PD_Dec2002
03-18 07:43 AM
The upper limit should be on a per state basis, at the very least. 150K AGI in CA is not much of a deal. Pretty much all double income families will cross that limit, and quite a few single income ones. Bummer!!:mad:
BTW, you can barely afford a Condo or a low end home in Bay Area for 150k AGI.
I agree with you completely. But note that the amount of rebate starts phasing as your AGI goes north of 150K. I'm in a similar situation and not getting the rebate at all. But the way to approach this is (at least that's how I am consoling myself) "Because we make a lot of money, we are not getting this rebate. Would we prefer to make less money just to get this itsy-bitsy one-time rebate?"*
And anyway rebate-on-a-per-start-basis would be a logistical nightmare for IRS given how competent federal goverment bodies are... ^^^ detect heavy dose of sarcasm here ^^^
Don't even think of proposing that idea to IRS. The next thing you know, these rebates will be backlogged. And in 2012, there will be a TaxRebateVoice.com suggesting administrative fixes/law changes to get the 2007 rebate! :D
Regards,
Jayant
*The only exception is the AMT where people in the middle-income group are being unfairly snared because the antiquated 70s law was not pegged to inflation.
BTW, you can barely afford a Condo or a low end home in Bay Area for 150k AGI.
I agree with you completely. But note that the amount of rebate starts phasing as your AGI goes north of 150K. I'm in a similar situation and not getting the rebate at all. But the way to approach this is (at least that's how I am consoling myself) "Because we make a lot of money, we are not getting this rebate. Would we prefer to make less money just to get this itsy-bitsy one-time rebate?"*
And anyway rebate-on-a-per-start-basis would be a logistical nightmare for IRS given how competent federal goverment bodies are... ^^^ detect heavy dose of sarcasm here ^^^
Don't even think of proposing that idea to IRS. The next thing you know, these rebates will be backlogged. And in 2012, there will be a TaxRebateVoice.com suggesting administrative fixes/law changes to get the 2007 rebate! :D
Regards,
Jayant
*The only exception is the AMT where people in the middle-income group are being unfairly snared because the antiquated 70s law was not pegged to inflation.
wallpaper Black Leather Jacket
p1234
09-14 06:11 PM
july 07 filer yes.. but I have a PD of mid 2004... How in the name of almighty is that out of turn?
but you are too stupid anyway
so go home now..... and please don'y forget to pickup meds for your gonorrhea form csv pharmacy :D:D:D
Don't want to stoop to your levels, Mr. Phd!
Point your dirty fingers at July 07 EB2 first, with PDs of 2005 and later, nowhere close to being current in June 07 but suddenly became current in July 07.
but you are too stupid anyway
so go home now..... and please don'y forget to pickup meds for your gonorrhea form csv pharmacy :D:D:D
Don't want to stoop to your levels, Mr. Phd!
Point your dirty fingers at July 07 EB2 first, with PDs of 2005 and later, nowhere close to being current in June 07 but suddenly became current in July 07.
desi485
11-17 05:07 PM
Update: Googling and found the murthy forums thread which I mentioned earlier.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=3031070961
some ppl (atleast 2 of them) reported successfully renewed EAD, AP while appeal to 485 denial was pending.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2704080912&m=3031070961
some ppl (atleast 2 of them) reported successfully renewed EAD, AP while appeal to 485 denial was pending.
2011 Dressed in a lack leather
Chiwere
12-21 03:19 PM
Sure, he will face lot of difficulties, if his employer failed to file for H1 amendment when his job profile/responsibilities changed. There is a procedure in place whenever for cases when job profile changes. My job profile was changed, but my employer filed for both H1 amendment and new I-140 to reflect new job duties.
When new I-140 is filed in such cases, beneficiary retains his/her priority date.
Good Luck with your GC.
______________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
desi3933,
Most likely your employer needed to file a new labor as well when your profile changed, right?
Thanks
When new I-140 is filed in such cases, beneficiary retains his/her priority date.
Good Luck with your GC.
______________________________________
Proud Indian-American and Legal Immigrant
desi3933,
Most likely your employer needed to file a new labor as well when your profile changed, right?
Thanks
more...
sundevil
03-12 11:27 PM
How does that work? There is no law or process to connect an abandoned labor. I had approved labor with a PD of 1999 that got lost when I switched companies. But no one seems to be connecting that to me.
Its not a rumor. This is real. Coming to think abt it, he had filed a labor in 2000/2001 time period and had abandoned it when he switched companies. I am wondering if USCIS takes the oldest one an applicant had ever filed.
Its not a rumor. This is real. Coming to think abt it, he had filed a labor in 2000/2001 time period and had abandoned it when he switched companies. I am wondering if USCIS takes the oldest one an applicant had ever filed.
seahawks
09-12 12:55 AM
awesome bump thread....
more...
raju123
07-07 12:27 PM
I would suggest to meet your local Senator and pursue your case. Age-out is the genuine problem and I believe no lawmaker will deny to help in age-out case for legals. Only thing you need to pursue them how monster of retrogression is killing kids of legals with age-out weapon!
I am fully support this matter
None of the bills being considered currently benefit children of would-be legal immigrants, while the children of illegal immigrants are protected by the proposed DREAM ACT. Please write to senators and house representatives highlighting the "age-out" problem.
Appreciate your contribution to IV.
I am fully support this matter
None of the bills being considered currently benefit children of would-be legal immigrants, while the children of illegal immigrants are protected by the proposed DREAM ACT. Please write to senators and house representatives highlighting the "age-out" problem.
Appreciate your contribution to IV.
2010 Woven Leather Coat: Green.
rongha_2000
04-30 04:03 PM
They are bullsxxting themselves and everyone else. I am amazed..!! These committee members dont have a clue of what they are hearing about. Mixing GCs with H1-B. This issue is always a killer and more inportantly not even related to issue at hand..!!
I am losing hopes.. I might find solace in Alberta, I hope.
I don't understand how removing the country limit may have resorce implications, as how I understand is, instead of adjucation an EB-2(2008) from Mali you'll be adjucating an EB-2(2004) from India, what difference it is for them ???
I am losing hopes.. I might find solace in Alberta, I hope.
I don't understand how removing the country limit may have resorce implications, as how I understand is, instead of adjucation an EB-2(2008) from Mali you'll be adjucating an EB-2(2004) from India, what difference it is for them ???
more...
nik.patelc
02-18 06:04 PM
EB3 to EB2 porting is so huge. I dont think PERM 2005 data really matters. i think a pattern of gradual moving dates ( 1 month or 2 month per bulletin) forward for EB2 India till Spet 2009. Then with OCT, dates will go back to 2002 due to EB3 - EB2 porting.
Somewhere in another thread i saw that roughly total 60000 EB2 India cases are in pending state by Ron gotcher analysis.
if hypothetically, After July 2007 fiasco, thousands of EB3 cases prior to 2004 PD date were converted to Eb2, I assume It will take alteast 2 to 3 years to clear all EB2 cases with PD < DEC 2004 even if there is new cases of Eb3 to EB2 porting going forward from today.
Somewhere in another thread i saw that roughly total 60000 EB2 India cases are in pending state by Ron gotcher analysis.
if hypothetically, After July 2007 fiasco, thousands of EB3 cases prior to 2004 PD date were converted to Eb2, I assume It will take alteast 2 to 3 years to clear all EB2 cases with PD < DEC 2004 even if there is new cases of Eb3 to EB2 porting going forward from today.
hair Images Italian Leather Coat
kartikiran
12-10 04:59 PM
Ugh, I want to cry right about now. :o
I am with you Almond. After waiting for 12 long years in USA and 8 long years for a GC, the tunnel is still dark.
I am with you Almond. After waiting for 12 long years in USA and 8 long years for a GC, the tunnel is still dark.
more...
forever
07-23 03:38 PM
It is good to know someone with PD Aug 2004 in EB3 from India is getting approval. This gives me confidence that there are not many people waiting in line when the doors open in Oct 2007 with new quota.:)
hot Marilyn Black Ladies Soft Napa
ash0210
06-02 06:40 PM
I agree with you "Astronomical tution fee" for childern, pay Mortgage, renewel of EAD/AP's..so on & on...
In a situation like us..I contribute IV with my limitations (every month!) + involving myself in web faxes plus..Calling Senators / Congressmans etc..
For those of you continually pushing for donations having a son in college on an F1 makes it impossible for me to donate since the tuition fees are astronomical.
In a situation like us..I contribute IV with my limitations (every month!) + involving myself in web faxes plus..Calling Senators / Congressmans etc..
For those of you continually pushing for donations having a son in college on an F1 makes it impossible for me to donate since the tuition fees are astronomical.
more...
house Black-leather-long-coat-no
hariswaminathan
07-14 01:32 PM
sent $10.00 instead of $5 to make up for someone that doesn't.:)
Used Bank Bill Pay Conf : 119124506
Used Bank Bill Pay Conf : 119124506
tattoo Long Black Leather Coat
supers789
07-18 08:00 PM
Since most of the crowd will file 485 now and will get EAD, I was wondering, if IV will still be putting efforts to make the PD current, or to get the option of filing 485 even if PD is not current?
This will help those -
1. who are stuck in BEC and could not file 485
2. who changed jobs after seeing no movement in PD for months, and labor is not yet filed or approved by new employer.
I am one of them.. and was wondering if there are chances of getting EAD for us. Or we will be employer dependent always.. until .. forever...
Thanks!
This will help those -
1. who are stuck in BEC and could not file 485
2. who changed jobs after seeing no movement in PD for months, and labor is not yet filed or approved by new employer.
I am one of them.. and was wondering if there are chances of getting EAD for us. Or we will be employer dependent always.. until .. forever...
Thanks!
more...
pictures for lack leather jackets.
ronhira
08-12 02:36 PM
yawnnnnnnnn...... i'm waiting for someone to start attacking & blaming others for this...... something like andra v/s tamil or north v/s south india fight..... when r we going to start that..... i'm ready with a box of popcorn to enjoy that "debate"..... lets add some masala to this.... otherwise its boring.....
dresses Long, lack, imitation leather
indyyy
04-11 03:02 PM
No, unfortunatelly, there are many thousands like me.
PD - Nov 2001, regular, EB2 - No 45 day letter yet - How about that ?
PD - Nov 2001, regular, EB2 - No 45 day letter yet - How about that ?
more...
makeup long black leather coat
sheela
07-11 09:39 AM
Just wondering...
How many people would benefit out of this big movement?
What estimated # of applications is USCIS expecting through this movement?
If the dates were current last year same time, how many ppl with PDs between 2004 and 2006 would have missed the bus last year? Dont think many wld have...
Excuse my ignorance if there is a basic mistake in my assumption
If uscis works more efficiently, several thousand EB2 i may benefit.
Below is reproduced from uscis 7/07 explanation for last yr july fiasco. "60000 visa numbers available were made available" during the weekend of june/july 07.
during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations in response to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation have been made available.
How many people would benefit out of this big movement?
What estimated # of applications is USCIS expecting through this movement?
If the dates were current last year same time, how many ppl with PDs between 2004 and 2006 would have missed the bus last year? Dont think many wld have...
Excuse my ignorance if there is a basic mistake in my assumption
If uscis works more efficiently, several thousand EB2 i may benefit.
Below is reproduced from uscis 7/07 explanation for last yr july fiasco. "60000 visa numbers available were made available" during the weekend of june/july 07.
during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations in response to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation have been made available.
girlfriend winter lack leather coat
Raju
07-06 02:37 PM
More important is the last 48 hrs where they processed 25000 cases
AT-WILL.
Ohh this guy has a good first name - 485 granted.
Ohh this guy married twice,needs money - 485 granted.
Ooh this girl doesnt look good - 485 denied.
Ooh this girl has excellent looks - 485 granted.
Ooh This couple stayed EUROPE not so loyal - 485 denied.
and so on and so forth....
I doubt if anyone was denied. They have to approve anyone and everyone to meet the numbers.
AT-WILL.
Ohh this guy has a good first name - 485 granted.
Ohh this guy married twice,needs money - 485 granted.
Ooh this girl doesnt look good - 485 denied.
Ooh this girl has excellent looks - 485 granted.
Ooh This couple stayed EUROPE not so loyal - 485 denied.
and so on and so forth....
I doubt if anyone was denied. They have to approve anyone and everyone to meet the numbers.
hairstyles a long black leather coat
cheshirecat
07-14 02:21 PM
Done
ak_2006
05-15 09:46 AM
Here is the scoop.
from US Congresswoman's office, an immigration specialist spoke to their liaison at the Nebraska Service Center.
Liaison confirmed the following:
1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2009 as I have the hard copy)
2. I-140 revocation in Feb, 2009 ( he has not provided the day of the month, but from LUD I have it strongly pointing to 02/03/2009)
I have not told the Congresswoman's office about the I-140 revocation. Just mentioned that it might have happened as I have left the company.
3. Liaison did confirm that even after the I-140 being withdrawn I am eligible for adjustment thru AC21.
4. Liaison did agree that if the I-140 was revoked within the stipulated time given in AC21, Nebraska’s decision to deny the I-485 may have been in error. (which in my case is true)
Immigration specialist at the Congresswoman's office is going to contact the Director of NSC to review this matter with a supervisor
Unanswered questions:
1. If the Liaison can see that my I-140 is approved on 09/04/2009, why is that the adjudicating officer is responding with a denial on 09/04/2009 and subsequent denial of I-485?
2. Are they both not looking at my information with same interface?
Conclusion:
Atleast in my case it looks deliberate and intentional.
Hi ind_game,
For me, 1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2009 as I have the hard copy) has typo. I think your 09/04/2009 should be 2007.
Please correct.
from US Congresswoman's office, an immigration specialist spoke to their liaison at the Nebraska Service Center.
Liaison confirmed the following:
1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2009 as I have the hard copy)
2. I-140 revocation in Feb, 2009 ( he has not provided the day of the month, but from LUD I have it strongly pointing to 02/03/2009)
I have not told the Congresswoman's office about the I-140 revocation. Just mentioned that it might have happened as I have left the company.
3. Liaison did confirm that even after the I-140 being withdrawn I am eligible for adjustment thru AC21.
4. Liaison did agree that if the I-140 was revoked within the stipulated time given in AC21, Nebraska’s decision to deny the I-485 may have been in error. (which in my case is true)
Immigration specialist at the Congresswoman's office is going to contact the Director of NSC to review this matter with a supervisor
Unanswered questions:
1. If the Liaison can see that my I-140 is approved on 09/04/2009, why is that the adjudicating officer is responding with a denial on 09/04/2009 and subsequent denial of I-485?
2. Are they both not looking at my information with same interface?
Conclusion:
Atleast in my case it looks deliberate and intentional.
Hi ind_game,
For me, 1. I-140 approval in September, 2007 (actually 09/04/2009 as I have the hard copy) has typo. I think your 09/04/2009 should be 2007.
Please correct.
indio0617
03-08 01:28 PM
Senator Cornyn supports Kyl amendment for barrier only at a few places and not across the entire border
I can hear it too now. The debate is about illegal aliens and about building fences and border security...
I can hear it too now. The debate is about illegal aliens and about building fences and border security...
No comments:
Post a Comment