquota (according to CFR22)
However Sec 203, INA seems to layout the eb quota volume and lists eligibilities.
Looking at INA I am unable to find the link between ebdependent/detivaties and ebquota.
The I485 application "Part 2: App Type" Option b (derivative status for spouses and children)
seems to be related to quota listed in INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] a - 2. (family quota)
and seems to be not related to INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] b - * (employment quota).
Question:
=========
What quota do dependents of Employment based AOS(I-485) LEGALLY fall into - is it the EB quota or FB quota?
If incorrectly classified ? Is there any legal option this mis-classification be corrected?
Thanks a lot in advance for your time.
INA 203(d) Treatment of family members
A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 1101(b)(1) of this title shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section, be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
This means that if primary beneficiary is using visa number from EB(2) classification then dependent(s) will also be using same classification as primary beneficiary (i.e. EB(2) in this example).
______________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
About Myself:
=============
Myself EB2 Mar-06 now in I485.
deeply concerned about the current retrogression of eb2 priority date to 2000.
Background:
===========
Currently CIS and Statedept count ebdependents / derivatives under ebquota (according to CFR22)
However Sec 203, INA seems to layout the eb quota volume and lists eligibilities.
Looking at INA I am unable to find the link between ebdependent/detivaties and ebquota.
The I485 application "Part 2: App Type" Option b (derivative status for spouses and children)
seems to be related to quota listed in INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] a - 2. (family quota)
and seems to be not related to INA Sec. 203. [8 U.S.C. 1153] b - * (employment quota).
Question:
=========
What quota do dependents of Employment based AOS(I-485) LEGALLY fall into - is it the EB quota or FB quota?
If incorrectly classified ? Is there any legal option this mis-classification be corrected?
Thanks a lot in advance for your time.
INA 203(d) Treatment of family members
A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 1101(b)(1) of this title shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c) of this section, be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
This means that if primary beneficiary is using visa number from EB(2) classification then dependent(s) will also be using same classification as primary beneficiary (i.e. EB(2) in this example).
______________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
house 2011 hair color jennifer
ssnd03
08-03 04:17 PM
This is the latest on my LIN number ...
Response to request for evidence received, and case processing has resumed.
What does it mean ... Any Ideas folks ...
RFE accepted... so chill and relax and have a good weekend
Response to request for evidence received, and case processing has resumed.
What does it mean ... Any Ideas folks ...
RFE accepted... so chill and relax and have a good weekend
tattoo Jennifer Lopez Gold Dress at
rghrdr777
10-24 05:34 PM
TSC (Sent to NSC. Got transferred to TSC)
RD: 06/25/2007
ND: 08/01/2007
EAD Self Card Received: 08/23
EAD Spouse Card Received: 08/25
FP done for myself and Spouse: 09/06
AP: Waiting
GC: Waiting
RD: 06/25/2007
ND: 08/01/2007
EAD Self Card Received: 08/23
EAD Spouse Card Received: 08/25
FP done for myself and Spouse: 09/06
AP: Waiting
GC: Waiting
more...
pictures Jennifer Lopez#39;s Modern Farrah
kaisersose
07-27 02:37 PM
Hi All,
Has anybody used this Freedom of Information Act to obtain the information. I was going over the Form G-639 and it looks like they are asking for couple of information which I don't have and I am not sure if my employer will provide (Thats the sole reason why I want to use this act).The form is asking for the Alien Registration # and Petition #. I dont have them. Also for the information needed to search what needs to be mentioned if I need to get a copy of my Labour certification (Not sure If I could get that ) and my I-140 related documents say (Receipt Notice/Approval Notice). Any advise/input on this is highly appreciated.
Thanks.
You really do not need your labor certificate. You do not need the A# as it is optional. Leave it blank.
You however need to have the 140 petition number. Ask your employer for the number. Tel him you would like to have it for tracking purposes.
Has anybody used this Freedom of Information Act to obtain the information. I was going over the Form G-639 and it looks like they are asking for couple of information which I don't have and I am not sure if my employer will provide (Thats the sole reason why I want to use this act).The form is asking for the Alien Registration # and Petition #. I dont have them. Also for the information needed to search what needs to be mentioned if I need to get a copy of my Labour certification (Not sure If I could get that ) and my I-140 related documents say (Receipt Notice/Approval Notice). Any advise/input on this is highly appreciated.
Thanks.
You really do not need your labor certificate. You do not need the A# as it is optional. Leave it blank.
You however need to have the 140 petition number. Ask your employer for the number. Tel him you would like to have it for tracking purposes.
dresses Jennifer Lopez#39;s gorgeous
johnamit
08-15 09:20 AM
Thanks for bringing this up and highlighting the issue.
The below quoted estimate is when we are assuming a perfect world, however I believe it will take longer than this.
• There will be around 1Million AOS/I-485) applications by Aug 17 which will take 1M/140K = 7+ years to clear the backlog. Thus, late priority dates will remain retrogressed for several years.
The below quoted estimate is when we are assuming a perfect world, however I believe it will take longer than this.
• There will be around 1Million AOS/I-485) applications by Aug 17 which will take 1M/140K = 7+ years to clear the backlog. Thus, late priority dates will remain retrogressed for several years.
more...
makeup jennifer lopez hair colour on
krishna_brc
05-05 08:54 AM
Yes, we don't need original I-485 receipt notice to travel.
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
I traveled without original I-485.
see below for USCIS note on this
----
[Federal Register: November 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 211)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 61791-61793]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr01no07-1]
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
__________________________________________________ ____________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
8 CFR Part 245
[CIS No. 2420-07; Docket No. USCIS-2007-0047]
RIN 1615-AB62
Removal of Receipt Requirement for Certain H and L Adjustment
Applicants Returning From a Trip Outside the United States
AGENCY: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, DHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: This rule removes the requirement that certain H and L
nonimmigrants returning to the United States following a trip abroad
must present a receipt notice for their adjustment of status
applications to avoid having such applications deemed abandoned. The
purpose of this narrow change is to remove an unnecessary documentation
requirement from the regulations that the Department of Homeland
Security has determined causes an undue burden on H and L
nonimmigrants.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule is effective November 1, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carol Vernon, Regulations and Product
Management Division, Domestic Operations, U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services, Department of Homeland Security, 20 Massachusetts
Avenue, Room 2034, Washington, DC 20529, telephone (202) 272-8350.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Travel outside the United States for an alien who has filed Form I-
485, ``Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status,''
to obtain lawful permanent resident status under section 245 of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255, may adversely
affect that application unless the alien takes certain steps before the
trip. Most applicants must obtain permission from U.S. Citizenship and
Immigration Services (USCIS) to travel prior to the trip, a process
referred to as ``advance parole.'' See 8 CFR 212.5 (c) and (f). For
these applicants, departing the United States without advance parole
while their adjustment of status applications are pending results in
automatic abandonment of the applications and constitutes grounds for
denial. 8 CFR 245.2(a)(4)(ii)(A) & (B).
III. Rulemaking Requirements
DHS finds that this rule relates to internal agency management,
procedure, and practice and therefore is exempt from the public comment
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) under 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(A). This rule does not alter substantive criteria by which USCIS
will approve or deny applications or determine eligibility for any
immigration benefit. Instead, this rule relieves a document
presentation requirement for certain applicants for immigration
benefits. Specifically, this rule removes the requirement that H-1/H-4
and L-1/L-2 nonimmigrants present a Form I-797 receipt notice for their
adjustment of status applications upon readmission to the United States
after a trip abroad in order to avoid having their applications
abandoned. This document presentation requirement is unnecessary since
it concerns information that is already available to DHS. This final
rule merely eliminates an unnecessary burden on these arriving aliens
and streamlines agency management of its processes. As a result, DHS is
not required to provide the public with an opportunity to submit
comments on the subject matter of this rule.
Moreover, DHS finds that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B)
to make the rule effective upon publication in the Federal Register
without prior notice and public comment on the grounds that delaying
implementation of this rule to allow for public comment would be
impracticable and contrary to the public interest. As a result of
USCIS's July 17, 2007, announcement that it would accept employment-
based Forms I-485 filed by aliens whose priority dates are current
under Department of State Visa Bulletin No. 107, USCIS received an
unprecedented volume of employment-based applications for adjustment of
status, including those filed by H and L nonimmigrants. Because of the
recent surge in such filings, it will take several weeks for USCIS to
enter the necessary data and issue Form I-797 receipt notices for
employment-based adjustment of status applications. Therefore, it is
important for this rule to take effect as soon as possible to avoid
undue hardship on applicants who may need travel outside the United
States prior to receiving the receipt notice.
In addition, no substantive rights or obligations of the affected
public are changed by this rule. DHS believes the public will welcome
this change. The public needs no time to conform its conduct so as to
avoid violation of these regulations because the rule relieves a
requirement of the existing regulations. Further, this rule will have
no adverse impact on DHS' adjudicatory responsibilities or ability to
track the foreign travel of affected persons since DHS already records
the admission of all nonimigrants. For these reasons, this rule is
effective immediately under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (3).
This rule relates to internal agency management, and, therefore, is
exempt from the provisions of Executive Order Nos. 12630, 12988, 13045,
13132, 13175, 13211, and 13272. This rule is not considered by DHS to
be a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866,
section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. Therefore, it has not
been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget. Further, this
action is not a proposed rule requiring an initial or final regulatory
flexibility analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601
et seq. In addition, this rule is not subject to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., Title
II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. Ch. 17A, 25,
or the E-Government Act of 2002, 44 U.S.C. 3501, note.
Finally, under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-
13, all Departments are required to submit to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), for review and approval, any reporting requirements
inherent in a rule. This rule does not affect any information
collections, reporting or recordkeeping requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects in 8 CFR Part 245
Aliens, Immigration, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Accordingly, part 245 of chapter 1 of title 8 of the Code of Federal
Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 245--ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR
PERMANENT RESIDENCE
1. The authority citation for part 245 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1101, 1103, 1182, 1255; sec. 202, Pub. L.
105-100, 111 Stat. 2160, 2193; sec. 902, Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat.
2681; 8 CFR part 2.
2. Section 245.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(4)(ii)(C) as
follows:
Sec. 245.2 Application.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) The travel outside of the United States by an applicant for
adjustment of status who is not under exclusion, deportation, or
removal proceeding and who is in lawful H-1 or L-1 status shall not be
deemed an abandonment of the application if, upon returning to this
country, the alien remains eligible for H or L status, is coming to
resume employment with the same employer for whom he or she had
previously been authorized to work as an H-1 or L-1 nonimmigrant, and,
is in possession of a valid H or L visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful H-4 or L-2 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if the spouse or parent of such alien through whom the
H-4 or L-2 status was obtained is maintaining H-1 or L-1 status and the
alien remains otherwise eligible for H-4 or L-2 status, and, the alien
is in possession of a valid H-4 or L-2 visa (if required). The travel
outside of the United States by an applicant for adjustment of status,
who is not under exclusion, deportation, or removal proceeding and who
is in lawful K-3 or K-4 status shall not be deemed an abandonment of
the application if, upon returning to this country, the alien is in
possession of a valid K-3 or K-4 visa and remains eligible for K-3 or
K-4 status.
Dated: October 15, 2007.
Michael Chertoff,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-21506 Filed 10-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
girlfriend Jennifer Lopez looked stunning
americandesi
10-15 03:32 PM
I have this basic question. How would USCIS know that he had used EAD for the second job? As far as I know, the information submitted in I-9 doesn�t go to USCIS. During the H1 extension if he submits W2�s, Paystubs and all documents from the H1 employer alone, wouldn�t it get approved? Can anyone clarify this?
Gurus! Can you please answer the above so that all ambiguities on this topic are eliminated?
Gurus! Can you please answer the above so that all ambiguities on this topic are eliminated?
hairstyles My hair muse is Jennifer Lopez
johnamit
07-12 12:49 PM
As per this report Indian-Americans raise $2Million. Can we get some help from her to raise our issues?
source: http://www.nysun.com/article/57238
If you think this thread is useless, CORE please close this thread.
source: http://www.nysun.com/article/57238
If you think this thread is useless, CORE please close this thread.
SDdesi
06-19 09:04 PM
I just posted another alternative to saving on the vaccines:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=87048&postcount=20
Basically, if your county health dept has a program, they can give you vaccinations for dirt cheap prices. I paid only $10 per person for Td & MMR :)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=87048&postcount=20
Basically, if your county health dept has a program, they can give you vaccinations for dirt cheap prices. I paid only $10 per person for Td & MMR :)
kdprasad
07-08 07:19 PM
Any Drive in Minneapolis???