cygent
01-06 01:25 PM
Thank you for your kind words Everybody!!
gc28262: I don't think $485 on AOS is out of the question! It feels like I have been infused with energy and so am able to better focus on career/future.
seahawks: True
pappu: You are welcome
gc28262: I don't think $485 on AOS is out of the question! It feels like I have been infused with energy and so am able to better focus on career/future.
seahawks: True
pappu: You are welcome
wallpaper jamie hammer wallpapers.
sapota
10-18 05:53 PM
What�s the logic behind USCIS receiving 500,000 Naturalization Applications in July and August 2007? How do the VISA numbers being current relate to Naturalization?!?!?!?!
This due to increased fee coming to effect after July.
This due to increased fee coming to effect after July.
LostInGCProcess
09-02 10:40 AM
This is not correct. The OP's status is not determined by what he files in the I-9 form. The determining factor is the I-94 form, the latest one that is valid. If the OP got an I-94 attached to his I-797 form (usually one does), then s/he is in H1-B from the day printed on the I-94 form regardless how long does the EAD remain valid.
AFAIK, if the OP wishes to remain on F-1 EAD, s/he can go out of the country before the H1-B I-94 starting date (Oct 1?) and reenter US on F-1 visa (i.e., the I-94 given at the port of entry would be for F-1). I do not know if there is any risk involved, or what would happen to the H1-B approval.
---------
I am not a lawyer. Use at your own risk any information given by me.
I think you are confused with the question. There is no mention of F1. The question is: If a person is on H1 and also has an EAD, what factor determines the switch from H1 to EAD? Are you suggesting one must travel out and in of the country to get the status changed from H1 to EAD? I don't think thats correct.
Please read the question clearly and don't get confused. F1 and H1 are different....but one can have both H1 and EAD (when I-485 is pending).
AFAIK, if the OP wishes to remain on F-1 EAD, s/he can go out of the country before the H1-B I-94 starting date (Oct 1?) and reenter US on F-1 visa (i.e., the I-94 given at the port of entry would be for F-1). I do not know if there is any risk involved, or what would happen to the H1-B approval.
---------
I am not a lawyer. Use at your own risk any information given by me.
I think you are confused with the question. There is no mention of F1. The question is: If a person is on H1 and also has an EAD, what factor determines the switch from H1 to EAD? Are you suggesting one must travel out and in of the country to get the status changed from H1 to EAD? I don't think thats correct.
Please read the question clearly and don't get confused. F1 and H1 are different....but one can have both H1 and EAD (when I-485 is pending).
2011 jamie hammer wallpapers.
LC2002
07-10 12:11 PM
I mailed my EAD renewal (Paper filing) with priority mail on 06/23/08 and was received at TSC on 06/26/08 but check has not been en-cashed yet and obviously no receipt. Any body in similar situation? Wanted to know how long it should take get receipt.
more...
GC_Q
04-18 10:21 AM
Hello Prasadn,
Could you please post what action have you taken in your wife's case? Your answer might help many people in similar situation.
Thanks in advance
Could you please post what action have you taken in your wife's case? Your answer might help many people in similar situation.
Thanks in advance
never_giveup
11-05 03:13 PM
Forget about comprehensive bills. With the gridlock in Washington, and both parties trying to gain points for 2012, nothing meaningful will happen !!!!!
more...
neeidd
11-09 06:06 PM
Hi ,
I am planning to use AP for re-enter to USA. Could someone please let me know the list the documents that I should carry ?
Thanks
I am planning to use AP for re-enter to USA. Could someone please let me know the list the documents that I should carry ?
Thanks
2010 jaime hammer picture pack; jamie hammer wallpapers. japanese model wallpaper
HV000
01-15 12:51 PM
$1000 is a lot for Premium Processing and VSC is profiting a lot from this. They are running a business for sure....
Its only extensions which are a long time.
Its only extensions which are a long time.
more...
krishna_brc
05-16 12:02 PM
Hello Friends,
I am planning to apply Canada PR... here is my status...
Filed 485... currently working on EAD... no H1 any more... employer didn't extend it...
1. Should i qualify IELTS to prove english language ability... inspite of having 18 yrs of education with medium of instruction as english?
2. Since i do not have h1 any more and am on PAROLE status.... will it be difficult for me to prove that i have "real intent" of moving to Canada after getting PR?
I would appreciate any one who can throw some light on this.
Thanks,
Krishna
I am planning to apply Canada PR... here is my status...
Filed 485... currently working on EAD... no H1 any more... employer didn't extend it...
1. Should i qualify IELTS to prove english language ability... inspite of having 18 yrs of education with medium of instruction as english?
2. Since i do not have h1 any more and am on PAROLE status.... will it be difficult for me to prove that i have "real intent" of moving to Canada after getting PR?
I would appreciate any one who can throw some light on this.
Thanks,
Krishna
hair jamie hammer wallpapers.
WaitingForMyGC
09-26 11:16 AM
Congratulations..would you change ur IV handle now to GC_ROCKS or something :-)
more...
shana04
02-01 06:09 AM
There is a seperate thread on this. Look it up.
can some one point to the right thread. Thanks in advance
can some one point to the right thread. Thanks in advance
hot latest bollywood wallpaper. jamie hammer wallpapers. Audrey Tautou Wallpaper
sduddukuri
04-07 07:56 PM
We didnot file MTR. As per my lawyer, MTR takes around 2-3 months and if in case MTR gets denied then the total time (from the date of denial) will considered as illegal and it will create more problems. I also went along with my wife to chennai embassy(both H1 and H4 renwal ), they just asked me my paystubs and about my company . they didnot ask my wife any questions.
more...
house Wallpapers Charm jaime hammer
saketkapur
12-02 06:58 PM
This in from Ron Gotcher website....I guess they are reading our letters.....
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received some very good news over the weekend. In October and November, our office was contacted by a number of adjustment of status applicants who had received denials based on "revocations" of their approved I-140 petitions by former employers. All of these applicants had AOS applications that had been pending for more than 180 days before they left their sponsoring employers. They also had approved I-140 petitions. Nonetheless, vindictive employers in each case attempted to revoke the approved I-140 petitions. The CIS accepted these "revocations" and promptly denied the AOS applications. We were contacted by six different individuals with these types of cases and we filed motions to reconsider in their cases.
Earlier, in September, we handled this type of case and the MTR was granted and the denial successfully reversed. This happened before any of these October/November cases came in or were filed.
I was disappointed to see that the CIS was still attempting to deny cases on this basis. There is absolutely no law to support this type of denial and, in fact, such denials are directly contrary to both statutory law and explicit CIS policy.
I was gratified to see that all six of the MTRs we field in October/November were granted and the denials reversed. I am also encouraged that the CIS accepted our request to reopen the denials of the dependents as well, on their own motion, and spare the pricipal applicants the cost of paying filing fees for MTRs for the denials of dependents' AOS applications.
I hope this means that the supervisors at the service centers involved are now aware of the blatant illegality of these types of denials and will put and end to them in the future. We can only hope that we have seen an end to this nonsense.
__________________
Good news concerning AOS denials based on I-140 revocations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We received some very good news over the weekend. In October and November, our office was contacted by a number of adjustment of status applicants who had received denials based on "revocations" of their approved I-140 petitions by former employers. All of these applicants had AOS applications that had been pending for more than 180 days before they left their sponsoring employers. They also had approved I-140 petitions. Nonetheless, vindictive employers in each case attempted to revoke the approved I-140 petitions. The CIS accepted these "revocations" and promptly denied the AOS applications. We were contacted by six different individuals with these types of cases and we filed motions to reconsider in their cases.
Earlier, in September, we handled this type of case and the MTR was granted and the denial successfully reversed. This happened before any of these October/November cases came in or were filed.
I was disappointed to see that the CIS was still attempting to deny cases on this basis. There is absolutely no law to support this type of denial and, in fact, such denials are directly contrary to both statutory law and explicit CIS policy.
I was gratified to see that all six of the MTRs we field in October/November were granted and the denials reversed. I am also encouraged that the CIS accepted our request to reopen the denials of the dependents as well, on their own motion, and spare the pricipal applicants the cost of paying filing fees for MTRs for the denials of dependents' AOS applications.
I hope this means that the supervisors at the service centers involved are now aware of the blatant illegality of these types of denials and will put and end to them in the future. We can only hope that we have seen an end to this nonsense.
__________________
tattoo jamie hammer wallpapers.
.jpg "Rachel Mcadams Wallpaper; jamie hammer wallpapers. Orange Movie Wallpapers")
skark
08-31 08:35 AM
I need some references of good consulting companies that have direct vending relationships with big companies. I will be looking out for contracting jobs since my current contract will come to an end soon and dont want to be on bench.
more...
pictures japanese model wallpaper. jamie hammer wallpapers. cameron diaz wallpaper
transpass
08-04 11:17 AM
Hey, great example and at a good time.
....Now that PD is current for a large number of EB2s, you will see approvals coming randomly (not in order of PDs or RDs); largely due to inefficiency of USCIS. They simply dont have enough resources or mechanism to utilize current resources to deal with what they are dealing with. And so, we come across issues like these. It is unfortunate and sad that things at USCIS are running worse than any government office in third world countries....
May be we should suggest CIS that anyone of us at IV can VOLUNTEER for CIS so that they have more resources...
I think we can do a fantastic job in sorting the thousands of mail pieces according RD, PD, etc. In that way everyone will be happy...The immigrant community will be happy because now everything is in FIFO order and CIS will be happy because they cannot be blamed for approving cases haphazardly without following FIFO rule...:D
....Now that PD is current for a large number of EB2s, you will see approvals coming randomly (not in order of PDs or RDs); largely due to inefficiency of USCIS. They simply dont have enough resources or mechanism to utilize current resources to deal with what they are dealing with. And so, we come across issues like these. It is unfortunate and sad that things at USCIS are running worse than any government office in third world countries....
May be we should suggest CIS that anyone of us at IV can VOLUNTEER for CIS so that they have more resources...
I think we can do a fantastic job in sorting the thousands of mail pieces according RD, PD, etc. In that way everyone will be happy...The immigrant community will be happy because now everything is in FIFO order and CIS will be happy because they cannot be blamed for approving cases haphazardly without following FIFO rule...:D
dresses Jaime Hammer: .
ampudhukode
01-14 05:03 PM
TiE is a good place too. Of late it has become very crowded I heard. If you have a specific area( ie. Wireless, Semiconductor, Enterprise Software) that you are interested in there will def be SIGs(Special Interest Groups) for these in most orgs and you can join them and network your way through.
more...
makeup jamie hammer wallpapers.
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)
girlfriend Rachel Mcadams Wallpaper; jamie hammer wallpapers. Orange Movie Wallpapers
wonderlust
09-27 04:34 PM
You are wrong! I am not indian, my friends from China, Sweden, Poland, Russia, Philipine, and Vietnam were there. You just did not see the pics.:D
Ras, looking at the photo at the rally, I think you got the point. Not much attended and I don't see any other nationals there.
Ras, looking at the photo at the rally, I think you got the point. Not much attended and I don't see any other nationals there.
hairstyles jamie hammer wallpapers. wallpapers of beautiful girls
Shujaat
05-14 02:21 PM
Hi
orion
11-07 05:01 PM
Yes i had also applied OCI for my child about 6 months back and was denied since we parents hold indian citizenship. Does anybody know that registering every 6 months is a must ? Some of my friends have permanentely gone back to India i am not sure what they are doing though since there kids hold US Citizenship. Any infomation on this will be helpful.
- A child under age 16 (with any visa, including PIO) don't need to register with FRRO. But many Indian immigration officials conveniently forget this and harass you. So you better take a print out from official Indian Government website.
- PIO card holder needs to register with FRRO when the stay exceeds 6 months for the first time and that registration is valid until PIO expires. PIO is valid for 15 years, so you will register once in 15 years at the most.
Google for references. If you don't find it, I will look up and post it.
- A child under age 16 (with any visa, including PIO) don't need to register with FRRO. But many Indian immigration officials conveniently forget this and harass you. So you better take a print out from official Indian Government website.
- PIO card holder needs to register with FRRO when the stay exceeds 6 months for the first time and that registration is valid until PIO expires. PIO is valid for 15 years, so you will register once in 15 years at the most.
Google for references. If you don't find it, I will look up and post it.
boston_gc
05-30 10:04 PM
Thank you everyone.
I did my share and sent the webfax.
I did my share and sent the webfax.
No comments:
Post a Comment