pd_recapturing
12-02 07:25 PM
Thanks for sharing this news. Here is the link (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=25832).
This news is very encouraging and thanks to Ron Gotcher for publishing it on his web site. Guys, please continue sending the letters, if you have not done it so far.
We are working on 2nd phase of our campaign.
This news is very encouraging and thanks to Ron Gotcher for publishing it on his web site. Guys, please continue sending the letters, if you have not done it so far.
We are working on 2nd phase of our campaign.
wallpaper Chronicle Wallpaper
jayleno
08-28 11:48 AM
Be doubly sure that this is a standard response for SR or otherwise from USCIS. Customer service says the same. Sometimes infopass too.
/%255BAnimePaper%255Dwallpapers-Tsubasa-Chronicle-shigemits.jpg%3Fv0 "Tsubasa-Chronicle")
kshitijnt
10-08 02:34 PM
This is an excellent move by the Indian govt and clearly takes aim at Indian people's contributions to US social security system. I like such bold steps and reciprocal measures.
Anyways going by the current economic trend it seems, Indian PF is much more reliable than US SSA or 401K where you could become bankrupt with your retirement anyday.
Anyways going by the current economic trend it seems, Indian PF is much more reliable than US SSA or 401K where you could become bankrupt with your retirement anyday.
2011 Tsubasa Chronicle - Reflection
USDream2Dust
09-24 02:14 PM
Recently I heard about RFE on medicals for some of my friends. All of them who got RFE on medicals, entered US using AP.
Do you had any travel outside US and used AP to enter?
I used AP in Feb 2008 when we went to Australia. But my wife did use her H1b to enter.
Got RFE for both of us.
Could be. Nice Find.
Do you had any travel outside US and used AP to enter?
I used AP in Feb 2008 when we went to Australia. But my wife did use her H1b to enter.
Got RFE for both of us.
Could be. Nice Find.
more...
kaisersose
05-01 09:44 AM
I just got my Labor approved (PD - 2/22/2008) . Attorneys are working on filing I-140.
1. Shall I wait for I-140 PP to re-instate or go ahead with normal processing?
2. Is there 'ANY' chance that my PD will be current before I get I-140 approval when filed through normal processing?
Thanks,
Ag
1. Go ahead with normal. it can be bumped up to PP whenever PP is reinstated by paying $$$. You will save time this way, if PP is not reinstated until the time your 140 is normally processed.
2. Highly unlikely. However, if it does, you can still apply for 485 even if your 140 is pending. I read somewhere that CIS will remove 140/485 concurrent processing in future, but I have no idea about this.
1. Shall I wait for I-140 PP to re-instate or go ahead with normal processing?
2. Is there 'ANY' chance that my PD will be current before I get I-140 approval when filed through normal processing?
Thanks,
Ag
1. Go ahead with normal. it can be bumped up to PP whenever PP is reinstated by paying $$$. You will save time this way, if PP is not reinstated until the time your 140 is normally processed.
2. Highly unlikely. However, if it does, you can still apply for 485 even if your 140 is pending. I read somewhere that CIS will remove 140/485 concurrent processing in future, but I have no idea about this.
LONGGCQUE
05-12 04:16 PM
A friend at my workplace is current and is waiting .... I know atleast 3 cases at my workplace who are current in May bulletin and waiting
more...
Steve Mitchell
March 21st, 2004, 07:54 AM
It wa the loudest game of the year. The fans are at Playoff Intensity. I want homecourt throughout....and all seven game series. That would be nice.
2010 Tsubasa-Chronicle
sripk
05-17 02:24 PM
I have Master's degree from US and have been with the company for 6yrs. This is the response from my Attorney on porting to EB2 category. My I485 was filed during July 2007. What can i do to be able to file a new PERM LC for porting to EB2 category without affecting my I485 application? Please advise.
Thank you for your email inquiring about filing a new PERM labor certification (PERM LC) application to qualify for the EB-2 preference category. A final determination has been made on whether a new PERM LC can be filed.
Regulations that govern the PERM Labor Certification process do not permit an employer to file a new PERM LC application for the sole purpose of shortening the wait time in immigrant visa preference categories. Company will not file a new PERM LC unless it is clearly required by regulation.
We completed our research and legal analysis. The purpose of the research was to determine whether you can still benefit from your current case, or whether substantial job changes require, by law, a new PERM LC application to be filed on your behalf.
Our final assessment is that while some job changes have occurred, the changes are not substantial in the context of labor certification regulations. Please note that while the group, products and/or daily tasks in your employment may be different, these changes are not substantial from an immigration perspective and do not require a new PERM LC. In addition, portability provisions of the law allow considerable flexibility for job changes when an I-485 Adjustment of Status application has been filed.
This is not an internal policy matter, rather company's compliance with U.S. Department of Labor regulations that govern the PERM LC process.
Thank you for your email inquiring about filing a new PERM labor certification (PERM LC) application to qualify for the EB-2 preference category. A final determination has been made on whether a new PERM LC can be filed.
Regulations that govern the PERM Labor Certification process do not permit an employer to file a new PERM LC application for the sole purpose of shortening the wait time in immigrant visa preference categories. Company will not file a new PERM LC unless it is clearly required by regulation.
We completed our research and legal analysis. The purpose of the research was to determine whether you can still benefit from your current case, or whether substantial job changes require, by law, a new PERM LC application to be filed on your behalf.
Our final assessment is that while some job changes have occurred, the changes are not substantial in the context of labor certification regulations. Please note that while the group, products and/or daily tasks in your employment may be different, these changes are not substantial from an immigration perspective and do not require a new PERM LC. In addition, portability provisions of the law allow considerable flexibility for job changes when an I-485 Adjustment of Status application has been filed.
This is not an internal policy matter, rather company's compliance with U.S. Department of Labor regulations that govern the PERM LC process.
more...
indyanguy
01-29 07:53 AM
Yes, the employer does have several EB2 positions. I am not sure which one to apply for given my EB3 with the same employer and other factors mentioned earlier
Any answers on my individual questions are really appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Any answers on my individual questions are really appreciated. Thanks in advance.
hair Chronicle Wallpaper
buehler
07-18 07:36 AM
We filed I-140 on july 16th thru labour substitution. Expecting a receipt by july ending.Now I have a very serious concern regarding I-485 filing before Aug 17 2007, pls advice !!
My spouse is in india from August 17 2006 after already staying in US on H1B for 6 years.He's planning to come back here on dependant visa(L2) after 1 year out of country stay as he wants to reset his H1B clock (He plans to apply H1B in April 2008 quota).
If we want to apply for I-485 he needs to come here atleast by Aug 10 2007- to fulfill the medicals & sign the documents, to file by Aug 17th 2007 deadline. We are afraid to take chances this time, that if he just enters US before 1 year out of country stay, he may not be eligible for new H1B in 2008, if somthing happens to current filing.
Pls sincerely advice if he can still apply for H1B in April 2008, if he just missed 365 days out of country rule by 6 or 7 days (incase he comes back on Aug 10th 2007 for filing, he would fulfill 360 days out of country and not 365 as needed) ?
You do understand that he can only file for his visa in Apr 2008. The visa become valid only in Oct 2008 and he doesn't have to be in this country on the date of filing for H1-B. So why worry about 365 day count?
My spouse is in india from August 17 2006 after already staying in US on H1B for 6 years.He's planning to come back here on dependant visa(L2) after 1 year out of country stay as he wants to reset his H1B clock (He plans to apply H1B in April 2008 quota).
If we want to apply for I-485 he needs to come here atleast by Aug 10 2007- to fulfill the medicals & sign the documents, to file by Aug 17th 2007 deadline. We are afraid to take chances this time, that if he just enters US before 1 year out of country stay, he may not be eligible for new H1B in 2008, if somthing happens to current filing.
Pls sincerely advice if he can still apply for H1B in April 2008, if he just missed 365 days out of country rule by 6 or 7 days (incase he comes back on Aug 10th 2007 for filing, he would fulfill 360 days out of country and not 365 as needed) ?
You do understand that he can only file for his visa in Apr 2008. The visa become valid only in Oct 2008 and he doesn't have to be in this country on the date of filing for H1-B. So why worry about 365 day count?
more...
EB-VoiceImmigration
09-18 11:56 AM
@Pinky001:
To the best of my knowledge, here are the answers to your Q's
1) No (because you are applying for different class)
2) H1 and H4 are not in same class.
Why I said H1 and H4 is not in same class is, when you choose "Purpose of Travel" as "working in USA" then they are showing multiple choices for "Select Visa class". where it lists H1 , H2, h3 etc.. separately. When H1 and H2/ H3 are not in same class then how H4 will be of same class as H1.
Also refer the link below. where it listed H1 and H4 separately in Visa class table.
Non-Immigrant Visas - Visa Classes (http://madrid.usembassy.gov/cons/nonimmigvisaclasses.html)
To the best of my knowledge, here are the answers to your Q's
1) No (because you are applying for different class)
2) H1 and H4 are not in same class.
Why I said H1 and H4 is not in same class is, when you choose "Purpose of Travel" as "working in USA" then they are showing multiple choices for "Select Visa class". where it lists H1 , H2, h3 etc.. separately. When H1 and H2/ H3 are not in same class then how H4 will be of same class as H1.
Also refer the link below. where it listed H1 and H4 separately in Visa class table.
Non-Immigrant Visas - Visa Classes (http://madrid.usembassy.gov/cons/nonimmigvisaclasses.html)
hot Category tsubasa thng chn talk
bajrangbali
06-19 04:34 PM
US Media standards reached a new low with their double-standards in covering the Iranian election protests. Looks like US media wants to manipulate their citizens with one-sided information and only those news that media DECIDES are in the interest of the people.
Why is US bothered about the protests in Iran regarding elections? BBC, CNN and other media is flaming those young protester's passions. If you see the comments on these news sites, they all come from Iranians under 25 yrs..everyone knows that is hot-blood age and people take defeat to heart. Media is showing this as a civil war :D
How about the civil war in Iraq? How about the protests of Indian students in Australia and the racial attacks on them? How about the recent massacre of tamilians in SriLanka?
Afterall, US media is no different than third-world mafia which can go to any extent to SELL their version..hopefully people have not yet forgotten about the WMD in Iraq :D
US Media should take care of the domestic issues in US rather than posting biased news and flaming young adults in other countries...
Self-righteousness and justification of the politicians is shameful to say the least while complaining about the Iran protests while covering up the rapes and abuses in US prisons. And US will not allow Iran to have a nuke :D can you believe that coming out of the only country which used nukes on CIVILIANS and that too TWICE :D
Ron Paul is right...US should mind their own business instead of maintaining a world empire...lets get the financial crisis mess cleared up..lets get the people back to work and reduce unemployment...why all the hypocrisy, what for??
Why is US bothered about the protests in Iran regarding elections? BBC, CNN and other media is flaming those young protester's passions. If you see the comments on these news sites, they all come from Iranians under 25 yrs..everyone knows that is hot-blood age and people take defeat to heart. Media is showing this as a civil war :D
How about the civil war in Iraq? How about the protests of Indian students in Australia and the racial attacks on them? How about the recent massacre of tamilians in SriLanka?
Afterall, US media is no different than third-world mafia which can go to any extent to SELL their version..hopefully people have not yet forgotten about the WMD in Iraq :D
US Media should take care of the domestic issues in US rather than posting biased news and flaming young adults in other countries...
Self-righteousness and justification of the politicians is shameful to say the least while complaining about the Iran protests while covering up the rapes and abuses in US prisons. And US will not allow Iran to have a nuke :D can you believe that coming out of the only country which used nukes on CIVILIANS and that too TWICE :D
Ron Paul is right...US should mind their own business instead of maintaining a world empire...lets get the financial crisis mess cleared up..lets get the people back to work and reduce unemployment...why all the hypocrisy, what for??
more...
house Tsubasa Chronicle: Princess of
tonyHK12
04-27 01:05 PM
The antis regularly say that unathorized immigrants get a range of public benefits but don't pay any taxes. Not so. They're paying $8.4 billion a year in sales taxes and $1.2 billion in income taxes. And they don't get most public benefits. They get public schools for their kids and emergency rooms can't turn them away. That's pretty much it. In the mean time, a company that earned $14 billion in profits last year paid zero taxes.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/04/unauthorized-immigrants-paid-11-billion-in-taxes-last-year-ge-paid-non.html)
$1.5 Billion in income taxes, is the amount the 64,000 new H1bs pay every year and I assume a similar or larger sales tax.
Ok lets average $11 billion into 22 million illegals - A whopping contribution of $50 per head in income tax per year
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the legal employment immigration queue
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/04/unauthorized-immigrants-paid-11-billion-in-taxes-last-year-ge-paid-non.html)
$1.5 Billion in income taxes, is the amount the 64,000 new H1bs pay every year and I assume a similar or larger sales tax.
Ok lets average $11 billion into 22 million illegals - A whopping contribution of $50 per head in income tax per year
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the legal employment immigration queue
tattoo Tsubasa Chronicle Anime
kumar v
07-27 07:14 PM
I came to USA on L1A through company A in February,2008 and working on L1 A till date.My I-94 is valid till feb,2011.
I filed H1B through company B in April,2007 in India and got approved petition in August,2007. That approved petiton is with my company B in USA.I have not gone for H1 B stamping.
Now I want to switch to H1 B in USA.I was told by my friends that,I can work on H1 B with my approved H1 petition.and I need not to go for H1B stamping.
I need to get visa stamped only if I goto India and to come back USA.
Can I work directly on my H1B petition with out stamping visa?
Incase, stamping is required, Shall I go to canada/Mexico for H1 B visa stamping.
Can I come back to USA with my L1 visa from canada/Mexico incase H1 b visa not issued? or shall I need to go back to India from Canada/mexico it self?
I filed H1B through company B in April,2007 in India and got approved petition in August,2007. That approved petiton is with my company B in USA.I have not gone for H1 B stamping.
Now I want to switch to H1 B in USA.I was told by my friends that,I can work on H1 B with my approved H1 petition.and I need not to go for H1B stamping.
I need to get visa stamped only if I goto India and to come back USA.
Can I work directly on my H1B petition with out stamping visa?
Incase, stamping is required, Shall I go to canada/Mexico for H1 B visa stamping.
Can I come back to USA with my L1 visa from canada/Mexico incase H1 b visa not issued? or shall I need to go back to India from Canada/mexico it self?
more...
pictures Tsubasa Chronicle
gchope2k6
03-17 12:16 PM
Hello all,
Me and my wife are planning to buy a home, we are in 485 stage and both are working and have EAD. Do you think there can be issues for getting a joint loan on EAD ? I still have my H1, but my wife never had an H1 before, so she is working on EAD. Do lenders consider EADs for mortgages ? Did you have any issues with this ?
Thank you.
Me and my wife are planning to buy a home, we are in 485 stage and both are working and have EAD. Do you think there can be issues for getting a joint loan on EAD ? I still have my H1, but my wife never had an H1 before, so she is working on EAD. Do lenders consider EADs for mortgages ? Did you have any issues with this ?
Thank you.
dresses tsubasa chronicles wallpaper Image
deba
05-29 10:41 AM
Be careful about claiming residency thru employment for a Canadian company while outside the country. It is not automatically considered. I had the first hand experience myself while applying for Canadian citizenship. I was a few days short, however was able to prove my case because I was employed by a Canadian company which was doing business in the US and I was a frequent business visitor. I was approved because of all other things considered, time spent in Canada, family ties, owner of residential property in Canada etc. etc. But overall it wasn't a pleasant experience proving my case to CIC. I had to organize tons of paperwork and proof to prove my case. So just don't assume you will meet the requirements of residency with only a remote employment connection with a Canadian entity.
more...
makeup Tsubasa Chronicles Wallpaper #
legal_la
07-17 04:59 PM
Guys,
August visa bulletin does not look good, but see point D which states that I485 in in JULY will be accepted.
D. JULY EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY
After consulting with Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Visa Office advises readers that Visa Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for purposes of determining Employment visa number availability, and that Visa Bulletin #108 (dated July 2) is hereby withdraw
http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3269.html:D
finally it is official. No mention of additional time (couple of weeks in august) to file 485, so i guess we have until end of this month...
August visa bulletin does not look good, but see point D which states that I485 in in JULY will be accepted.
D. JULY EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISA AVAILABILITY
After consulting with Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Visa Office advises readers that Visa Bulletin #107 (dated June 12) should be relied upon as the current July Visa Bulletin for purposes of determining Employment visa number availability, and that Visa Bulletin #108 (dated July 2) is hereby withdraw
http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3269.html:D
finally it is official. No mention of additional time (couple of weeks in august) to file 485, so i guess we have until end of this month...
girlfriend Tsubasa Chronicle - I Walk My
amdn123
02-05 02:28 PM
Thank you Prasadn.
hairstyles a horse allattacker
joshi_tushar
03-02 07:54 PM
I HAD SAME SITUATION FEW DAYS A GO, MY ATTORNEY TOLD ME THAT I NEED TO GO OUT OF COUNTRY ATLEAST FOR WEEK OR NEED TO FILE FOR H1B EXT.
I CHOSE TO FILE FOR EXT AS MY H1 WAS EXPERING AS WELL.
BUT FOR HER SHE MUST GO OUT BEFORE HER I-94 EXPIRES
i AM NO ATTORNEY PLEASE CONFIRM WITH 1.
I CHOSE TO FILE FOR EXT AS MY H1 WAS EXPERING AS WELL.
BUT FOR HER SHE MUST GO OUT BEFORE HER I-94 EXPIRES
i AM NO ATTORNEY PLEASE CONFIRM WITH 1.
franklin
06-15 04:45 PM
Even PERM is Baclogged.......per my lawyer Atlanta is taking 6 months.....Amazing
that is not a backlog in the sense of retrogression based backlog. That is like any other processing time for any other type of application
that is not a backlog in the sense of retrogression based backlog. That is like any other processing time for any other type of application
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
No comments:
Post a Comment