antihero
11-26 01:15 PM
You won't have any issue with Indian Emigration officials in India. They are well aware of advanced parole as a means of entry to US.
Thanks for encouraging words. So can you confirm that the reentry to US does not require any other visa if one is carrying I-485 receipt and AP?
Also, can somebody who traveled in such a share the experience with me?
Thanks for encouraging words. So can you confirm that the reentry to US does not require any other visa if one is carrying I-485 receipt and AP?
Also, can somebody who traveled in such a share the experience with me?
wallpaper new corn rows hair style?!
jkays94
06-29 07:39 AM
The reality is there will not be another immigration bill this year if CIR does not make it. And calling CIR the "amnesty bill" means some of us may have started pandering to and unfortunately have fallen for the anti-immigrationists propaganda trap. That is fine if one thinks its okay to wait for another two years while a new congress settles in and for key immigration bills to come to the floor. However "cutting and running" is what we do when out of fear of association we fail to stand up and speak up and explain our motivating cause which is the plight of legal law abiding immigrants who contribute legally to this country. In my own personal opinion this is an excellent opportunity that can put IV in the spot light and distinguish IV for standing up for highly skilled immigrants. This requires good orational and communication skills so that one is not misquoted. If it takes wearing a t-shirt saying "Support Legal Immigrants" then so be it, but lets not cut and run on the basis of someone elses propaganda. If IV opts out then let it be because we could not find someone who could clearly get our unique message and goals out. Thanks to randallemery for bringing this opportunity to IV's attention and I hope the IV core will respond appropriately as this needs to be a well coordinated effort. When people fully understand the humanitarian reasons why legal immigrants need relief through CIR they tend to be more compassionate and supportive. However if we sit and twiddle our thumbs because of what Lou Dobbs says then we are doing exactly what these anti-immigrationists want us to do. The primary victory of Rep Chris Cannon (R) in Utah ought to be a shot in the arm for those fighting for CIR. Instead of cutting and running he supported CIR, the anti-immigrationist opponents attacked CIR and in the end they still lost. Rep Cannon had the opportunity of being associated with the alleged "amnesty" bill but he stood up bravely to be counted as a CIR supporter and prevailed in the end.
gc4me
07-08 04:22 PM
Spouse will have to be in relation for 3 years even after getting GC. Or else upon request, GC of the spouse can be revoked by USCIS.
2011 braided cornrow hairstyle.
anandrajesh
05-22 09:38 AM
Official Press release..
http://www.nfap.com/researchactivities/studies/NFAPRelease052206.pdf
U guys rock... U are doing a great job and keep the momentum going.
http://www.nfap.com/researchactivities/studies/NFAPRelease052206.pdf
U guys rock... U are doing a great job and keep the momentum going.
more...
Rajeev
08-10 02:54 PM
By other poster...
"Some people already know about this bill introduced on July 1 by John Shadegg (AZ)
H.R. 5658 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase competitiveness in the United States, and for other purposes.
Link: H.R.5658: SKIL Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5658/show)
go to the link and click and write to you local representative to consponsor and suppor this bill and pass this bill.
If congress passes this bill it would increase the available EB visa numbers and will make life easy for lots of indian and chinese citizens.
Good Luck
And thanks"
If this bill becomes a law, all retrogression will end. All provisions favorable to us, are there in the bill.
1. Increase of Immigrant visa to 290,000.
2. Master's degree from US in STEM field not counted in any quota.
3. Master's degree from a foreign country and three years of US experience not counted in any quota.
4. Family counted as one.
5. Recapture of visas from previous years
"Some people already know about this bill introduced on July 1 by John Shadegg (AZ)
H.R. 5658 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase competitiveness in the United States, and for other purposes.
Link: H.R.5658: SKIL Act of 2010 - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h5658/show)
go to the link and click and write to you local representative to consponsor and suppor this bill and pass this bill.
If congress passes this bill it would increase the available EB visa numbers and will make life easy for lots of indian and chinese citizens.
Good Luck
And thanks"
If this bill becomes a law, all retrogression will end. All provisions favorable to us, are there in the bill.
1. Increase of Immigrant visa to 290,000.
2. Master's degree from US in STEM field not counted in any quota.
3. Master's degree from a foreign country and three years of US experience not counted in any quota.
4. Family counted as one.
5. Recapture of visas from previous years
seeking_GC
07-29 12:39 PM
I would be very surprised if it became current in the next month.
more...
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
2010 cornrows hairstyles. about cornrow-styles fun,; about cornrow-styles fun,
Aah_GC
07-25 10:14 AM
Congratulations on you new job. Like others have suggested - make sure you do a good job of sending our AC21 docs - now that you know that your employer is going to revoke I140. Also be ready for any RFE / NOID and prepare your documentation before hand.
Good luck.
Good news is that I'm working again. While I was out of a job, I converted from H1 to EAD under my previous employer (consultancy).
Now, I've finally found a job although this is a full time opportunity. I'm going to be using my EAD / AC21 .
Question: Since I'm no longer working for my previous employer, they are going to be revoking my I140 next month. I believe this is not a problem since my case has been pending for more than 180 days so that's a good thing.. What I do want to know is whether my status is in any jeopardy since I haven't generated any income for about 3 months?
Thanks for any replies. I really need to find out the answer to this. A lot of forum info suggests that I'm ok but I'd very much like to hear any / all viewpoints on this issue.
Good luck.
Good news is that I'm working again. While I was out of a job, I converted from H1 to EAD under my previous employer (consultancy).
Now, I've finally found a job although this is a full time opportunity. I'm going to be using my EAD / AC21 .
Question: Since I'm no longer working for my previous employer, they are going to be revoking my I140 next month. I believe this is not a problem since my case has been pending for more than 180 days so that's a good thing.. What I do want to know is whether my status is in any jeopardy since I haven't generated any income for about 3 months?
Thanks for any replies. I really need to find out the answer to this. A lot of forum info suggests that I'm ok but I'd very much like to hear any / all viewpoints on this issue.
more...
chantu
07-16 03:12 PM
Admin :
This kind of question should be banned. You should have some self-respect and show the same towards your native country. If you know you can do it, whats the point of making it public. Go get it done. Are you asking IV to pay the sum on your behalf also ?
Unfortunately, this is the fact in our country. But the thing is he will get it by spending Rs.100 - Rs.200. Here, after spending $10,000 legally for GC..it is nowhere in sight.
This kind of question should be banned. You should have some self-respect and show the same towards your native country. If you know you can do it, whats the point of making it public. Go get it done. Are you asking IV to pay the sum on your behalf also ?
Unfortunately, this is the fact in our country. But the thing is he will get it by spending Rs.100 - Rs.200. Here, after spending $10,000 legally for GC..it is nowhere in sight.
hair Cornrows and Braids
immi_2006
01-16 01:21 PM
I may be wrong but i read on murthy that in the 6 years of H1 if you are out of the country for few days/months/years you can file H1B as a new H1 claiming missed days/months/years. (note: your H1 will be valid for only those missed period and not another 6 years) If it is for few days/weeks it is not worth to file for recapturing.
This option was given in murthy.com for people who are on EAD and then their 485 application gets rejected. In order to extend their status for few more months they can apply for recapturing of missed period.
This option was given in murthy.com for people who are on EAD and then their 485 application gets rejected. In order to extend their status for few more months they can apply for recapturing of missed period.
more...
fromnaija
07-23 02:38 PM
I remember reading somewhere on USCIS website and this forum that FP taken in late 2007 (probably for all July 2007 filers) will last for the duration of AOS application...
This must be for bad FP or for missing FP for self or any family member...
I posted the following at another forum on this topic:
USCIS is developing the Biometrics Storage System (BSS) w hich will allow the re-use of fingerprints and, if an application or petition has not been adjudicated within the fifteen month validity period, USCIS will be able to simply re-submit the stored fingerprints to the FBI, without any involvement of the applicant or petitioner. See 72 FR 17172 (Apr. 6, 2007) (establishing a new system of records).
It is from this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=c9aecd408423b3f800b01aa0c83db a52
Further research showed that the BSS (Biometrics Storage System) actually went into effect on May 7, 2007.
DATES: The established system of
records will be effective May 7, 2007
unless comments are received that
result in a contrary determination.
This is from FR 17172 which you can find at:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2007_register&position=all&page=17172
This must be for bad FP or for missing FP for self or any family member...
I posted the following at another forum on this topic:
USCIS is developing the Biometrics Storage System (BSS) w hich will allow the re-use of fingerprints and, if an application or petition has not been adjudicated within the fifteen month validity period, USCIS will be able to simply re-submit the stored fingerprints to the FBI, without any involvement of the applicant or petitioner. See 72 FR 17172 (Apr. 6, 2007) (establishing a new system of records).
It is from this link:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=c9aecd408423b3f800b01aa0c83db a52
Further research showed that the BSS (Biometrics Storage System) actually went into effect on May 7, 2007.
DATES: The established system of
records will be effective May 7, 2007
unless comments are received that
result in a contrary determination.
This is from FR 17172 which you can find at:
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2007_register&position=all&page=17172
hot Cornrows hairstyles for men
21stIcon
12-20 08:17 PM
Although I was not affected, my colleague who joined most recently this company for $100k salary on consulting project was scammed. He was astonished when he received his pay check, the reason being this company deducted 33% tax then deposited reaming amount on bank which was further liable to tax deduction from IRS.
For example
100k/12 = 8333/pm -company deducted highest tax bracket 2525(33% of 8333) as tax then deposited 5808/pm on bank account, after IRS withholding he got around 4000/pm.
We need to stop such scams by let labor department know about this and arrest him to set an example to other consulting companies saying we are not uneducated.
For example
100k/12 = 8333/pm -company deducted highest tax bracket 2525(33% of 8333) as tax then deposited 5808/pm on bank account, after IRS withholding he got around 4000/pm.
We need to stop such scams by let labor department know about this and arrest him to set an example to other consulting companies saying we are not uneducated.
more...
house hair designs cornrow Share
sanjay02
07-28 02:47 AM
Hi
My PD is Nov 2005 , I had I-485 interview in Feb 2009, because dates werent current I was given a letter saying "Your case has been continued because of VISA unavailability"
My question is if I claim unemployment insurance would I have issues in GC adjucation? ( Since my case is already pre-adjucated)?
Thnks
My PD is Nov 2005 , I had I-485 interview in Feb 2009, because dates werent current I was given a letter saying "Your case has been continued because of VISA unavailability"
My question is if I claim unemployment insurance would I have issues in GC adjucation? ( Since my case is already pre-adjucated)?
Thnks
tattoo braided fringe, hairstyles
jsb
01-23 11:17 AM
.... If the receipt date shown on your receipt notice is prior to the processing date shown below, you may call USCIS Customer Service at 1-800-375-5283. ...
Although reference in the text above refers to "receipt date shown on your receipt", I doubt if they really mean that. As per latest processing status, all cases with RD = July 2 should have been processed by now. Is that true? I doubt.
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
Although reference in the text above refers to "receipt date shown on your receipt", I doubt if they really mean that. As per latest processing status, all cases with RD = July 2 should have been processed by now. Is that true? I doubt.
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
more...
pictures This is a great cornrow hair
miguy
06-16 08:19 AM
what if your wife has a B1/B2 status.......can you still file for I-485?...Has anyone encountered a similar situations?
thanks,
thanks,
dresses Cornrows have gone from rare
sundar99
05-03 11:34 AM
Instead of picking holes in the system, all that we need to do is to ensure the reporter gets the message " How legal immigrants are stuck so deeply for following rules" . This will help them put it out in press and debate on it, that way, there will be a larger awareness. You got to look at it from a larger perspective. The more awareness the better are the chances. The time is now to call reporters and highlight the plight of EB Retro folks. That way, they get to seperate legal and illegals (or Mex Citizens) inorder not to confuse the public.
I am of the opinion, it will help the legal immigrants cause by calling, no harm in trying it.
I am of the opinion, it will help the legal immigrants cause by calling, no harm in trying it.
more...
makeup Cornrow hairstyles Cornrows006
Steve Mitchell
March 12th, 2004, 12:29 AM
Thanks for clarifying skip. It would be great to get the Nikon forum more active.
SB-26 will be a problem. You cannot use TTL flash mode with any Nikon digital camera. It would be like going back to an old thyristor auto flash. Only the DX series flashes work with the digitals.
SB-26 will be a problem. You cannot use TTL flash mode with any Nikon digital camera. It would be like going back to an old thyristor auto flash. Only the DX series flashes work with the digitals.
girlfriend Cornrow Styles for Women
whitecollarslave
04-17 04:51 PM
Hi All,
I am an aspiring US immigrant, and currently work with a desi-like employer who has not been paying me for last 3 months. I have resigned and started working at a new employer, using portability options. I will also contact DOL and report this to get my money back, however, DOL may not be able to recover it if the employer files for bankruptcy. I donot care much about money now, as its not too much and my new job increment covers it.
Here are my questions
1) Is there a way i can report this misdoing to USCIS directly. Is there any phone number/contact info to report frauds on I-140s and I-485s as he is holding some employees hostage (not allowing them to move out because of this situation where your money is stuck and so is your immigration).
2) What else should i do to make this injustice visible? I will work with DOl and get my money back.
3) I am thinking of reporting this directly to the I-140 processing centers. Is this is a good idea?
PK
I would suggest getting something in writing and filing a complaint with DOL.
I think Lou Dobbs will be happy to report H-1B abuse :)
If you are from Iowa or Illinois, your Senators might also be interested to help bring justice to such employers :)
I am an aspiring US immigrant, and currently work with a desi-like employer who has not been paying me for last 3 months. I have resigned and started working at a new employer, using portability options. I will also contact DOL and report this to get my money back, however, DOL may not be able to recover it if the employer files for bankruptcy. I donot care much about money now, as its not too much and my new job increment covers it.
Here are my questions
1) Is there a way i can report this misdoing to USCIS directly. Is there any phone number/contact info to report frauds on I-140s and I-485s as he is holding some employees hostage (not allowing them to move out because of this situation where your money is stuck and so is your immigration).
2) What else should i do to make this injustice visible? I will work with DOl and get my money back.
3) I am thinking of reporting this directly to the I-140 processing centers. Is this is a good idea?
PK
I would suggest getting something in writing and filing a complaint with DOL.
I think Lou Dobbs will be happy to report H-1B abuse :)
If you are from Iowa or Illinois, your Senators might also be interested to help bring justice to such employers :)
hairstyles Cornrow Braid Hairstyles
ram04
10-20 08:43 PM
If your new company is paying the fee use company attorney else stick with old attorney.
Make sure the new attorney is good and capble of handling your case.
I have followed first option in my case which is similar to yours and ofcourse my new corporate attorney is equally good.
Hope this helps to decide further.
Make sure the new attorney is good and capble of handling your case.
I have followed first option in my case which is similar to yours and ofcourse my new corporate attorney is equally good.
Hope this helps to decide further.
arkanand
06-22 01:31 PM
To EB3June03
I got an RFE for TB test too last week and got all of it done by June 19. I did a TB test in 2002 was 20mm induration which is positive. Because it was positive in 2002, I did not do TB test in 2007 when I sent in my I-485.
I got an RFE for a TB test last week and decided to do another test although I got positive in 2002. I also did one in India in 2000 and was positive then also.
So after two positive tests done in 2000 and 2002, I did one again last week and got positive with 19mm induration (2002 induration was 20 mm). Anyways, I am fine so far and no problem. I attached my chest x-ray which was clear and all documents sent.
Since this my 3rd test and all 3 positive, i think you can do the test and will become positive. However I do want to EMPHASIZE...the doctors and the nurses RECOMMEND NOT taking the test again as it will be positive.
But I took it anyways for sake of RFE and nothing happened.
I am not a doctor and just shared my personal experience if it helps!!
I got an RFE for TB test too last week and got all of it done by June 19. I did a TB test in 2002 was 20mm induration which is positive. Because it was positive in 2002, I did not do TB test in 2007 when I sent in my I-485.
I got an RFE for a TB test last week and decided to do another test although I got positive in 2002. I also did one in India in 2000 and was positive then also.
So after two positive tests done in 2000 and 2002, I did one again last week and got positive with 19mm induration (2002 induration was 20 mm). Anyways, I am fine so far and no problem. I attached my chest x-ray which was clear and all documents sent.
Since this my 3rd test and all 3 positive, i think you can do the test and will become positive. However I do want to EMPHASIZE...the doctors and the nurses RECOMMEND NOT taking the test again as it will be positive.
But I took it anyways for sake of RFE and nothing happened.
I am not a doctor and just shared my personal experience if it helps!!
velan
05-26 06:17 AM
We should say thanks to IV core team, senators who understand our pains and helped to achieve this level and finally to QGA for the guidance given to IV core team.
No comments:
Post a Comment