Beta_mle
02-20 07:28 AM
^ ^ ^
Bump.
Anyone?
Bump.
Anyone?
eb2india
07-13 09:47 AM
Our Current EAD is expiring on 10/01/2008. So we had applied for extension in june
This is mistake. I got my EAD last year with validity only between 10/01/2007 and 01/01/2008. I called USCIS. They have asked me to send a new application for a new card with out the application fee. You probably have to do the same. Since it is mistake on their part you don't have pay any fee. Please talk to USCIS, they will let you know how to proceed.
This is mistake. I got my EAD last year with validity only between 10/01/2007 and 01/01/2008. I called USCIS. They have asked me to send a new application for a new card with out the application fee. You probably have to do the same. Since it is mistake on their part you don't have pay any fee. Please talk to USCIS, they will let you know how to proceed.
21stIcon
10-15 04:37 PM
look this
http://www.investopedia.com
http://www.investopedia.com
desi3933
02-25 09:07 PM
......
what are the options for me?
can I apply for a H1b transfer?
please help
When was your H1-B amendment denied?
What is your current LCA salary vs. original LCA Salary?
what are the options for me?
can I apply for a H1b transfer?
please help
When was your H1-B amendment denied?
What is your current LCA salary vs. original LCA Salary?
more...
va_labor2002
05-17 01:15 PM
I listened to President's speech last Monday on immigration.But,he did not mention anything about legal immigration issues. I think ,we should send a memorandum or mass letter from each members of IV to the President.
We should communicate our problems. If everybody sends letter to the IV Team and they can submit all the letters to the President's Office. What do you think ? Any comments ? Is there any better way of communicating to the President ?
We should communicate our problems. If everybody sends letter to the IV Team and they can submit all the letters to the President's Office. What do you think ? Any comments ? Is there any better way of communicating to the President ?
nayekal
08-18 05:12 PM
Guys,
I faced this problem myself. My wife was on H1 earlier and she never worked for a period of 1 year. At the beginning of the H1 period, we are expecting a baby and we took easy about her doing any job (its my fault). Later, market turned worse, it became to hard for her and her employer look for projects for her.
So, I contacted a lawyer (he is great). He told me that her status is H1 even though she is not working and she has to get back to H4. He assured me that they will for my documents more than her's and we filed as such and we don't even have her pay stubs or W2 forms.
She got in 45 days period and last week she went for H4 stamping, showing my documents. Yesterday, she got her passport back with H4 stamp.
I faced this problem myself. My wife was on H1 earlier and she never worked for a period of 1 year. At the beginning of the H1 period, we are expecting a baby and we took easy about her doing any job (its my fault). Later, market turned worse, it became to hard for her and her employer look for projects for her.
So, I contacted a lawyer (he is great). He told me that her status is H1 even though she is not working and she has to get back to H4. He assured me that they will for my documents more than her's and we filed as such and we don't even have her pay stubs or W2 forms.
She got in 45 days period and last week she went for H4 stamping, showing my documents. Yesterday, she got her passport back with H4 stamp.
more...
jediknight
11-09 11:18 AM
Filled out. Will post this in other forums and email lists
ab2k7
07-17 04:28 AM
Thanks desi3933,
The article here from Murthy specifies the solution in a different way and doesn't mention the need of filing LC or 140 again if the LC was properly filed as roving employee. Will have to confirm with attorney. Hope this would help ppl in similar situations.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_svcupd.html
I-485 Filing for Roving Employees
�MurthyDotCom
The USCIS indicated that, if a roving employee's I-140 petition is filed with Service Center A where the company is headquartered, but the employee moves to Service Center B's jurisdiction before the I-485 is filed, the employee may file the I-485 with either Service Center A or Service Center B. The USCIS also noted, however, that if the I-140 petition is filed at Service Center A, and then the I-485 is filed with Service Center B, the I-485 must be held until the I-140 is adjudicated. It is not clear if this means no action will be taken or if it simply cannot be approved until the I-140 petition is adjudicated. Roving employees are those who do not have fixed work sites, but can be moved from location to location, depending upon the needs of the employer. This is common with IT contractors. The safer approach would be to file the I-140 petition and the I-485 application in the same Service Center to avoid additional delays or the need to transfer the file from one Service Center to another.
In this instance when ever a consultant or "roving employee" moves to another city/state an LCA amendment is to be filed to accomodate USCIS rules. Whether this would have any adverse effect on LC/140/485 as far as refiling/ RFEs later is still not clear. I'll keep looking around for more credible info regarding the same. Pls point out of you guys know of any.
Thanks again in advance.
The article here from Murthy specifies the solution in a different way and doesn't mention the need of filing LC or 140 again if the LC was properly filed as roving employee. Will have to confirm with attorney. Hope this would help ppl in similar situations.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_svcupd.html
I-485 Filing for Roving Employees
�MurthyDotCom
The USCIS indicated that, if a roving employee's I-140 petition is filed with Service Center A where the company is headquartered, but the employee moves to Service Center B's jurisdiction before the I-485 is filed, the employee may file the I-485 with either Service Center A or Service Center B. The USCIS also noted, however, that if the I-140 petition is filed at Service Center A, and then the I-485 is filed with Service Center B, the I-485 must be held until the I-140 is adjudicated. It is not clear if this means no action will be taken or if it simply cannot be approved until the I-140 petition is adjudicated. Roving employees are those who do not have fixed work sites, but can be moved from location to location, depending upon the needs of the employer. This is common with IT contractors. The safer approach would be to file the I-140 petition and the I-485 application in the same Service Center to avoid additional delays or the need to transfer the file from one Service Center to another.
In this instance when ever a consultant or "roving employee" moves to another city/state an LCA amendment is to be filed to accomodate USCIS rules. Whether this would have any adverse effect on LC/140/485 as far as refiling/ RFEs later is still not clear. I'll keep looking around for more credible info regarding the same. Pls point out of you guys know of any.
Thanks again in advance.
more...
nirdlalegcade
02-26 12:34 AM
Hi one question,,,if I go home to my country to study using H4 while my GC is pending,then suddenly the GC was sent to my sister here in US,can my sister just mail my GC to me in my country so that if i go back here in the US,i can present my GC to the US immigration???uh!im confussed!thanks!
desi3933
02-26 06:04 PM
Original LCA salary is like 58k and current one is 40k
Odd are that you are out of status and this may prevent you seeking another change of status.
Please consult your attorney.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
Odd are that you are out of status and this may prevent you seeking another change of status.
Please consult your attorney.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
amsgc
02-07 02:42 PM
I worked in Delhi before moving to the US, so have some contacts. Last December I touched base with some of my friends from my previous company (big teleco services) and found that it is still not worth moving back - even if you have a home in delhi.
After 7 yrs of work experience, they are still making about 12-15 Lacs (moved up from being an entry level SE to a Project Manager).
Anyways, now days they are very selective in hiring talent - practically a hiring freeze. Also, the days for 30% raises seem to be over, at least for now.
I heard Bangalore is much better.
After 7 yrs of work experience, they are still making about 12-15 Lacs (moved up from being an entry level SE to a Project Manager).
Anyways, now days they are very selective in hiring talent - practically a hiring freeze. Also, the days for 30% raises seem to be over, at least for now.
I heard Bangalore is much better.
manderson
11-09 10:56 AM
another good 485 stats website is this (THIS IS NOT A PLUG):
http://www.immigrationwatch.com/uscis-processing-statistics.html
this has status prediction feature also but wait till Feb/ March to get more accurate results when all the Sept/October receipts are counted in.
http://www.immigrationwatch.com/uscis-processing-statistics.html
this has status prediction feature also but wait till Feb/ March to get more accurate results when all the Sept/October receipts are counted in.
more...
gcformeornot
08-09 09:08 PM
It has nothing to do with EB Immigration
wandmaker
05-14 02:19 PM
This is not a joke, we have received this querry, and are seeking some helpful advice.
If you have worked on location other than what's mentioned in the certified LCA, it will be considered as an unauthorized employment, eventually application for adjustment of status will be denied on the basis of you engaged in unauthorized employment.
If you have worked on location other than what's mentioned in the certified LCA, it will be considered as an unauthorized employment, eventually application for adjustment of status will be denied on the basis of you engaged in unauthorized employment.
more...
Ann Ruben
05-15 04:38 PM
no worries. my response should have been more precise.
raju123
06-26 02:51 PM
Numberusa reported following possible 24 amendments and Cantwell/Kyl amendment is not there. I hope this news is not right.
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
more...
90210
05-11 01:54 PM
Hello 90210,
If you entered on AP your status is AOS/EAD,you can transfer your H1 but you can't be on H1 status unless and until you go out of the country and enter on H1.
I talked to Murthy about this couple of months ago.
Are you sure? There is a lot of confusion.
And what do you mean " you can transfer but you can't be on H1". If I transfer H1, then I can not work here unless I get the H1 stamped?
Can some Guru please make this clear?
If you entered on AP your status is AOS/EAD,you can transfer your H1 but you can't be on H1 status unless and until you go out of the country and enter on H1.
I talked to Murthy about this couple of months ago.
Are you sure? There is a lot of confusion.
And what do you mean " you can transfer but you can't be on H1". If I transfer H1, then I can not work here unless I get the H1 stamped?
Can some Guru please make this clear?
optimystic
03-19 02:44 PM
Well...my PD is current and my RD at Nebraska is also current as per thier processing times. But still no LUDs or any other updates so far :( (its been 19 days since my PD became current)
I already spoke to USCIS IO one week back, and was told its a bit too early, and wait for 45 days and call back if nothing happens until then. They weren't willing to give me the status whether my Namecheck crossed 180 days.
Just going to wait until April 1, and then call them again. Or get an INFOPASS . What do the gurus suggest?
[EB3 - I , PD May 2001, RD July 30 07, Nebraska ]
I already spoke to USCIS IO one week back, and was told its a bit too early, and wait for 45 days and call back if nothing happens until then. They weren't willing to give me the status whether my Namecheck crossed 180 days.
Just going to wait until April 1, and then call them again. Or get an INFOPASS . What do the gurus suggest?
[EB3 - I , PD May 2001, RD July 30 07, Nebraska ]
waltz
08-24 10:17 AM
Wisconsin Public Radio www.wpr.org
You can listen online
For Program On: Friday, August 24, 2007 at 9:00 AM
According to a new report, the U.S. suffers from �brain drain� because many skilled, foreign-born workers can�t get resident visas. After nine, Kathleen Dunn talks with one of the researchers. Guest: Vivek Wadhwa, founder, Chairman, and CEO of Relativity Technologies. Executive in Residence/Adjunct Professor, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University. www.kauffman.org
You can listen online
For Program On: Friday, August 24, 2007 at 9:00 AM
According to a new report, the U.S. suffers from �brain drain� because many skilled, foreign-born workers can�t get resident visas. After nine, Kathleen Dunn talks with one of the researchers. Guest: Vivek Wadhwa, founder, Chairman, and CEO of Relativity Technologies. Executive in Residence/Adjunct Professor, Pratt School of Engineering, Duke University. www.kauffman.org
new_horizon
02-17 07:16 AM
I have a couple of questions:
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
gjoe
10-05 10:59 AM
This is what the law says:
INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of each has been filed.
What is your argument to sue?
How can someone with EB3 with a later PD get GC before me? If he has been approved there should be valid reason why mine is not approved, the reason should be something other than USCIS ineffeciency.
INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of each has been filed.
What is your argument to sue?
How can someone with EB3 with a later PD get GC before me? If he has been approved there should be valid reason why mine is not approved, the reason should be something other than USCIS ineffeciency.
No comments:
Post a Comment