desi3933
02-10 02:47 PM
I had my GC approved out of line last year in aug [was current (pd march 2006), but processing time wasn't current for texas at that time]. EADs for both me and my spouse had been approved like 1 week before this happened. Hers was for 2 yrs and mine for 1 yr. What happens to her application if I loose my job or leave my job ? I am the primary.
Since that I-485 is a derivative application, your job change should not impact her pending I-485 application.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
Since that I-485 is a derivative application, your job change should not impact her pending I-485 application.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US Citizen of Indian Origin
wallpaper images wallpaper of mobile
.jpg "house hot Nokia 5233 mobile")
pd_recapturing
10-19 01:35 PM
According to what I have read - porting of PD can be done at 2 stages
1. At the time the second I-140 is applied or,
2. When one applies for the I-485.
So you should be fine going by #2. Not an attorney, just like you all - a GC aspirant commenting on his research.
My question is the same that you raised earlier - the Memo states that the PD has to be current when interfiling. But in the case of pd_recapturing, his PD is May 04 which is not current - EB2 for India is Apr 04 (my assumption being that pd_recapturing is from India.)
My case is exactly as pd_recapturing, waiting for the approval of my second I-140 to see if the date got ported or not (we had requested during filing of second I-140). After the approval, I was thinking of waiting for my PD to be current before filing.
pd_recapturing - we'll be following your lead to see how your case turns out.
Thanks.
Gene
According to my lawyer, mine is a simple case of updating I-485 file with a different I-140 so there is no need to wait PD to be current. And also it makes sense to me as I am not applying a new I-485 to wait for PD to be current. They will anyway touch my AOS when PD will be current. Right now, they will have to update my I-140 with the existing I-485. And moreover, my case is not a PD change, instead, its a EB category change. What do you guys think ?
1. At the time the second I-140 is applied or,
2. When one applies for the I-485.
So you should be fine going by #2. Not an attorney, just like you all - a GC aspirant commenting on his research.
My question is the same that you raised earlier - the Memo states that the PD has to be current when interfiling. But in the case of pd_recapturing, his PD is May 04 which is not current - EB2 for India is Apr 04 (my assumption being that pd_recapturing is from India.)
My case is exactly as pd_recapturing, waiting for the approval of my second I-140 to see if the date got ported or not (we had requested during filing of second I-140). After the approval, I was thinking of waiting for my PD to be current before filing.
pd_recapturing - we'll be following your lead to see how your case turns out.
Thanks.
Gene
According to my lawyer, mine is a simple case of updating I-485 file with a different I-140 so there is no need to wait PD to be current. And also it makes sense to me as I am not applying a new I-485 to wait for PD to be current. They will anyway touch my AOS when PD will be current. Right now, they will have to update my I-140 with the existing I-485. And moreover, my case is not a PD change, instead, its a EB category change. What do you guys think ?
ashkam
02-07 11:13 AM
H1B extension November 13 2007 receipt date, still pending. No LUDs except for an address change.
2011 house hot Nokia 5233 mobile
nozerd
08-07 04:31 PM
rbharol,
Dude thats why we started this topic. To see feasibility of living in Canada but working in US. Windsor/Detroit are the 2 cities closest to each other across US/Canada border.
If you can get job in detroit area you can do this. You wont pay any more tax than you would have made with same income in canada.
Dude thats why we started this topic. To see feasibility of living in Canada but working in US. Windsor/Detroit are the 2 cities closest to each other across US/Canada border.
If you can get job in detroit area you can do this. You wont pay any more tax than you would have made with same income in canada.
more...
.jpg "wallpaper mobile nokia 5233.")
rbharol
08-30 06:20 PM
By no means we shall find ourselves supporting what is against public opinion in our host country, which is now America. .....The lack of sympathy for immigration is in the air.
Dear 'TheOmbundsman' ,
Majority of Americans are not aware of the plight of Legal High tech workers who contribute to the economy and success of US and are struggling to get the GC.
The people unwittingly club everybody with 'Illegal Immigrants'
I agree with you that there is anti-immigrant feeling among people.
We need to create awareness among those who matter most.
Thats how we stand any chance.
I think this thread can be closed now as it is going in totally wrong direction.
Dear 'TheOmbundsman' ,
Majority of Americans are not aware of the plight of Legal High tech workers who contribute to the economy and success of US and are struggling to get the GC.
The people unwittingly club everybody with 'Illegal Immigrants'
I agree with you that there is anti-immigrant feeling among people.
We need to create awareness among those who matter most.
Thats how we stand any chance.
I think this thread can be closed now as it is going in totally wrong direction.
.jpg "wallpaper mobile nokia 5233.")
skd043000
02-10 01:41 PM
what I know is you have to renew your EAD and there may be some complication when you change job
more...
vactorboy29
02-19 01:11 PM
THIS IS AMERICA AND AMERICANS A Swiss Bank Is Set to Open Its Secret Files
In the hush-hush world of Swiss banking, the unthinkable is happening: secrets are spilling into the open.
UBS the largest bank in Switzerland, agreed on Wednesday to divulge the names of well-heeled Americans whom the authorities suspect of using offshore accounts at the bank to evade taxes. The bank admitted conspiring to defraud the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICES and agreed to pay $780 million to settle a sweeping federal investigation into its activities.
It is unclear how many of its clients� names UBS will divulge. Federal prosecutors have been examining about 19,000 accounts at the bank, but UBS ultimately may disclose the identities of only a few hundred customers.
But to some, turning over any names at all heralds the end of the secret Swiss bank account, whose traditions date to the Middle Ages.
�The Swiss are saying that this is the end of Swiss banking as they knew it,� said Jack Blum, an offshore tax specialist. �Nobody will trust the security of the Swiss bank account.�
As part of the settlement, UBS agreed to cooperate with a broad summons issued by the Justice Department to turn over the names. Under the terms of a so-called deferred prosecution agreement, the bank and its executives could be indicted if UBS didn�t identify the customers.
UBS has said it is closing the offshore accounts of its American clients. But under the deal with the United States authorities, the bank must provide periodic written evidence of that to prosecutors. UBS earned $200 million annually from the business.
Prosecutors suspect that from late 2002 to 2007, UBS helped American clients illegally hide $20 billion, letting them evade $300 million a year in taxes.
In a striking admission, UBS said that from 2000 through 2007, some of its private bankers and managers had �participated in a scheme to defraud the United States� and the I.R.S. by helping American clients set up and conceal offshore accounts. The scheme involved falsifying or not properly obtaining or filing certain tax forms required of both the bank and its clients.
UBS�s offshore private banking business once employed some 60 private bankers in Lugano, Zurich and Geneva. Prosecutors claimed UBS referred clients to lawyers and accountants who set up secret offshore entities to conceal assets from the I.R.S.
UBS urged some American clients to destroy records and to stash watches, jewelry and artwork that they had bought with money hidden offshore in safe deposit boxes in Switzerland. The bank also encouraged them to use Swiss credit cards so the I.R.S. could not track purchases. In a statement on Wednesday, Peter Kurer, the chairman of UBS, said that �UBS sincerely regrets the compliance failures in its U.S. cross-border business that have been identified by the various government investigations in Switzerland and the U.S., as well as our own internal review. We accept full responsibility for these improper activities.�
Marcel Rohner, the group chief executive of UBS, said in a statement that �it is apparent that as an organization we made mistakes and that our control systems were inadequate.�
In January a senior UBS executive, Raoul Weil, was declared a fugitive, two months after being indicted by a federal judge in connection with the investigation of the bank. Mr. Weil, a Swiss citizen, oversaw the cross-border private banking operations from 2002 to 2007.
UBS had fiercely resisted turning over the names, even after some executives were indicted and implicated in the offshore private banking business. Swiss law distinguishes broadly between tax avoidance, tax evasion and tax fraud. Unlike in the United States, tax evasion is not a criminal offense under Swiss law.
The move by UBS to settle the case, on the eve of a Senate subcommittee hearing next Tuesday on the matter, signals how close the bank came to being indicted for not cooperating with prosecutors. Indictment is a near-certain death knell for corporations.
Of the $780 million that UBS will pay, $380 million represents disgorgement of profits from its cross-border business. The remainder represents United States taxes that UBS failed to withhold on the accounts. The figures include interest, penalties and restitution for unpaid taxes
As part of the deal, UBS also entered into a consent order with the Securities and Exchange Commission in which it agreed to charges of having acted as an unregistered broker-dealer and investment adviser for Americans.
The settlement caps a painful run for UBS, which suffered more than $50 billion in losses in the collapse of the American mortgage market and received a $60 billion bailout from the Swiss government last October.
The bank will not have to pay additional fines and penalties, which could have brought the deal to more than $1 billion. People briefed on the issue said the banking crisis and the recession were factors in this decision by prosecutors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the hush-hush world of Swiss banking, the unthinkable is happening: secrets are spilling into the open.
UBS the largest bank in Switzerland, agreed on Wednesday to divulge the names of well-heeled Americans whom the authorities suspect of using offshore accounts at the bank to evade taxes. The bank admitted conspiring to defraud the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICES and agreed to pay $780 million to settle a sweeping federal investigation into its activities.
It is unclear how many of its clients� names UBS will divulge. Federal prosecutors have been examining about 19,000 accounts at the bank, but UBS ultimately may disclose the identities of only a few hundred customers.
But to some, turning over any names at all heralds the end of the secret Swiss bank account, whose traditions date to the Middle Ages.
�The Swiss are saying that this is the end of Swiss banking as they knew it,� said Jack Blum, an offshore tax specialist. �Nobody will trust the security of the Swiss bank account.�
As part of the settlement, UBS agreed to cooperate with a broad summons issued by the Justice Department to turn over the names. Under the terms of a so-called deferred prosecution agreement, the bank and its executives could be indicted if UBS didn�t identify the customers.
UBS has said it is closing the offshore accounts of its American clients. But under the deal with the United States authorities, the bank must provide periodic written evidence of that to prosecutors. UBS earned $200 million annually from the business.
Prosecutors suspect that from late 2002 to 2007, UBS helped American clients illegally hide $20 billion, letting them evade $300 million a year in taxes.
In a striking admission, UBS said that from 2000 through 2007, some of its private bankers and managers had �participated in a scheme to defraud the United States� and the I.R.S. by helping American clients set up and conceal offshore accounts. The scheme involved falsifying or not properly obtaining or filing certain tax forms required of both the bank and its clients.
UBS�s offshore private banking business once employed some 60 private bankers in Lugano, Zurich and Geneva. Prosecutors claimed UBS referred clients to lawyers and accountants who set up secret offshore entities to conceal assets from the I.R.S.
UBS urged some American clients to destroy records and to stash watches, jewelry and artwork that they had bought with money hidden offshore in safe deposit boxes in Switzerland. The bank also encouraged them to use Swiss credit cards so the I.R.S. could not track purchases. In a statement on Wednesday, Peter Kurer, the chairman of UBS, said that �UBS sincerely regrets the compliance failures in its U.S. cross-border business that have been identified by the various government investigations in Switzerland and the U.S., as well as our own internal review. We accept full responsibility for these improper activities.�
Marcel Rohner, the group chief executive of UBS, said in a statement that �it is apparent that as an organization we made mistakes and that our control systems were inadequate.�
In January a senior UBS executive, Raoul Weil, was declared a fugitive, two months after being indicted by a federal judge in connection with the investigation of the bank. Mr. Weil, a Swiss citizen, oversaw the cross-border private banking operations from 2002 to 2007.
UBS had fiercely resisted turning over the names, even after some executives were indicted and implicated in the offshore private banking business. Swiss law distinguishes broadly between tax avoidance, tax evasion and tax fraud. Unlike in the United States, tax evasion is not a criminal offense under Swiss law.
The move by UBS to settle the case, on the eve of a Senate subcommittee hearing next Tuesday on the matter, signals how close the bank came to being indicted for not cooperating with prosecutors. Indictment is a near-certain death knell for corporations.
Of the $780 million that UBS will pay, $380 million represents disgorgement of profits from its cross-border business. The remainder represents United States taxes that UBS failed to withhold on the accounts. The figures include interest, penalties and restitution for unpaid taxes
As part of the deal, UBS also entered into a consent order with the Securities and Exchange Commission in which it agreed to charges of having acted as an unregistered broker-dealer and investment adviser for Americans.
The settlement caps a painful run for UBS, which suffered more than $50 billion in losses in the collapse of the American mortgage market and received a $60 billion bailout from the Swiss government last October.
The bank will not have to pay additional fines and penalties, which could have brought the deal to more than $1 billion. People briefed on the issue said the banking crisis and the recession were factors in this decision by prosecutors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 dresses Nokia 5233 mobiles,
.jpg "wallpaper mobile nokia 5233.")
go_guy123
04-04 03:25 PM
IV has been doing a great job, we should all be proud of being a part of it.
I came across this post (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10316).
I think we should keep fighting till our goal is met. Can IV core team shed some light whether recapturing the unused visa numbers is ever possible ? Even if there is slightest change, we should NOT GIVE UP and work towards it. I've read that USCIS have so far wasted upto 600,000 EB visa numbers.
Now we are seeing some light at the end of the tunnel for multi year EAD or EAD validity during the period of AOS(I-485). Should we roll up our sleeves and work for the recapture of unused visa numbers ? How to make this happen, Please share your thoughts and ideas.
LETS NOT STOP UNTIL WE GET WHAT WE DESERVE!
it happened in 2000.....but its always the nurse loby who gets the
unused visa
I came across this post (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10316).
I think we should keep fighting till our goal is met. Can IV core team shed some light whether recapturing the unused visa numbers is ever possible ? Even if there is slightest change, we should NOT GIVE UP and work towards it. I've read that USCIS have so far wasted upto 600,000 EB visa numbers.
Now we are seeing some light at the end of the tunnel for multi year EAD or EAD validity during the period of AOS(I-485). Should we roll up our sleeves and work for the recapture of unused visa numbers ? How to make this happen, Please share your thoughts and ideas.
LETS NOT STOP UNTIL WE GET WHAT WE DESERVE!
it happened in 2000.....but its always the nurse loby who gets the
unused visa
more...
bestofall
06-20 12:45 AM
Pappu , Thanks for update
I got info from Our FL State chapter ,
Thanks
BestOfAll
I got info from Our FL State chapter ,
Thanks
BestOfAll
hair nokia 5233 wallpapers
.jpg "wallpaper mobile nokia 5233.")
Jeff Wheeler
03-21 04:43 PM
How is it that a question about the Bible raises so much feedback, whereas a question like "Have you ever climbed Mount Everest?" would have little or no affect.
After voting for it, I posted because I thought it didn't really have any place here, especially because of his apparent intent and implication (confirmed by viewing his other work). Seemed out of place on this secular site.
After voting for it, I posted because I thought it didn't really have any place here, especially because of his apparent intent and implication (confirmed by viewing his other work). Seemed out of place on this secular site.
more...
ebizash
07-07 12:00 PM
Hi,
My attorney received an EVL RFE for my I-485 case. My PD is 2007 EB3 so I don't have any hope of getting GC but I guess they are just pre-adjucating my case.
Here is my situation - I filed my !-485 in Aug 2007 and changed job (without filing any AC-21 paperwork with USCIS) in April 2008. My attorney had looked at new job description and given green signal for change. My entire immigration history of 10 years in US is totally clean with no gaps and with all work autorizations.
Now, my concern is that the letter that my attorney has prepared for my current employer to sign has lot of legal lingo (AC-21 language, lot of CFRs, info related to my LCA and I-140) and has some language to the effect of supporting my LCA and I-140 till my GC is approved. It also states that my current employer was able to afford to pay my salary since the LCA date. My employer is fortune 5 company so money wise there is no problem but my concern is that they may not want to sign such a lengthy (wordy) legal doc without consulting their Immi attorney. I don't have much time to respond (only 8 more days). So if my employer takes long time or tells me that they can not sign it, I want to be ready with Plan B. Can someone suggest what should I do?
1 - should I prepare a simple document with job duties, responsibilities, start date, salary etc that my employer will be willing to sign. So at last moment I can atleast get that signed. Something will be better than nothing.
2 - Should I / (bigger question is can I) ask USCIS to give me more time to respond to RFE?
3. Provide simple letter from employer with an affedavit or something stating that the new job is same / similar as the old job.
Sorry for a long post and thanks for any suggestions.
My attorney received an EVL RFE for my I-485 case. My PD is 2007 EB3 so I don't have any hope of getting GC but I guess they are just pre-adjucating my case.
Here is my situation - I filed my !-485 in Aug 2007 and changed job (without filing any AC-21 paperwork with USCIS) in April 2008. My attorney had looked at new job description and given green signal for change. My entire immigration history of 10 years in US is totally clean with no gaps and with all work autorizations.
Now, my concern is that the letter that my attorney has prepared for my current employer to sign has lot of legal lingo (AC-21 language, lot of CFRs, info related to my LCA and I-140) and has some language to the effect of supporting my LCA and I-140 till my GC is approved. It also states that my current employer was able to afford to pay my salary since the LCA date. My employer is fortune 5 company so money wise there is no problem but my concern is that they may not want to sign such a lengthy (wordy) legal doc without consulting their Immi attorney. I don't have much time to respond (only 8 more days). So if my employer takes long time or tells me that they can not sign it, I want to be ready with Plan B. Can someone suggest what should I do?
1 - should I prepare a simple document with job duties, responsibilities, start date, salary etc that my employer will be willing to sign. So at last moment I can atleast get that signed. Something will be better than nothing.
2 - Should I / (bigger question is can I) ask USCIS to give me more time to respond to RFE?
3. Provide simple letter from employer with an affedavit or something stating that the new job is same / similar as the old job.
Sorry for a long post and thanks for any suggestions.
hot wallpaper mobile nokia 5233.
ramaonline
01-25 12:37 PM
I can create a spreadsheet on thinkfree.com or any other collaboration site with information about monthly or recurring contributions
All those who have contributed please send me the details via private message so that this thread does not get swamped - I will work on it next weekend.
All those who have contributed please send me the details via private message so that this thread does not get swamped - I will work on it next weekend.
more...
house wallpapers for mobile nokia.
balasundaram_s
07-12 03:51 PM
Please consult with an immigration attorney, to make sure your stay is legal. if your i-94 expired, unless you get the revised I-94 with the valid dates, your stay is illegal. If it is more than 180 days, then you are in deep trouble. Consult with an attorney and prepare to leave.....
tattoo wallpaper mobile nokia 5233.
schutthalde
July 5th, 2004, 03:04 PM
I do have a D70 as well as other AF and non-AF cameras and never had such problems before. I have backfocus-problems with all lenses on the D70. I ran some simple testing that confirmed this. In practice, this will only be a problem shoting faces wide open - but here, it's quite bad.
more...
pictures Nokia 5233 Wallpapers Download
ramaonline
01-25 12:37 PM
I can create a spreadsheet on thinkfree.com or any other collaboration site with information about monthly or recurring contributions
All those who have contributed please send me the details via private message so that this thread does not get swamped - I will work on it next weekend.
All those who have contributed please send me the details via private message so that this thread does not get swamped - I will work on it next weekend.
dresses 360×640 like Nokia 5233.
Pravan
10-02 12:59 PM
Always, Always, Always maintain liquidity!! The benefit of having the money with you far offsets any benefits of saving anything on mortgage interest rate payments. CASH is unboubtedly indeed the KING !!
more...
makeup wallpaper for mobile nokia
.jpg "wallpapers for mobile nokia.")
rcr_bulk
08-14 11:11 AM
Dear IVans,
Now that the SEP VB is out, what does this indicate in terms of
- future VBs
- visa availability in the coming months
- awareness about visa wastage
- dates becoming current for most EB categories
- light at the end of tunnel for most of us
- USCIS efficiencies
Pls share your thoughts. Thanks!
USCIS efficiencies :D : They are not efficient. People with PD in 2002,2003,2004 are still waiting and that are in 2006 getting released. Where is FIFO and efficiency in their process? No transparency in their process.
Now that the SEP VB is out, what does this indicate in terms of
- future VBs
- visa availability in the coming months
- awareness about visa wastage
- dates becoming current for most EB categories
- light at the end of tunnel for most of us
- USCIS efficiencies
Pls share your thoughts. Thanks!
USCIS efficiencies :D : They are not efficient. People with PD in 2002,2003,2004 are still waiting and that are in 2006 getting released. Where is FIFO and efficiency in their process? No transparency in their process.
girlfriend wallpaper mobile nokia 5233.
n.sravan
10-04 10:04 AM
Hi all,
Thanks for the responses and sorry for Confusions..
I am giving the scenario more clearly..
My name Before mariz is"Venkata Naga Sunita" surname: "Prachina" (changed identity).
After mariz surname changed to "Naveena".
When I applied for H4 alongwith my husband's H1B, I had my passport with old surname(Prachina). That passport got stamped for H4. Later I got another passport with surname changed(Naveena). At this point, I have one passport of old surname with H4 stamp and another passport with new surname.
While entering into US this January, on I-94, I wrote "Venkata Naga Sunita" Last name: "Naveena". In March, DMV ppl told me that the name in the I-94 should match with Visa". When, I applied for H1B in May with this new surname and attached this I-94 that has new surname "Naveena".
During H1B processing, I had to visit my home country on emergency purpose and got approval of H1B on Sept 7th, which is valid only from Oct 2nd. I re-entered to US on Sept10th and wrote my last name as "Prachina" on I-94(to match with current H4 Visa with which I am entering US). When I recived my papers this week, I was happy to see that my Change of Status is approved and surprised to see that my name on the I-797 and attached I-94 is printed as "Sunita V" Last Name:"Naveena".
Now, the I-94 number and name that are present on my I-797 are not matching that are attached to my passport. Is this OK or going to create any problems in future(SSN or stamping)..
Thanks for the responses and sorry for Confusions..
I am giving the scenario more clearly..
My name Before mariz is"Venkata Naga Sunita" surname: "Prachina" (changed identity).
After mariz surname changed to "Naveena".
When I applied for H4 alongwith my husband's H1B, I had my passport with old surname(Prachina). That passport got stamped for H4. Later I got another passport with surname changed(Naveena). At this point, I have one passport of old surname with H4 stamp and another passport with new surname.
While entering into US this January, on I-94, I wrote "Venkata Naga Sunita" Last name: "Naveena". In March, DMV ppl told me that the name in the I-94 should match with Visa". When, I applied for H1B in May with this new surname and attached this I-94 that has new surname "Naveena".
During H1B processing, I had to visit my home country on emergency purpose and got approval of H1B on Sept 7th, which is valid only from Oct 2nd. I re-entered to US on Sept10th and wrote my last name as "Prachina" on I-94(to match with current H4 Visa with which I am entering US). When I recived my papers this week, I was happy to see that my Change of Status is approved and surprised to see that my name on the I-797 and attached I-94 is printed as "Sunita V" Last Name:"Naveena".
Now, the I-94 number and name that are present on my I-797 are not matching that are attached to my passport. Is this OK or going to create any problems in future(SSN or stamping)..
hairstyles for mobile nokia 5233.
diqingshen
01-23 01:37 PM
Immigration Reform Efforts Begin Anew in 110th Congress
01/22/2007
Shortly after Congress convened for the 110th Congress on January 4, 2007, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) both expressed their respective desire to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Majority Leader Reid introduced Senate bill S. 9, Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, to indicate the Senate's commitment to address the issue this Congress. S. 9 does not actually include any actual legislative language. Instead, it contains a "sense of Congress" that Congress should pass legislation "to provide for more effective border and employment enforcement, to prevent illegal immigration, and to reform and rationalize avenues for legal immigration." S. 9 sets the tone for future legislation, which is expected to come from the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Additionally, Senators Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Larry Craig (R-ID) and a group of bipartisan cosponsors introduced S. 340, the Agricultural Job Opportunity, Benefits, and Security Act (AgJOBS). AgJOBS was part of the Senate Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act from last year. The bill would create a "Blue Card" program, under which agricultural workers who worked the lesser of 863 hours or 150 days in a two-year period may apply for a Blue Card within two years of the bill's enactment. The Blue Cards would be encrypted with biometric identifiers, and would be machine-readable. Furthermore, the worker would be able to adjust to permanent resident status by working at least 100 days for five years or 150 days for three years.
In addition to AgJOBS, Senator Feinstein introduced, with Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), S. 276, the Passport and Visa Fraud Prevention Act. This bill would add a new, criminal ground to penalize trafficking in 10 or more passports, U.S. or foreign, or visas with a maximum term of imprisonment of 20 years. The bill would confer extraterritorial jurisdiction over these offenses, meaning the United States could prosecute individuals who may have committed a passport fraud crime while abroad. In addition, the bill would criminalize the actions of those sham attorneys and others who engage in schemes to defraud foreign nationals based on immigration laws. Furthermore, the bill directs the Attorney General to promulgate regulations to ensure that the prosecution of these crimes is in keeping with current U.S. treaty obligations relating to refugees (which states that refugees carrying false passports should not be prosecuted).
In the House, Representatives Howard Berman (D-CA) and Chris Cannon (R-UT) introduced H.R. 371, the companion bill to the Senate's AgJOBS. Representative Jo Ann David (R-VA) introduced the Intercountry Adoption Reform Act (ICARE) of 2007, H.R. 120, which is intended to facilitate overseas adoptions by American parents. Representative Philip English (R-PA) introduced the Secure Travel and Counterterrorism Partnership Act, which would expand visa waiver privileges to nationals of countries that are allies of the United States in the war on terrorism. Representative Elton Gallegly (R-CA) introduced H.R. 133, Citizenship Reform Act of 2007, which would limit citizenship by birth to children born to at least one permanent resident or citizen parent. Representative Gallegly also introduced H.R. 132, which would impose criminal penalties for those who unlawfully reenter the United States after having been granted "voluntary departure." Finally, Representative Gene Green (D-TX) introduced H.R. 147, which would exempt elementary and secondary schools from the fee imposed on employers filing petitions with respect to non-immigrant workers under the H-1B program.
Several members of this new Congress offered bills on immigration enforcement. On January 9, the House, as part of the new leadership's 100-hour agenda, passed House bill H.R. 1, a bill implementing the "9/11 Commission" recommendations, by a vote of 299-128. Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) of the House Homeland Security Committee introduced this bill that would, among other things, appropriate additional resources to the Human Trafficking Center and also establish a Border Intelligence Fusion Center Program. Other enforcement bills introduced in the House include H.R. 26, Criminal Alien Accountability Act, introduced by Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) to establish minimum prison terms for specified categories of criminals re-entering the United States after having been removed previously. Representative Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) introduced H.R. 78, American Child Support Enforcement Immigration Act, which would bar family-based immigration petitions by one who owes child support.
Worksite enforcement also received early attention in the 110th Congress. Representative David Dreier (R-CA) introduced H.R. 98, Illegal Immigration Enforcement and Social Security Protection Act of 2007. Representative Dreier introduced the same bill in the last Congress and the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the bill in 2005. The bill would direct the Social Security Administration to upgrade the technology for a new social security card made of durable plastic that would contain anti-tampering technology and a magnetic strip that employers could scan to check employment eligibility against an "employment eligibility database." All those seeking employment, including U.S. citizens, would be required to hold such a card. Employers using the system would have a good faith defense in cases concerning the inadvertent hiring of illegal workers. While enforcement proponents supported the bill last Congress, it did raise concerns among the privacy advocates. In addition to H.R. 98, another bill dealing with worksite enforcement was introduced in the House. Representative Ken Calvert (R-CA) introduced H.R. 19, which would require employers to participate in an electronic employment eligibility system. The bill would phase in compliance requirements over a seven-year period, according to the number of persons employed. The bill would also establish sanctions for noncompliance and provide for voluntary participation by entities not required to participate.
Notwithstanding the number of bills that have already been introduced this Congress, most observers expect an effort in both the House and the Senate to include all immigration legislation into a comprehensive reform package. If, as expected, the package resembles the bill that the Senate passed in May of 2006, it will include provisions for border and interior enforcement, sanctions against employers who hire undocumented workers, legalization of the currently undocumented, and admission of new workers of all skill levels, including highly-educated professionals. More details about the Comprehensive Reform proposal is expected to become available soon.
The majority of lawmakers agree to address these areas in the comprehensive reform bill. However, there most certainly will be intense debate, as occurred in the last Congress, regarding its details. While the debate last year focused mostly on whether and how to legalize the undocumented, the debate this year--because of the new majority--may shift its focus to whether and how many new guest workers to admit in light of concerns raised by organized labor.
Copyright � 2007 by Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP
01/22/2007
Shortly after Congress convened for the 110th Congress on January 4, 2007, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) both expressed their respective desire to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation. Majority Leader Reid introduced Senate bill S. 9, Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007, to indicate the Senate's commitment to address the issue this Congress. S. 9 does not actually include any actual legislative language. Instead, it contains a "sense of Congress" that Congress should pass legislation "to provide for more effective border and employment enforcement, to prevent illegal immigration, and to reform and rationalize avenues for legal immigration." S. 9 sets the tone for future legislation, which is expected to come from the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Additionally, Senators Diane Feinstein (D-CA), Larry Craig (R-ID) and a group of bipartisan cosponsors introduced S. 340, the Agricultural Job Opportunity, Benefits, and Security Act (AgJOBS). AgJOBS was part of the Senate Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act from last year. The bill would create a "Blue Card" program, under which agricultural workers who worked the lesser of 863 hours or 150 days in a two-year period may apply for a Blue Card within two years of the bill's enactment. The Blue Cards would be encrypted with biometric identifiers, and would be machine-readable. Furthermore, the worker would be able to adjust to permanent resident status by working at least 100 days for five years or 150 days for three years.
In addition to AgJOBS, Senator Feinstein introduced, with Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), S. 276, the Passport and Visa Fraud Prevention Act. This bill would add a new, criminal ground to penalize trafficking in 10 or more passports, U.S. or foreign, or visas with a maximum term of imprisonment of 20 years. The bill would confer extraterritorial jurisdiction over these offenses, meaning the United States could prosecute individuals who may have committed a passport fraud crime while abroad. In addition, the bill would criminalize the actions of those sham attorneys and others who engage in schemes to defraud foreign nationals based on immigration laws. Furthermore, the bill directs the Attorney General to promulgate regulations to ensure that the prosecution of these crimes is in keeping with current U.S. treaty obligations relating to refugees (which states that refugees carrying false passports should not be prosecuted).
In the House, Representatives Howard Berman (D-CA) and Chris Cannon (R-UT) introduced H.R. 371, the companion bill to the Senate's AgJOBS. Representative Jo Ann David (R-VA) introduced the Intercountry Adoption Reform Act (ICARE) of 2007, H.R. 120, which is intended to facilitate overseas adoptions by American parents. Representative Philip English (R-PA) introduced the Secure Travel and Counterterrorism Partnership Act, which would expand visa waiver privileges to nationals of countries that are allies of the United States in the war on terrorism. Representative Elton Gallegly (R-CA) introduced H.R. 133, Citizenship Reform Act of 2007, which would limit citizenship by birth to children born to at least one permanent resident or citizen parent. Representative Gallegly also introduced H.R. 132, which would impose criminal penalties for those who unlawfully reenter the United States after having been granted "voluntary departure." Finally, Representative Gene Green (D-TX) introduced H.R. 147, which would exempt elementary and secondary schools from the fee imposed on employers filing petitions with respect to non-immigrant workers under the H-1B program.
Several members of this new Congress offered bills on immigration enforcement. On January 9, the House, as part of the new leadership's 100-hour agenda, passed House bill H.R. 1, a bill implementing the "9/11 Commission" recommendations, by a vote of 299-128. Chairman Bennie Thompson (D-MS) of the House Homeland Security Committee introduced this bill that would, among other things, appropriate additional resources to the Human Trafficking Center and also establish a Border Intelligence Fusion Center Program. Other enforcement bills introduced in the House include H.R. 26, Criminal Alien Accountability Act, introduced by Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) to establish minimum prison terms for specified categories of criminals re-entering the United States after having been removed previously. Representative Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) introduced H.R. 78, American Child Support Enforcement Immigration Act, which would bar family-based immigration petitions by one who owes child support.
Worksite enforcement also received early attention in the 110th Congress. Representative David Dreier (R-CA) introduced H.R. 98, Illegal Immigration Enforcement and Social Security Protection Act of 2007. Representative Dreier introduced the same bill in the last Congress and the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the bill in 2005. The bill would direct the Social Security Administration to upgrade the technology for a new social security card made of durable plastic that would contain anti-tampering technology and a magnetic strip that employers could scan to check employment eligibility against an "employment eligibility database." All those seeking employment, including U.S. citizens, would be required to hold such a card. Employers using the system would have a good faith defense in cases concerning the inadvertent hiring of illegal workers. While enforcement proponents supported the bill last Congress, it did raise concerns among the privacy advocates. In addition to H.R. 98, another bill dealing with worksite enforcement was introduced in the House. Representative Ken Calvert (R-CA) introduced H.R. 19, which would require employers to participate in an electronic employment eligibility system. The bill would phase in compliance requirements over a seven-year period, according to the number of persons employed. The bill would also establish sanctions for noncompliance and provide for voluntary participation by entities not required to participate.
Notwithstanding the number of bills that have already been introduced this Congress, most observers expect an effort in both the House and the Senate to include all immigration legislation into a comprehensive reform package. If, as expected, the package resembles the bill that the Senate passed in May of 2006, it will include provisions for border and interior enforcement, sanctions against employers who hire undocumented workers, legalization of the currently undocumented, and admission of new workers of all skill levels, including highly-educated professionals. More details about the Comprehensive Reform proposal is expected to become available soon.
The majority of lawmakers agree to address these areas in the comprehensive reform bill. However, there most certainly will be intense debate, as occurred in the last Congress, regarding its details. While the debate last year focused mostly on whether and how to legalize the undocumented, the debate this year--because of the new majority--may shift its focus to whether and how many new guest workers to admit in light of concerns raised by organized labor.
Copyright � 2007 by Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP
pitha
02-14 06:22 PM
You mean to say CIR will be introduced to the immigration or judiciary senate committee or introduce directly to the senate. If it is introduced directly to the senate floor that will save a lot of time, on the flip side it will become difficult to add or change provisions if it is directly introduced to the senate bypassing the senate judiciary and immigration committee
I called Senator Ed Kennedy's office and was told that CIR is likely to be introduced in early March something like first week. They of course told me that there are no guarantees, but more a reasonable probability.
I called Senator Ed Kennedy's office and was told that CIR is likely to be introduced in early March something like first week. They of course told me that there are no guarantees, but more a reasonable probability.
NolaIndian32
02-11 09:36 AM
I support chanduv23! He is like our cheer leader, and we need one (or several) for IV and for this current campaign.
Thanks to the all the on-going reminders, encouragement and requests, I have collected 52 letters thus far with more than 50 in the works. I will report a final tally shortly.
Thanks to the all the on-going reminders, encouragement and requests, I have collected 52 letters thus far with more than 50 in the works. I will report a final tally shortly.
