walking_dude
10-25 03:47 PM
Indiana, wake up and smell coffee. Your neighbors in MI wish you good luck.
wallpaper cool hairstyles for girls with
Munna Bhai
02-08 12:59 PM
If its been more than 180 days since your 140 was approved, can you not use AC21 to move to a new job (similar). even if the old company revokes the 140, you will get RFE/NOID and you can reply back in specified time.
correct me if i am wrong.
180 days rule don't apply to I-140 as far as I know.
correct me if i am wrong.
180 days rule don't apply to I-140 as far as I know.
rajuram
01-15 01:47 AM
I think more members will join and people will be willing to contribute more if they see positive things happening. Right now we seem to be going no where. Even if a basic thing like filing for 485 during retrogression gets passed, people will gain confidence in IV and they will be willing to contribute money.
2011 cool hairstyles for short hair
whiteStallion
11-10 02:44 PM
For my recent in-laws trip, I took insurance from ICICI Lombard. As one of the previous poster mentioned they are tied up with United Healthcare and they give you an Identity Card from United Healthcare. I previously used United and they are pretty good. So its a reliable Insurance.
I took the platinum cover for my in-laws(age:mid 50s) and it came to around INR 16k for both of them for a 3 months stay, which I consider is reasonable, given a $ 250K coverage.
Previously when my parents came, I have taken ICICI Lombard. Though I was lucky enough that they did not have any medical issues and I did not need to show up at any doctor/hospital.
I took the platinum cover for my in-laws(age:mid 50s) and it came to around INR 16k for both of them for a 3 months stay, which I consider is reasonable, given a $ 250K coverage.
Previously when my parents came, I have taken ICICI Lombard. Though I was lucky enough that they did not have any medical issues and I did not need to show up at any doctor/hospital.
more...
chris
12-31 04:11 PM
Is your PD is current ? Goodluck any how.
My case was also transfered from Texas to Vermont. I spoke to our company's attorney and here is what they told me:
The USCIS is sharing its work load among the 4 service centers...the transfer is part of the administrative processing...I dont see any issues with it...so, dont worry about it...
Here is the online status on my case:
Current Status: Case Transfered to Another Office for Processing
On September 30, 2008, we transferred this case I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS to our VERMONT SERVICE CENTER location for processing and sent you a notice explaining this action.
I guess its happening randomly though but does not mean anything.
My case was also transfered from Texas to Vermont. I spoke to our company's attorney and here is what they told me:
The USCIS is sharing its work load among the 4 service centers...the transfer is part of the administrative processing...I dont see any issues with it...so, dont worry about it...
Here is the online status on my case:
Current Status: Case Transfered to Another Office for Processing
On September 30, 2008, we transferred this case I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS to our VERMONT SERVICE CENTER location for processing and sent you a notice explaining this action.
I guess its happening randomly though but does not mean anything.
Nov2004
08-24 06:18 PM
can you please let us know some details. I am in the same situation.
Nov2004, EB3, I140 approved and I485 applied.
1. what happens to the present ead, after filing the new I140.
2.After I140 do we have to apply for new I485?
It took almost 3 months to get the approval. Key points:
1. USCIS does not accept I-140 PP as the original Labor approval is not included.
2. I am not sure if USCIS requests a duplicate copy of labor from DOL or they locate the orginal labor in the old file.
3. Make sure you ask your employer to download the labor approval from DOL website and complete it (employer's signature and your signature) and send it along with the I-140 application.
Hope it helps....Good luck
Nov2004, EB3, I140 approved and I485 applied.
1. what happens to the present ead, after filing the new I140.
2.After I140 do we have to apply for new I485?
It took almost 3 months to get the approval. Key points:
1. USCIS does not accept I-140 PP as the original Labor approval is not included.
2. I am not sure if USCIS requests a duplicate copy of labor from DOL or they locate the orginal labor in the old file.
3. Make sure you ask your employer to download the labor approval from DOL website and complete it (employer's signature and your signature) and send it along with the I-140 application.
Hope it helps....Good luck
more...
cris
08-30 10:22 AM
many thanks to all you guys answered and clarified my issue .
2010 emo hairstyles for short hair
lavenyahs
12-19 04:56 PM
We went to Tijuana in 2003 from SanDiego. We just walked across the Border. But we stayed for only a couple of hours. Only while crossing into the US,people at the US checkpoint checked our Visa stamps and after scanning our passports allowed us to enter.
more...
thomachan72
11-10 02:47 PM
Never heard of this before. Wouldn't know what to do either. Can you call them and ask? or send an email? what does your attorney say? Was an educational evaluation done on this?
hair cool hairstyles for short hair
deba
12-10 12:40 PM
I have a question regarding the 180 day rule. I am a July 2nd filer, got EAD and AP. I-140 approved long time back in '06. So, I will be meeting the 180 day rule and I-140 approved criteria in jan/08.
My H1 expires in 12/08. In case I transfer my H1 to a new co. sometime next year, will I have to restart my GC process again? or will AC-21 kick in and the process will continue as is with me just waiting for GC and PD becoming current etc. Thanks
My H1 expires in 12/08. In case I transfer my H1 to a new co. sometime next year, will I have to restart my GC process again? or will AC-21 kick in and the process will continue as is with me just waiting for GC and PD becoming current etc. Thanks
more...
asdfgh
10-15 03:03 PM
Lawyers havent received notice yet either...does CSC only enter receipt dates or do they process EAD, AP etc. as well prior to transfers?
as far as i know CSC sending the transfer notices after issuing the receipts. Did u check with ur lawyer for receipts? .
as far as i know CSC sending the transfer notices after issuing the receipts. Did u check with ur lawyer for receipts? .
hot cool hairstyles for short hair
GcInLimbo
12-01 11:45 PM
Thanks for the response.
H1B extension was denied in Feb 2009 after almost 2 and half years of processing.
??: H-1B ext denied?
I spoke to my lawyer and he said it shouldn't be a problem.
Once again thank you very much for your response.
H1B extension was denied in Feb 2009 after almost 2 and half years of processing.
??: H-1B ext denied?
I spoke to my lawyer and he said it shouldn't be a problem.
Once again thank you very much for your response.
more...
house cool hairstyles for girls with
san3297
06-29 05:34 PM
Hi Martin,
Thanks once again for your reply with in no time.I really admire your service.I went through your Faqs but the part i dint understood is..
If you don't show the extension approval notice (maybe because you didn't know the case was approved before you returned), you will get just the old expiration date on your new I-94. This will then be the operative end date, not the extension date. This is because CIS has a "last action" rule, whereby the last status they give you is what governs. In this situation, the last action would be your admission until the visa and date.
As i get a new I94 attached with expiration date as my new 797 approval date(Assuming i get approval after my travel when i am in USA) .So my old I94 is valid till My present visa date and after that i have my New I 94 which is valid till my Extension approval date.So iam unable to get what complication i may get into.Only problem i can think of is if i dont get I 94 attached to my I 797 Approval Notice.Do let me know if iam missing anything.Thanks again.
Thanks once again for your reply with in no time.I really admire your service.I went through your Faqs but the part i dint understood is..
If you don't show the extension approval notice (maybe because you didn't know the case was approved before you returned), you will get just the old expiration date on your new I-94. This will then be the operative end date, not the extension date. This is because CIS has a "last action" rule, whereby the last status they give you is what governs. In this situation, the last action would be your admission until the visa and date.
As i get a new I94 attached with expiration date as my new 797 approval date(Assuming i get approval after my travel when i am in USA) .So my old I94 is valid till My present visa date and after that i have my New I 94 which is valid till my Extension approval date.So iam unable to get what complication i may get into.Only problem i can think of is if i dont get I 94 attached to my I 797 Approval Notice.Do let me know if iam missing anything.Thanks again.
tattoo Cool Hairstyles for Girls,
tnite
03-17 01:05 PM
Hi Friends,
I have a confusing situation here. Hope someone can help me with this. This is a bit complicated so please bear with me.
I fall under ROW. My first LC was filed in Feb 2005 under RIR and it was in BEC for a long time. So my company filed another LC under PERM in March 2007 which was approved very quickly and I-140 was filed for that.
Then in April 2007 the first LC (PD Feb 2005) was approved and we filed an I-140 for that as well. This was converted to PP and was approved very quickly.
Then in June 07 when my Feb 2005 PD became current we filed for 485 based on that older LC. However in the receipt notice the Priority Date box was blank which I did not notice till yesterday.
My other I-140 with PD March 2007 was pending till Jan 2008 and was approved in mid January. On the same day it was approved I noticed a soft LUD on my pending I-485 which has nothing to do with that I-140.
Now my question is, is it possible that USCIS mistakenly linked my recently approved I-140 (PD Mar 2007) to the pending I-1485? Is that possible? The reason for this worry is the soft LUD that saw on my 485 as mentioned above and the fact that my 485 receipt notice does not have a PD printed on it.
Is there anyway that I can verify which PD is linked to my 485 by contacting USCIS? I have heard of INFOPASS, would that help? If so how can I get an appointment? If as I suspect , the 485 is now linked to the wrong PD, is it difficult to have it corrected? Please let me know.
Also is it common to have the PD box blank in the 485 receipt notice?
Thanks in Advance!!!!!
When you filed I485 , you have to send a copy of the I140. If you had sent in the one with the old PD then thats what USCIS will go by.
Call USCIS custonmer service and see what they tell you.
I have a confusing situation here. Hope someone can help me with this. This is a bit complicated so please bear with me.
I fall under ROW. My first LC was filed in Feb 2005 under RIR and it was in BEC for a long time. So my company filed another LC under PERM in March 2007 which was approved very quickly and I-140 was filed for that.
Then in April 2007 the first LC (PD Feb 2005) was approved and we filed an I-140 for that as well. This was converted to PP and was approved very quickly.
Then in June 07 when my Feb 2005 PD became current we filed for 485 based on that older LC. However in the receipt notice the Priority Date box was blank which I did not notice till yesterday.
My other I-140 with PD March 2007 was pending till Jan 2008 and was approved in mid January. On the same day it was approved I noticed a soft LUD on my pending I-485 which has nothing to do with that I-140.
Now my question is, is it possible that USCIS mistakenly linked my recently approved I-140 (PD Mar 2007) to the pending I-1485? Is that possible? The reason for this worry is the soft LUD that saw on my 485 as mentioned above and the fact that my 485 receipt notice does not have a PD printed on it.
Is there anyway that I can verify which PD is linked to my 485 by contacting USCIS? I have heard of INFOPASS, would that help? If so how can I get an appointment? If as I suspect , the 485 is now linked to the wrong PD, is it difficult to have it corrected? Please let me know.
Also is it common to have the PD box blank in the 485 receipt notice?
Thanks in Advance!!!!!
When you filed I485 , you have to send a copy of the I140. If you had sent in the one with the old PD then thats what USCIS will go by.
Call USCIS custonmer service and see what they tell you.
more...
pictures pictures cool hairstyles for
sunny1000
07-23 01:38 AM
For Labor substitution cases, is there premium processing for I-140? Earlier, USCIS announced that from 05/18/2007 to 07/16/2007, it was stopping premium processing for Labor substitution cases. Any change now?
No PP for labor subs. No PP for other EB cases until 8/2/07 atleast. They may extend that because of the I-485 filings which will happen until 8/17.
No PP for labor subs. No PP for other EB cases until 8/2/07 atleast. They may extend that because of the I-485 filings which will happen until 8/17.
dresses teenage girl hairstyles
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
more...
makeup emo hairstyles for short hair
sonia_sd
09-15 05:17 PM
Last time CIR had sweet deal for Illegals ..
Pay $100 and get Z visa ( Work Permit ) .. --> GC --> Citizenship ---> Vote for ?? ..
For Legals ...go back and restart in new queue .. We dont want to skilled people be free of our companies. We expect you to be enslaved ..We are leader of Free world.
You are 100% correct. US congress has love about horses and their nutrition than human beings, we work like donkeys/slaves attached to all these companies without freedom. On top we pay taxes and follow laws inch by inch. No matter what their plan is but we are
Pay $100 and get Z visa ( Work Permit ) .. --> GC --> Citizenship ---> Vote for ?? ..
For Legals ...go back and restart in new queue .. We dont want to skilled people be free of our companies. We expect you to be enslaved ..We are leader of Free world.
You are 100% correct. US congress has love about horses and their nutrition than human beings, we work like donkeys/slaves attached to all these companies without freedom. On top we pay taxes and follow laws inch by inch. No matter what their plan is but we are
girlfriend short hair cuts middot; scene
questforgc
08-26 02:47 PM
Thanks for the info bluez. I think i will stick with my AOS.
hairstyles 2011 Cool Hair Styles Short
lostinbeta
10-20 02:44 AM
http://www.procreate.com/
You can find Painter 7 there. They have a trial... I might just download that :)
Anywho... I think painter is good for textures and things or something. David told me the difference before but I can't remember what exactly he said now.
You can find Painter 7 there. They have a trial... I might just download that :)
Anywho... I think painter is good for textures and things or something. David told me the difference before but I can't remember what exactly he said now.
laborfd
07-27 09:47 AM
Guys,
I just created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
-Vikram
Cool, good job, very useful :)
I just created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
-Vikram
Cool, good job, very useful :)
gbof
04-08 02:52 PM
Question regarding Current Immigration Status field on EAD renewal form:
I am applying for EAD renewal for my spouse. Currently she is on H-4 but I am soon planning to use EAD to start another job. I guess my spouse's status will also change from H-4 to AOS (I guess) at the same time. What should be current immigration status for my spouse when I have already started working on another job using EAD.
BTW, I used paper filing for both of us.
Thanks for your input.
I assume you are primary and she is derivative (as she is on H4). Now, If she has filed I-485, she is already in AOS irrespective of the fact that she is not using EAD.
I am applying for EAD renewal for my spouse. Currently she is on H-4 but I am soon planning to use EAD to start another job. I guess my spouse's status will also change from H-4 to AOS (I guess) at the same time. What should be current immigration status for my spouse when I have already started working on another job using EAD.
BTW, I used paper filing for both of us.
Thanks for your input.
I assume you are primary and she is derivative (as she is on H4). Now, If she has filed I-485, she is already in AOS irrespective of the fact that she is not using EAD.
