gcfriend65
12-07 03:12 PM
If your wife has gotten fp notice, then try to go along with her on the scheduled date and time, they could take yours too, provided you get the notice before the day on which her fp is scheduled.
its so weird, Oh USCIS have mercy on us. go IV
its so weird, Oh USCIS have mercy on us. go IV
niklshah
01-06 08:58 AM
change the title of thread buddy its misleading. change to something like guessing on feb visa bulletin.. or time waste on feb visa bulettin..
paskal
08-14 04:02 PM
July 2nd 8.46 AM received by PITCHER[Aug,14 16:59 ET]
July 2 - Fedex - 7.55 AM - Recd: R Williams[Aug,14 16:58 ET]
NSC July2, 1025AM J.BARRETT[Aug,14 16:58 ET]
is this not going a bit far????
c'mon iv'ers, check out iv-merchandise, volunteer, contribute, call friends, ditribute flyers...so much to do!
July 2 - Fedex - 7.55 AM - Recd: R Williams[Aug,14 16:58 ET]
NSC July2, 1025AM J.BARRETT[Aug,14 16:58 ET]
is this not going a bit far????
c'mon iv'ers, check out iv-merchandise, volunteer, contribute, call friends, ditribute flyers...so much to do!
desi3933
07-13 09:48 AM
What will happen if primary case got approved but dependent case is still pending and at the same time, dependent H4 will be expiring soon??
Actually my case got approved yesterday, my wife's not yet. Her H4 expires in September. Thanks.
She is NOT in H4 status anymore the day your I-485 is approved.
She has 180 days (from your approval date) to file I-485 application, otherwise she has to do follow-to-join CP at consulate abroad.
Consult a good attorney asap.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
Actually my case got approved yesterday, my wife's not yet. Her H4 expires in September. Thanks.
She is NOT in H4 status anymore the day your I-485 is approved.
She has 180 days (from your approval date) to file I-485 application, otherwise she has to do follow-to-join CP at consulate abroad.
Consult a good attorney asap.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
gauravster
01-16 01:41 PM
Guys, looks like a lot of people are voting against H1B visas as well. I think since most of us are here on these visas, we should support these visas as well.
Even if we are able to get green cards, it is important that we strive to keep this place the best atleast in our lifetime. On that ground, it is important that we understand and stand up to the H1B visa provision which gets the best people in the world to this counrty and also make sure that they stay here.
I felt bad that even some people who are here (or atleast claim to be) on H1B seem to suggest on change.gov that the visa is not good for jobs here. Can we expect this country to be able to produce cmopanies like Google, Yahoo, Sun and numerous others if we are not able to atract talent.
On this note I would also like to add one insight that we had once we were discussing in office. My boss's contention was that if you are paid half the money as you are here, would you go back to India. A discussion ensued and we both concluded that the thing that keeps this country in the forefront of technology is that it attarcts the best people from all around. Be it Indian, chinese, European, Arab, African. It would be difficult to find an environment so geared to be able to get the best brains and keep them there. India/China is also growing, but unless they are able to attract talent like US, it would be difficult for them to match atleast in technology (which also ties down to higher per capita GDP).
Even if we are able to get green cards, it is important that we strive to keep this place the best atleast in our lifetime. On that ground, it is important that we understand and stand up to the H1B visa provision which gets the best people in the world to this counrty and also make sure that they stay here.
I felt bad that even some people who are here (or atleast claim to be) on H1B seem to suggest on change.gov that the visa is not good for jobs here. Can we expect this country to be able to produce cmopanies like Google, Yahoo, Sun and numerous others if we are not able to atract talent.
On this note I would also like to add one insight that we had once we were discussing in office. My boss's contention was that if you are paid half the money as you are here, would you go back to India. A discussion ensued and we both concluded that the thing that keeps this country in the forefront of technology is that it attarcts the best people from all around. Be it Indian, chinese, European, Arab, African. It would be difficult to find an environment so geared to be able to get the best brains and keep them there. India/China is also growing, but unless they are able to attract talent like US, it would be difficult for them to match atleast in technology (which also ties down to higher per capita GDP).
Blog Feeds
02-10 08:50 PM
Most lawyers that are versed in the H1B visa process, are getting busier and busier these days. As we are nearing the April 1, 2010 filing deadline for the H1B visa. Many speculations out there as to when will the Cap be reached this year. The economy is still in recovery mode, and employers are careful before hiring. Yet, many Immigration experts feel the Cap will be met early this year, but when is the big question.
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
more...
sdpkelkar
01-27 12:13 PM
They're all awesome IMO...but Perlin circles is primus inter pares for me :P
franklin
07-17 05:37 PM
[I]A. STATUTORY NUMBERS
You seriously think anyone is going to answer given your user name?!
You seriously think anyone is going to answer given your user name?!
more...
tigerlibra
09-28 04:31 PM
Would greatly appreciate some advice regarding my fiancee.
She is currently in the US on a B1-B2 Tourist/Business visa. This is her fifth visa and has visited the US a total of 10 times over the past 5 years, spending 1-5 months each time. She has NEVER had a problem on arrival at the airport, never been called into the room for questioning, etc.
We are planning on getting married, but we need to make a trip to her home country for my work in the next few weeks for about a month. We were planning on waiting till 30 days after our return to marry and then to apply for her I-130/I-485 after that.
We just had a consultation with an immigration lawyer who recommended that she does NOT leave the country, and that we should get married ASAP and apply for the I-130/I-485 now, wait 2-3 months and make our trip then. The lawyer thought that there was a possibility that she might not be admitted the next time she comes in if the border agent has even the tiniest suspicion that she is entering to get married.
Although her previous B1-B2 visas were renewed each year without an interview, this year she was called in and they asked her some questions. She mentioned that she was doing some work for me in China, and that she would be staying with me in the US. She also put me down as her financial guarantee in the US.
I understand the basics of dual intent, and would not want to compromise her ability to enter the country.
Of course no one can know for sure, but would be grateful for some experienced advice about this. What are her chances of being refused entry when she returns? (Her visa is valid for one year, so it would be on the same visa she arrived here on this summer.) Would it be better if she arrived on a different flight than me? Or even better if she arrived on a flight to another city rather than the one where we live?
Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
She is currently in the US on a B1-B2 Tourist/Business visa. This is her fifth visa and has visited the US a total of 10 times over the past 5 years, spending 1-5 months each time. She has NEVER had a problem on arrival at the airport, never been called into the room for questioning, etc.
We are planning on getting married, but we need to make a trip to her home country for my work in the next few weeks for about a month. We were planning on waiting till 30 days after our return to marry and then to apply for her I-130/I-485 after that.
We just had a consultation with an immigration lawyer who recommended that she does NOT leave the country, and that we should get married ASAP and apply for the I-130/I-485 now, wait 2-3 months and make our trip then. The lawyer thought that there was a possibility that she might not be admitted the next time she comes in if the border agent has even the tiniest suspicion that she is entering to get married.
Although her previous B1-B2 visas were renewed each year without an interview, this year she was called in and they asked her some questions. She mentioned that she was doing some work for me in China, and that she would be staying with me in the US. She also put me down as her financial guarantee in the US.
I understand the basics of dual intent, and would not want to compromise her ability to enter the country.
Of course no one can know for sure, but would be grateful for some experienced advice about this. What are her chances of being refused entry when she returns? (Her visa is valid for one year, so it would be on the same visa she arrived here on this summer.) Would it be better if she arrived on a different flight than me? Or even better if she arrived on a flight to another city rather than the one where we live?
Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
GIDOC
07-14 01:46 AM
pmb76,
Good job on your letter to her. I am trying to write one to her also and will use yours as a template.
Good job on your letter to her. I am trying to write one to her also and will use yours as a template.
more...
walking_dude
03-14 10:22 AM
There is nothing much IV can do to fix the inefficiency of the USCIS. How can IV help if USCIS cannot do its job in time? We can request them to work harder, thats all we can do.
Multi-year EAD/APs ( 3 years) are already part of the ongoing IV Admin fixes campaign. Having 3 year EAD/APs will fix some of the issues mentioned by you.
Guys,
I guess we are here long on waiting for our green cards in the mean time I am suggesting we do a letter campaign to write in thousands to the USCIS director and lodge our protest about the problem the immigrant community is facing because of delays and irregularities in adjudication of EADs and APs. First and foremost things is a document which USCIS takes 6 months to Adjudicate is valid for 1 year which makes no sense.
Secondly USCIS should make efforts to make adjudicate it in not more than 2 months since we have to make travel plans etc. We should not be bounded by these documents. If for some reason it takes more than 2 months than 1 should able to get it via infopass, and a family member's death should not be the only reason to get the AP we are human beings and we have other social bondings too like marriages etc. I urge the core team to take steps to come forward a begin a campaign.... I guess this is the foremost need of the moment for 1000s of us..
Multi-year EAD/APs ( 3 years) are already part of the ongoing IV Admin fixes campaign. Having 3 year EAD/APs will fix some of the issues mentioned by you.
Guys,
I guess we are here long on waiting for our green cards in the mean time I am suggesting we do a letter campaign to write in thousands to the USCIS director and lodge our protest about the problem the immigrant community is facing because of delays and irregularities in adjudication of EADs and APs. First and foremost things is a document which USCIS takes 6 months to Adjudicate is valid for 1 year which makes no sense.
Secondly USCIS should make efforts to make adjudicate it in not more than 2 months since we have to make travel plans etc. We should not be bounded by these documents. If for some reason it takes more than 2 months than 1 should able to get it via infopass, and a family member's death should not be the only reason to get the AP we are human beings and we have other social bondings too like marriages etc. I urge the core team to take steps to come forward a begin a campaign.... I guess this is the foremost need of the moment for 1000s of us..
masti_Gai
10-25 12:22 PM
am waitin since May thrid week. :(
am not gonna give them a single penny
its almost five and half months
lemme see how long they will take to take a decision on ma case.:confused:
not worth spendin ma hard earned money when my PD isn't current.:rolleyes:
am not gonna give them a single penny
its almost five and half months
lemme see how long they will take to take a decision on ma case.:confused:
not worth spendin ma hard earned money when my PD isn't current.:rolleyes:
more...
chantu
09-15 06:37 PM
I may travel to India in Oct on AP for first time. I am working on EAD and changed employer with AC21. I will use AP at POE.
1) Do I have to get any transit visa if I go through European countries?
2) Will there be any problem at POE? Any recent experiences?
3) Do I have to go to consulate in India?
Thanks in advance!
1) Do I have to get any transit visa if I go through European countries?
2) Will there be any problem at POE? Any recent experiences?
3) Do I have to go to consulate in India?
Thanks in advance!
snathan
02-11 12:20 AM
Please contribute
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
more...
hojo
09-06 03:15 PM
whoa, also very nice text on the footer, having it upside down. didnt even make out what that was until just now, again looks great.
thanks for the tutorials above, hopefully i'll have a footer worth posting about soon, heh
thanks for the tutorials above, hopefully i'll have a footer worth posting about soon, heh
godspeed
01-15 09:03 AM
I paper filed at TSC on Dec16th got approval on Jan11th, the pace is pretty good considering the holidays in between.
There are several factor which helps aid in faster processing of the applications, mainly the required docs has to be in order and complete.
There are several factor which helps aid in faster processing of the applications, mainly the required docs has to be in order and complete.
more...
newhandle
03-05 10:48 PM
Family based might based upon the parents or siblings. That is the reason i asked whether is is spouse? If spouse you are OK. You can disclose the income.
LPR (dad) :(
LPR (dad) :(
Nil
04-07 06:01 PM
Approaching the presidential candidates is a good idea.
vijayam
09-15 05:34 PM
Thank you for the reply.
I did my Master's here.
And I will also make sure to check if we need a BS or MS for my Job. I sure applied for my job on my Master's basis.
---Vijaya.
I did my Master's here.
And I will also make sure to check if we need a BS or MS for my Job. I sure applied for my job on my Master's basis.
---Vijaya.
go_gc_way
06-20 03:06 PM
I think too that it may not become current.
But with new year Quota released in Oct (October?), how much it will move forward?
--> 2003 March ? or 2004 Jan?
When Retrogression introduced last year, for India the PD if I remember correctly was in 99 which now has moved to 2003 Jan, this I think because of addition of unused numbers?
Why would it not move an year by October this time , yes gravity of the situation .. please explain more clearly with numbers.
Thanks in advance for looking in to my request.
But with new year Quota released in Oct (October?), how much it will move forward?
--> 2003 March ? or 2004 Jan?
When Retrogression introduced last year, for India the PD if I remember correctly was in 99 which now has moved to 2003 Jan, this I think because of addition of unused numbers?
Why would it not move an year by October this time , yes gravity of the situation .. please explain more clearly with numbers.
Thanks in advance for looking in to my request.
reddyram
07-18 11:08 AM
Hi Folks
My EB2 will be current next month per VB. I just moved to a new place and did an online address change. I changed my address in Master DB as well as pending petitions.My questions in regard to this are :
<> I created an online USCIS ID and noticed there was a soft-update on my petition - meaning the update date itself changed but the status of petition is the same. "Under review". Just wanted to confirm if my address change online , caused the soft-update or USCIS opened my application ?
<> Last time , I changed my address online it immediately give me EMail alerts as well as a plain auto generated hard copy letter in zerox, from them informing me of the same. This time there are no alerts , nothing. How do I know what address USCIS have on file for me.
My online profile won't show current address - just an application online to change the same.
Any insights will help
Ram
My EB2 will be current next month per VB. I just moved to a new place and did an online address change. I changed my address in Master DB as well as pending petitions.My questions in regard to this are :
<> I created an online USCIS ID and noticed there was a soft-update on my petition - meaning the update date itself changed but the status of petition is the same. "Under review". Just wanted to confirm if my address change online , caused the soft-update or USCIS opened my application ?
<> Last time , I changed my address online it immediately give me EMail alerts as well as a plain auto generated hard copy letter in zerox, from them informing me of the same. This time there are no alerts , nothing. How do I know what address USCIS have on file for me.
My online profile won't show current address - just an application online to change the same.
Any insights will help
Ram