gcgreen
08-11 06:26 PM
IMO, the key criterion is "occupational classification" under which the new job falls under, not the technologies used. For example, it is logical to conclude that a Software Engineer position that requires programming in Java is in the same or similar occupational classification as a Software Engineer job that requires programming in .NET.
One could argue that .NET is a different technology than Java, but most if not all would agree they fall under the same/similar occupational classification.
So as long as you can make a strong case that the occupational classification for jobs is the same/similar, I don't think there is a problem.
Then again, I am not a lawyer and all that...
How much does technology come into picture? I changed jobs using AC21 and am on EAD, my new job utilizes only 50% of the skills from previous job and am getting trained in new technologies in the new job. I am not sure if the new employer will list all technologies mentioned in the labor, but will definitely list all those that are being used. Any comments?
One could argue that .NET is a different technology than Java, but most if not all would agree they fall under the same/similar occupational classification.
So as long as you can make a strong case that the occupational classification for jobs is the same/similar, I don't think there is a problem.
Then again, I am not a lawyer and all that...
How much does technology come into picture? I changed jobs using AC21 and am on EAD, my new job utilizes only 50% of the skills from previous job and am getting trained in new technologies in the new job. I am not sure if the new employer will list all technologies mentioned in the labor, but will definitely list all those that are being used. Any comments?
wallpaper This is what a human embryo
amit_p27
06-19 03:30 PM
Eb3/nsc/india
willwin
06-05 12:59 PM
I understand that is not a reliable source of tracking approval pattern, however, this is the only tracker we have available and this gives us fairly good idea about USCIS processing.
Based on , there are about 1200 Approvals for EB-2 (Including ROW, India and China) since Oct01 2007.
However, there are only 450 approvals for EB-3 (Including ROW, India and China) sine Oct01'2007.
So howcome they ran out of EB3 numbers when there are very few approvals for this year. I was hoping they will run out of EB2 numbers instead.
Any insight on this?
Thanks.
I guess that depends upon how many of the applicants have registered in .
If it is 1%, then CIS would have used 130,000 by now, if it was 2%, 65,000 used by now...
Based on , there are about 1200 Approvals for EB-2 (Including ROW, India and China) since Oct01 2007.
However, there are only 450 approvals for EB-3 (Including ROW, India and China) sine Oct01'2007.
So howcome they ran out of EB3 numbers when there are very few approvals for this year. I was hoping they will run out of EB2 numbers instead.
Any insight on this?
Thanks.
I guess that depends upon how many of the applicants have registered in .
If it is 1%, then CIS would have used 130,000 by now, if it was 2%, 65,000 used by now...
2011 first 8 weeks, the aby,
skd
01-10 12:47 PM
IV friends,
What are your inputs on Maternity Advantage, I got this information from Pregnancy Insurance.org
Also please provide me info, if any, on hospitals which provides maternity insurance.
** for pregnant with individual health insurance which does not cover maternity.
Based on my experience , Depending on type of delivery hospital bill for delivery can vary from 10,000 to 15,000 for Mom and 2000-3000 for new baby.
And prenatal bill around 4000 ( excluding all UltraSounds) One UltraSound Cost around 400-500 $.
So, If you don't have insurance total bill my about around 25,000.
Depending how far in pregnancy you are, One of my friend was in same situation he decided to take his wife to home country.
I am not discouraging you, But keep all this in mind before you take the decision.
I Hope and pray that you can get some kind of insurence
What are your inputs on Maternity Advantage, I got this information from Pregnancy Insurance.org
Also please provide me info, if any, on hospitals which provides maternity insurance.
** for pregnant with individual health insurance which does not cover maternity.
Based on my experience , Depending on type of delivery hospital bill for delivery can vary from 10,000 to 15,000 for Mom and 2000-3000 for new baby.
And prenatal bill around 4000 ( excluding all UltraSounds) One UltraSound Cost around 400-500 $.
So, If you don't have insurance total bill my about around 25,000.
Depending how far in pregnancy you are, One of my friend was in same situation he decided to take his wife to home country.
I am not discouraging you, But keep all this in mind before you take the decision.
I Hope and pray that you can get some kind of insurence
more...
sanju
12-18 10:24 AM
Sarcasm ? Or is he really our friend ? Bad at remembering names.
-M
That's ok, totally understand.
Sorry, I did not raise my arm to indicate that it was ALL sarcasm. Durbin is aginst H1B. Although his press release says that he is not against green cards, but thats just bull.
And if he is appointed Labor Secretary, that will be the last straw to break the camel's back.
.
-M
That's ok, totally understand.
Sorry, I did not raise my arm to indicate that it was ALL sarcasm. Durbin is aginst H1B. Although his press release says that he is not against green cards, but thats just bull.
And if he is appointed Labor Secretary, that will be the last straw to break the camel's back.
.
satishku_2000
01-03 07:13 PM
Definition of marriage according to the DOMA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act
more...
InTheMoment
04-22 05:08 PM
That may be true if you are not a AZ resident.
If you are an AZ resident, a AZ driver license is enough to prove your legal presence in the US. This is expressly stated in the Bill.
Be prepared to carry your H1B papers/EAD cards/I485 application papers and wait like a criminal while the cops check if you are legal or not after stopping you at the Phoenix Airport terminal, when you are waiting for your connecting flight, since your skin color was not white and you could be a potential illegal.
Also, be prepared for this to happen to your kids even though they might be US citizens.
- JK
If you are an AZ resident, a AZ driver license is enough to prove your legal presence in the US. This is expressly stated in the Bill.
Be prepared to carry your H1B papers/EAD cards/I485 application papers and wait like a criminal while the cops check if you are legal or not after stopping you at the Phoenix Airport terminal, when you are waiting for your connecting flight, since your skin color was not white and you could be a potential illegal.
Also, be prepared for this to happen to your kids even though they might be US citizens.
- JK
2010 hand of 21-week- old fetus
sanbaj
07-28 03:15 PM
Sanbaj,
Congrats for the GC !!!
You mentioned that both of your cases are under EB2, correct? Normally people will do interfile (PD Amendment) from one category to another, like EB3 to EB2.
Can you please share why you ported in the same category? Or because of some other reason?
-Immi_Chant
One I140 has PD of Oct-2006 and the other one has PD of Feb/2002. In Mar/08 EB2 was completely U, but I had hope that it will turn around and I will be able to use older PD based I140. That is exactly what happened when NSC 485 processing times reached my app's RD. Mine was not to switch categories, but to use the earlier PD.
Congrats for the GC !!!
You mentioned that both of your cases are under EB2, correct? Normally people will do interfile (PD Amendment) from one category to another, like EB3 to EB2.
Can you please share why you ported in the same category? Or because of some other reason?
-Immi_Chant
One I140 has PD of Oct-2006 and the other one has PD of Feb/2002. In Mar/08 EB2 was completely U, but I had hope that it will turn around and I will be able to use older PD based I140. That is exactly what happened when NSC 485 processing times reached my app's RD. Mine was not to switch categories, but to use the earlier PD.
more...
Lasantha
02-08 04:11 PM
That is one of the points raised in this current letter campaign for admin fixes.
I dont see any light at the tunnel. PDs will not move until they allow 485 filing even PD is not current.
I dont see any light at the tunnel. PDs will not move until they allow 485 filing even PD is not current.
hair Fetal Development Week 8
andrei
07-10 08:15 AM
Attacking Lou Dobbs will help those who purposefully blur the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants. While Dobbs sometimes talks about H1Bs, his main focus is on illegal immigration and he's mostly sympathetic to legal immigration, in my opinion.
more...
indio0617
12-20 01:41 PM
Hi everyone,
I read the memo in details as it directly applies to my wife's ability to work and my ability to extend H1. Here is the analysis (I have excluded L visa part). But before that, I would like to acknowledge the works of this "the" person. They dont know how much their post means to others. Thank you so much for digging this out.
1) Husband H1, wife H4 (or vice versa) in 7th year. Wife can now work on a new H1. Her H1 will be valid for a new six year period. She can start work on 1st October 2007 if this is her first H1 and is aproved.
2) If wife had old H1, and say she worked for 1 year and stopped after completing 6 years on H1+H4. She can now transfer old H1 and work for 5 more years.
3) Say, wife starts work and husband loses job. Wife is now H1 and husband is on H4 - they can continue like this till wife's H1 validity period or till the family's GC is approved.
4) Husband H1 + wife H4 in 7th year (assuming GC in progress) and leave the country and stay outside USA. Husband gets transfer back to USA OR gets a new job in USA. Husaband or wife not in any H or L status at this time. They can still use the old H1 and GC process dates to get H1 extension for old H1.
5) H1 employee worked for 2 years and left USA. At any time (not just October), he can use old H1 for transfer and continue for 4 more years OR he can opt for a new 6 year period after 1 year stay outside USA.
Other provisions are for L1/L2 (which I skipped) and for preventing fraud when a person gets H1 and parks his family in US but the person remains outside USA. The memo states that H4 members should be in USA only to accompany the H1 member (provided H1 is in USA and in valid state).
Hope this helps to all. If you have read the memo and if you have anything to add please do so. This is probably the only positive news for H1, H4, GC this year.
Nilcritz:
Very precise analysis. Thanks for posting this one.
I read the memo in details as it directly applies to my wife's ability to work and my ability to extend H1. Here is the analysis (I have excluded L visa part). But before that, I would like to acknowledge the works of this "the" person. They dont know how much their post means to others. Thank you so much for digging this out.
1) Husband H1, wife H4 (or vice versa) in 7th year. Wife can now work on a new H1. Her H1 will be valid for a new six year period. She can start work on 1st October 2007 if this is her first H1 and is aproved.
2) If wife had old H1, and say she worked for 1 year and stopped after completing 6 years on H1+H4. She can now transfer old H1 and work for 5 more years.
3) Say, wife starts work and husband loses job. Wife is now H1 and husband is on H4 - they can continue like this till wife's H1 validity period or till the family's GC is approved.
4) Husband H1 + wife H4 in 7th year (assuming GC in progress) and leave the country and stay outside USA. Husband gets transfer back to USA OR gets a new job in USA. Husaband or wife not in any H or L status at this time. They can still use the old H1 and GC process dates to get H1 extension for old H1.
5) H1 employee worked for 2 years and left USA. At any time (not just October), he can use old H1 for transfer and continue for 4 more years OR he can opt for a new 6 year period after 1 year stay outside USA.
Other provisions are for L1/L2 (which I skipped) and for preventing fraud when a person gets H1 and parks his family in US but the person remains outside USA. The memo states that H4 members should be in USA only to accompany the H1 member (provided H1 is in USA and in valid state).
Hope this helps to all. If you have read the memo and if you have anything to add please do so. This is probably the only positive news for H1, H4, GC this year.
Nilcritz:
Very precise analysis. Thanks for posting this one.
hot 21 week old fetus holds
leo2606
07-19 02:00 PM
if she can get the tests done in India, there are USCIS approved doctors in Chennai, Mumbai, Delhi and Calcutta.
My spouse is landing here on Aug 15. That leaves only one day to get medicals done. Any suggestions on how to handle this ? Can she skip skin test and take X-rays directly ?
My spouse is landing here on Aug 15. That leaves only one day to get medicals done. Any suggestions on how to handle this ? Can she skip skin test and take X-rays directly ?
more...
house How Our Baby#39;s Growing!
rockstart
04-21 03:13 PM
Trust me there is no way you can sell a diploma as equivalent to degree program. I mean all people can do is if they have 3 Yr BSc + 2 Yr MSc they can hope that CIS accepts it as equal to 4 Yr BS degree. I have seen cases of AMIE candidates rejected stating that US does not recognize AMIE. Now in these two cases atleast their home countries recognize their degrees, In your case India govt will also classify you as diploma holder and not degree holder. Also how can you add 1st year BCom with Hotel Management diploma I mean they are 2 completely different streams?
Here is a solution that I would have done if I was in your shoes. If you have enough time on your H1 then please enroll into a community college or University and try to get a US bachelor degree. I am sure your diploma will help you to get waiver for some courses so that will save time. Also taking evening classes will let you keep your current job. I know it is tough but that is pretty much the best alternative you have. USCIS has clearly stated that your diploma is not equivalent to US degree. I mean even the best evaluation agency can do is compare India degree program to US degree program how can you compare diploma to degree
HI
The minimum educational requirement for the diploma was 10+2. However I did 1st year of BCom out of choice before enrolling in the 3 year diploma. The diploma was for hotel management from a Govt Funded/recognized institute with nationwide entrance tests. DOnt know their acceptance rates but it falls under the umbrella of the Ministry of Tourism.
I think in the denial letter the officer is accepting that I have an equivalent of a bachelors degree but is still denying it. My attorney thinks that he might be mistaken & might have processed the case as EB2 instead of EB3.
Here is a solution that I would have done if I was in your shoes. If you have enough time on your H1 then please enroll into a community college or University and try to get a US bachelor degree. I am sure your diploma will help you to get waiver for some courses so that will save time. Also taking evening classes will let you keep your current job. I know it is tough but that is pretty much the best alternative you have. USCIS has clearly stated that your diploma is not equivalent to US degree. I mean even the best evaluation agency can do is compare India degree program to US degree program how can you compare diploma to degree
HI
The minimum educational requirement for the diploma was 10+2. However I did 1st year of BCom out of choice before enrolling in the 3 year diploma. The diploma was for hotel management from a Govt Funded/recognized institute with nationwide entrance tests. DOnt know their acceptance rates but it falls under the umbrella of the Ministry of Tourism.
I think in the denial letter the officer is accepting that I have an equivalent of a bachelors degree but is still denying it. My attorney thinks that he might be mistaken & might have processed the case as EB2 instead of EB3.
tattoo the first 8 week of human
chi_shark
02-12 01:35 PM
so for folks who are in the queue with USCIS in the states now (485 applied), can we change over to consular processing now?
Some hopes.........
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7168&page=2
Thanks
MDix
Some hopes.........
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7168&page=2
Thanks
MDix
more...
pictures 2010 Human Embryo: 6 - 7 weeks
Googler
02-20 05:06 PM
The damn thing was taken down before I could save it. Did anyone save the file?
dresses by the -week embryo Lose a
gsc999
11-10 11:46 AM
Filed July 18th, no FP yet
more...
makeup Human Embryo 4 Weeks Model
bigticket
08-23 11:10 AM
Your employer will have to file a PERM and I-140 and once I-140 is approved in EB-2 with earlier EB-3 PD, request USCIS to adjudicate your pending I-1485 using the newly approved EB-2 I-140. No need to file another I-485 if you already have one pending.
Regarding the fee, there is no filing fee for PERM. All the costs are related to advertising and lawyer fee. I have no idea how much the fee for the whole process is or what attorney's charge as I have never paid anything for any of my immigration process so far (11 yrs in US). Technically, you are not supposed to pay anything, only employer should pick up the fee. You can pay the premium processing fee wherever applicable.
Thanks for your detailed reply. Till now I have not paid for anything for my GC. I have been here since last 12 yrs. My employer is picking up the cost for PERM and I140, as you said I may pay for premium processing for 140 if I opt it that way. My concern is, he said we need to file I485 also as my old 485 is in old format (paying for EAD renewal and AP), not sure about that.
So we do not need to file a new I485 if EB3's 485 is pending ? After I140 is approved under EB2, we just need to request USCIS to look at this new application with old PD to approve EB3 485 ?
Regarding the fee, there is no filing fee for PERM. All the costs are related to advertising and lawyer fee. I have no idea how much the fee for the whole process is or what attorney's charge as I have never paid anything for any of my immigration process so far (11 yrs in US). Technically, you are not supposed to pay anything, only employer should pick up the fee. You can pay the premium processing fee wherever applicable.
Thanks for your detailed reply. Till now I have not paid for anything for my GC. I have been here since last 12 yrs. My employer is picking up the cost for PERM and I140, as you said I may pay for premium processing for 140 if I opt it that way. My concern is, he said we need to file I485 also as my old 485 is in old format (paying for EAD renewal and AP), not sure about that.
So we do not need to file a new I485 if EB3's 485 is pending ? After I140 is approved under EB2, we just need to request USCIS to look at this new application with old PD to approve EB3 485 ?
girlfriend This is a human embryo (an
uma001
06-07 12:06 PM
Stop worrying too much.This bill wont pass
hairstyles fetus at 5 weeks with
bidhanc
03-22 09:14 AM
All NY members - New York City, upstate ... please join this mailing list
IV-NY (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny)
As the first step, please update your contact information.
Thanks,
Chandrakanth
Hi,
I have added myself under the name boss_bid.
IV-NY (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/immigrationvoiceny)
As the first step, please update your contact information.
Thanks,
Chandrakanth
Hi,
I have added myself under the name boss_bid.
pappu
04-21 12:44 PM
Here is some analysis from Immigration Policy Center
---------------------------------
How Much Will Arizona's Immigration Bill (SB1070) Cost?
April 21, 2010
Washington, D.C.- Frustrated by Congress' failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, states across the country continue considering legislation that relies heavily on punitive, enforcement-only measures which not only fail to end unauthorized immigration but also have the potential to dig their state's finances deeper into a hole. The latest example of this kind of policy nose dive is in Arizona. A recent bill, "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act" (SB 1070), was passed by the Arizona State legislature and awaits the signature of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. As the Governor ponders whether or not to put her signature on SB 1070, she should consider the potential economic impact of the bill, which would require police to check a person's immigration status if they suspect that person is in the United States illegally. This bill, if it becomes law, will likely affect not only unauthorized immigrants, but all immigrants and Latinos in general. Given the vital role that immigrants and Latinos play in Arizona's economy, and considering Arizona's current budget deficit of $3 billion dollars, enacting SB 1070 could be a perilous move.
At a purely administrative level, Gov. Brewer should take into consideration the potential costs of implementation and defending the state against lawsuits. As the National Employment Law Project (NELP) points out in the case of other states that have passed harsh local immigration laws, Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted. This is in addition to the cost of implementation. For instance, NELP observes that "in Riverside, New Jersey, the town of 8,000 had already spent $82,000 in legal fees defending its ordinance" by the time it was rescinded in September, 2007. Also in 2007, the county supervisors in Prince William County, Maryland were unwilling to move forward with the police enforcement portion of an immigration law after they found that the price tag would be a minimum of $14 million for five years.
More broadly, Gov. Brewer should keep in mind that, if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them. The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002 - the last year for which data is available. The Perryman Group also estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well.
With Arizona facing a budget deficit of more than $3 billion, Gov. Brewer might want to think twice about measures such as SB 1070 that would further imperil the state's economic future and try instead to find ways in which she can bring additional tax revenue to her state while pursuing smart enforcement that will actually protect Arizonans.
-----------------------------------------
---------------------------------
How Much Will Arizona's Immigration Bill (SB1070) Cost?
April 21, 2010
Washington, D.C.- Frustrated by Congress' failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform, states across the country continue considering legislation that relies heavily on punitive, enforcement-only measures which not only fail to end unauthorized immigration but also have the potential to dig their state's finances deeper into a hole. The latest example of this kind of policy nose dive is in Arizona. A recent bill, "Support Our Law Enforcement and Safe Neighborhoods Act" (SB 1070), was passed by the Arizona State legislature and awaits the signature of Arizona Governor Jan Brewer. As the Governor ponders whether or not to put her signature on SB 1070, she should consider the potential economic impact of the bill, which would require police to check a person's immigration status if they suspect that person is in the United States illegally. This bill, if it becomes law, will likely affect not only unauthorized immigrants, but all immigrants and Latinos in general. Given the vital role that immigrants and Latinos play in Arizona's economy, and considering Arizona's current budget deficit of $3 billion dollars, enacting SB 1070 could be a perilous move.
At a purely administrative level, Gov. Brewer should take into consideration the potential costs of implementation and defending the state against lawsuits. As the National Employment Law Project (NELP) points out in the case of other states that have passed harsh local immigration laws, Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted. This is in addition to the cost of implementation. For instance, NELP observes that "in Riverside, New Jersey, the town of 8,000 had already spent $82,000 in legal fees defending its ordinance" by the time it was rescinded in September, 2007. Also in 2007, the county supervisors in Prince William County, Maryland were unwilling to move forward with the police enforcement portion of an immigration law after they found that the price tag would be a minimum of $14 million for five years.
More broadly, Gov. Brewer should keep in mind that, if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them. The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002 - the last year for which data is available. The Perryman Group also estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well.
With Arizona facing a budget deficit of more than $3 billion, Gov. Brewer might want to think twice about measures such as SB 1070 that would further imperil the state's economic future and try instead to find ways in which she can bring additional tax revenue to her state while pursuing smart enforcement that will actually protect Arizonans.
-----------------------------------------
BharatPremi
11-06 10:43 AM
Guys,
I had INFOPASS appointment today. We reached 15 minutes before scheduled time. 8101 N Stemmns Fwy - Building does not have visible number "8101" but large "Department of Homeland Security" board is easily visible. At the entrance we showed our infopass appointment letter and Guard told us to stand in a queue behind racks. I saw 2 different queues nearer to Window so curiously I asked the fellow who was right ahead of me and he told me that the queue where we stand is meant for people who have not taken appointment and other queue right across the window is meant for people who have taken an appointment. There are no sign boards for these 2 different queues. Guard misguided us so all in all we wasted 5 to 7 minutes I came out from that queue and stand in the right queue again. At the window I was asked for Driving license and purpose of the appointment. I showed driving license and told we filed AP in July, 1* but have not received it. He demanded I-131 receipts and I represented them. Then he gave us tag numbers for all family members including myself. Then we moved towards the main entrance of the bulding. Guard instructed us to remove wallet,pen, anything we had in our pockets, purse,belt etc (Cell phones are not allowed inside the building) and put in one bucket which was scanned through the machine like available on airports. We had to walk through metal detector and then took possesion of our belongings and then waited in the waiting room for approximately 15 minutes. As our tag number appears on the electronic board with assigned counter number, we went to the counter. Lady officer greeted us and asked the purpose of the appointment and again I represented infopass appointment letter and I-131 receipts and told her that I have not received our advanced parole yet although we filed on July 1*. She dived into her computer and said your all Advanced parole are already approved on 10/1*/07 (Which was the date of first (And only one) LUD on our APs) and already mailed to you so she can not issue either "Original" or "duplicate" Advanced parole. According to her I should be receiving them any day now. She herself wanted me to give me the info about EAD status without myself asking so I told her that we already received our EADs and then she asked me, do I have any question for her and I said yes, what would be our name check status and she again digged into computer.According to her my Name check is still pending and I should inquire again after 4 months by taking another infopass appointment. Upon my further digging she told me that if everything is "generally clean" then 4 months is a standard period to get name check clear so she suggested me "inquire after 4 months". According to her my family has already cleared name check.
Thanks.
I had INFOPASS appointment today. We reached 15 minutes before scheduled time. 8101 N Stemmns Fwy - Building does not have visible number "8101" but large "Department of Homeland Security" board is easily visible. At the entrance we showed our infopass appointment letter and Guard told us to stand in a queue behind racks. I saw 2 different queues nearer to Window so curiously I asked the fellow who was right ahead of me and he told me that the queue where we stand is meant for people who have not taken appointment and other queue right across the window is meant for people who have taken an appointment. There are no sign boards for these 2 different queues. Guard misguided us so all in all we wasted 5 to 7 minutes I came out from that queue and stand in the right queue again. At the window I was asked for Driving license and purpose of the appointment. I showed driving license and told we filed AP in July, 1* but have not received it. He demanded I-131 receipts and I represented them. Then he gave us tag numbers for all family members including myself. Then we moved towards the main entrance of the bulding. Guard instructed us to remove wallet,pen, anything we had in our pockets, purse,belt etc (Cell phones are not allowed inside the building) and put in one bucket which was scanned through the machine like available on airports. We had to walk through metal detector and then took possesion of our belongings and then waited in the waiting room for approximately 15 minutes. As our tag number appears on the electronic board with assigned counter number, we went to the counter. Lady officer greeted us and asked the purpose of the appointment and again I represented infopass appointment letter and I-131 receipts and told her that I have not received our advanced parole yet although we filed on July 1*. She dived into her computer and said your all Advanced parole are already approved on 10/1*/07 (Which was the date of first (And only one) LUD on our APs) and already mailed to you so she can not issue either "Original" or "duplicate" Advanced parole. According to her I should be receiving them any day now. She herself wanted me to give me the info about EAD status without myself asking so I told her that we already received our EADs and then she asked me, do I have any question for her and I said yes, what would be our name check status and she again digged into computer.According to her my Name check is still pending and I should inquire again after 4 months by taking another infopass appointment. Upon my further digging she told me that if everything is "generally clean" then 4 months is a standard period to get name check clear so she suggested me "inquire after 4 months". According to her my family has already cleared name check.
Thanks.