shree772000
08-13 03:36 PM
who is vld rao?
His full name is venkateshwar rao.....:p
His full name is venkateshwar rao.....:p
wallpaper i miss you friendship quotes.
senthil
08-08 09:05 AM
roseball, agree. got same resp from my attorney while filing AOS for my wife
1) employment letter ( just sent original & copies too )
2) I-134 ( convinced that they will need this even for H4 dependent )
3) did not ask for W2's or pay stubs
4) of course original medicals in closed envelope
5) all previous H4 approvals + I94's and color photocopy of entire passport
6) photos and required cheque's
hope mrdelhiite is all set ?
Yes, its good to file I-134 especially when she is on H4. Paystubs and tax returns are not required documents though a lot of people tend to submit them. Just an employment letter from your employer would suffice. You dont need to include your I-20 with your wife's application....However, do include her medicals, though its not part of the initial evidence......
1) employment letter ( just sent original & copies too )
2) I-134 ( convinced that they will need this even for H4 dependent )
3) did not ask for W2's or pay stubs
4) of course original medicals in closed envelope
5) all previous H4 approvals + I94's and color photocopy of entire passport
6) photos and required cheque's
hope mrdelhiite is all set ?
Yes, its good to file I-134 especially when she is on H4. Paystubs and tax returns are not required documents though a lot of people tend to submit them. Just an employment letter from your employer would suffice. You dont need to include your I-20 with your wife's application....However, do include her medicals, though its not part of the initial evidence......
lskreddy
04-12 09:51 AM
Can you not reply anonymously? If you couldn't, if you respond, I don't think they would put your existing application in jeopardy if you respond truthfully. You certainly have a good reason to move and they seem to already know that.
If you are worried, why don't you wait until your H1's approved and then respond? Its never too late to report these scumbags and you would be doing a service to others who might fall trap.
If you decide to not report, I totally understand. It is fair to feel queasy with anything related to immigration here.
If you are worried, why don't you wait until your H1's approved and then respond? Its never too late to report these scumbags and you would be doing a service to others who might fall trap.
If you decide to not report, I totally understand. It is fair to feel queasy with anything related to immigration here.
2011 i miss you quotes for friends.
chinna2003
03-11 09:21 AM
I worked for an employer in WY 2004 as a physician and since then i resigned and moved onto another job with a new labor and I-140. However last year at the time of July isa bulletin fiasco, I asked my employer from WY in 2004 to file for an I-140 based on the previous approved labor condition in 2004 to retain that priority date under EB -2.
Employer knows I have no intent of joining them after the green card and I have my own practice , so i donot intend to join the practice.
In this scenario, if this considered a misuse of retaining priority date and how do i prove the intent and will the USCIS allow a situation like this?
Employer knows I have no intent of joining them after the green card and I have my own practice , so i donot intend to join the practice.
In this scenario, if this considered a misuse of retaining priority date and how do i prove the intent and will the USCIS allow a situation like this?
more...
surabhi
04-08 05:24 AM
This is serious and could affect quite a few.
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
Summary: you could be affected if ALL of the folllowing is true
1)you have a PD before July 16, 2007 ( likely case is EB3 I/C 2002/2003 PD)
2) you have left your original employer ( whether you stayed for 180 days after I-485 application to comply with AC-21 rule doesnt matter)
3) your original employer has used your labor to subsititute some on else ( before July 16,2007)
Remember you are affected even though you are the original beneficiary.
How did this case happen?
This happend because USCIS not following LIFO processing
1. The original applicat applied labor in April 2001
2. Labor approved in Jan 2002
3. Original applicant applied I-140 in April 2002
4. i-140 approved in July 2002
5. Original applicant applies for I-485 in Dec 2002
In Jan 2004, after more than year ( > 180 days and Ac-21 was enacted), original applicant leaves the employer, presuming that she is safe and covered under Ac-21
Employer promptly writes to USCIS asking to revoke I-140. The employer goes ahead and uses the labor for another person and files I-140
The USCIS apprves I-140 and subsequently I-485 for the subsituted beneficiary.
So how could USCIS approve a I-485 that was filed at least 18 months later than the original applicant. ( May be the subsituted applicant was from different chargeability country and hence could ge approved??)
Now the original applicant is screwed because USCIS cannnot approve 2 I-485 petitions based on same labor.
I feel for the original applicant. She played by rules all along, but got screwed anyway
Now you can see the chances of your case being caught in similar circumstrances
1. You are EB3, India/China with PD around 2002/2003
2. You filed I-485 sometime before July 2007 ( if you filed during July 2007 and you were with original employer at that time, this doesnt apply)
3. You left your original employer before July 2007
4. Unbeknownst to you, your original employer has subsituted your labor for another person.(before July 16, 2007)
5. that other person also filed for I-1485
6. Now its a timebomb waiting to explode
tnite
07-30 02:19 PM
I wouldnt be surprised if this thread is referenced by numbersusa and alipac.us as " H1B's using anchor babies to get Green cards"
They did have it in their fax campaign but removed it.
They did have it in their fax campaign but removed it.
more...
c9411010
08-08 08:51 AM
if therez anything anyone else can add pls do so ..
2010 miss you friend quotes.
akred
03-27 11:07 AM
I have come to the realization that there is not much difference between illegals and legals. Both are victims of a system that does not have the capacity to assimilate them.
No one - press, congress, ordinary citizen or restrictionist - differentiates between legal and illegal immigrants. This is not surprising because the SOP is to somehow move illegal immigrants into the legal immigration system so that they are eventually treated as legal immigrants. In some cases like with CIR or Washington state's in-state tuition for illegals (but not for H or L), the system actively encourages people to qualify for benefits through the illegal stream.
Of course everyone must decide what they want to do. The I-94 states that penalty for unauthorized work is deportation. You have to decide if that matters to you based on a) whether you want to stay in the US and b) whether you believe you will be allowed to stay even if you follow all the rules
No one - press, congress, ordinary citizen or restrictionist - differentiates between legal and illegal immigrants. This is not surprising because the SOP is to somehow move illegal immigrants into the legal immigration system so that they are eventually treated as legal immigrants. In some cases like with CIR or Washington state's in-state tuition for illegals (but not for H or L), the system actively encourages people to qualify for benefits through the illegal stream.
Of course everyone must decide what they want to do. The I-94 states that penalty for unauthorized work is deportation. You have to decide if that matters to you based on a) whether you want to stay in the US and b) whether you believe you will be allowed to stay even if you follow all the rules
more...
.jpeg "Miss You Quotes And Sayings.")
TeddyKoochu
01-06 02:57 PM
There is nothing called "upgrade". You can file a second I-140 as EB1-A in parallel. Other than the money and energy spent, there is no downside. AFAIK, there is no "eligibility" for filing EB1-A. In the petition, you must demonstrate that you meet the minimum number of criteria described by USCIS.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
USCIS - EB-1 Eligibility and Filing (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3a4df271ab0fd010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=91919c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
Sincerest thanks for the information. Iam looking at criteria 1 to 10 in the list that you have provided. I believe that I can gather evidence to satisfy 2 criteria�s completely and maybe 1 partially, does that suffice or there is a rule that atleast say 4 / 10 or X / 10 should be satisfied as a minimum. Most of the criteria�s are actually meant for distinguished people in research, whereas my profile is more of an IT application developer / designer.
hair missing you friendship quotes.
sdrblr
10-07 10:59 PM
Since they came to your work location, can you not contact your HR/ Payroll dept and get the payroll journal?
How can they come to your desk randonmly and ask for pay stubs? Nobody carries paystubs to work everyday.Are these raids authorized by USCIS. Is there a memo that mentions this from USCIS.
How can they come to your desk randonmly and ask for pay stubs? Nobody carries paystubs to work everyday.Are these raids authorized by USCIS. Is there a memo that mentions this from USCIS.
more...
neoklaus
11-14 03:33 PM
Does it have anything to do with how recently you travelled out of the country? or How recently you came into this country? My wife came to US only 6 months back and I am not sure if this has got to do anything with the whole biometrics thing?
It is probably just this IO who has a different intepretation of the rules.
I came to US in June,07, my husband & daughter -Aug.14,07...probably just interpretation matters
It is probably just this IO who has a different intepretation of the rules.
I came to US in June,07, my husband & daughter -Aug.14,07...probably just interpretation matters
hot missing you friend quotes.
neelu
01-02 02:34 PM
Please anyone.........help me.
I couldn't find any other thread in this forum discussing the same problem as mine. Please let me know if it has been discussed already.
Thank you very much.
I couldn't find any other thread in this forum discussing the same problem as mine. Please let me know if it has been discussed already.
Thank you very much.
more...
house missing you friend quotes.
eb3retro
06-19 10:07 PM
Hi
Here is my situation
My current labor shows title as Systems Analyst (EB3-I category - PD Sept 2002). The code that I can read shows 030-167014.
I-140 is approved in 2005. 485 Applied in June 2007.
8th year on H1B - H1 Valid till November 2009.
I have offer to join one of big 5 IT Firms as Project Manager( working at client through them from past 4 years), however due to the "Same or Similar" clause , I am confused and kind of nervous as well that it may impact my GC application as the job title is not similar to what is on the labor.
This is great company to work for and Salary raise is about 15-20% from current and about 90% higher than what is on the labor. Would this create any issue?
I had kind of made up my mind that I will go ahead and join and skip notifying USCIS of AC21 and will deal with it if and when I receive the RFE, but the prospective employer's immigration guys are telling that they have policy and their attorney will prepare a letter for invoking AC21 and send that to USCIS.
Just tired of waiting for GC and losing the opportunities, What options do I have ?
� Should I stay put and continue to wait till I get GC in hand?
� If new employer notify USCIS with AC21 letter that my new title is PM or something else (but not same or similar to what is on Labor)
- Would USCIS makes the decision on my 485 right there saying it's a no go?
- or Would they send me the RFE later on when my PD is current?
- What if I say I am willing to go back to my old employer on the title that is on the labor, in the situation of RFE - would USCIS accepts that (I have good relationship with my current employer and they are mid size company)
Any Suggestion - Anybody?
Need to make the decision in next couple of days.
hey man, if i were you, i wouldn't do this..i personally changed jobs twice in ac21 and would not do this change..
Here is my situation
My current labor shows title as Systems Analyst (EB3-I category - PD Sept 2002). The code that I can read shows 030-167014.
I-140 is approved in 2005. 485 Applied in June 2007.
8th year on H1B - H1 Valid till November 2009.
I have offer to join one of big 5 IT Firms as Project Manager( working at client through them from past 4 years), however due to the "Same or Similar" clause , I am confused and kind of nervous as well that it may impact my GC application as the job title is not similar to what is on the labor.
This is great company to work for and Salary raise is about 15-20% from current and about 90% higher than what is on the labor. Would this create any issue?
I had kind of made up my mind that I will go ahead and join and skip notifying USCIS of AC21 and will deal with it if and when I receive the RFE, but the prospective employer's immigration guys are telling that they have policy and their attorney will prepare a letter for invoking AC21 and send that to USCIS.
Just tired of waiting for GC and losing the opportunities, What options do I have ?
� Should I stay put and continue to wait till I get GC in hand?
� If new employer notify USCIS with AC21 letter that my new title is PM or something else (but not same or similar to what is on Labor)
- Would USCIS makes the decision on my 485 right there saying it's a no go?
- or Would they send me the RFE later on when my PD is current?
- What if I say I am willing to go back to my old employer on the title that is on the labor, in the situation of RFE - would USCIS accepts that (I have good relationship with my current employer and they are mid size company)
Any Suggestion - Anybody?
Need to make the decision in next couple of days.
hey man, if i were you, i wouldn't do this..i personally changed jobs twice in ac21 and would not do this change..
tattoo miss you best friend quotes.
53885
05-12 11:38 AM
I didnt contact senators from AILA.
I sent to media organizations from - http://capwiz.com/aila2/dbq/media/ in northern/souther california and Arizona. May send to other states today.
How do you contact so many senators. It asked my my address and sent the email only to my state's senators.
I sent to media organizations from - http://capwiz.com/aila2/dbq/media/ in northern/souther california and Arizona. May send to other states today.
How do you contact so many senators. It asked my my address and sent the email only to my state's senators.
more...
pictures missing you friend quotes.
dingudi
06-08 11:16 PM
Hi Dingudi,
The problem is not the hours I worked as I've always worked legally and within the laws of the University and visa status.
The problem is proving that I filed my taxes, which I did but I can't produce evidence and neither can the IRS.
I understand your problem. All I was saying is to make sure any response you provide includes that your work during 1999-2000 was legal as per F1 on-campus regulations. And I hope the attorney you hire should be able to do that. If you do not have Tax returns , then you don't. Like someone said earlier , your W2 along with IRS letter that they do not keep records older than 7 years maybe enough but again your attorney should make this decision wisely.
The problem is not the hours I worked as I've always worked legally and within the laws of the University and visa status.
The problem is proving that I filed my taxes, which I did but I can't produce evidence and neither can the IRS.
I understand your problem. All I was saying is to make sure any response you provide includes that your work during 1999-2000 was legal as per F1 on-campus regulations. And I hope the attorney you hire should be able to do that. If you do not have Tax returns , then you don't. Like someone said earlier , your W2 along with IRS letter that they do not keep records older than 7 years maybe enough but again your attorney should make this decision wisely.
dresses love and i miss you quotes.
ChainReaction
04-18 09:09 AM
I already have two labor certification petition both of which are stuck in PBEC. MY first labor cert has PD of March 2003 and the other Feb 2005 . ON my lawyers advice i filed my second labor under RIR instead of waiting for another month and filing under PERM what a big mistake i made... I am onmy 5th yr on H1b and was hoping to Get at least 3yr ext if i was able to file 1-140 and have it approved before i file for the H1b . :(
more...
makeup Miss You Quotes And Sayings.
mchundi
02-16 06:02 PM
Let us put it this way. Short term we can get some benefits of the 90 k visas that can be recaptured (140k according to the Ombudsman - 50k which went to Schedule A last year) But now 90k , regardless of whether it frees numbers for all countries, is going to be a short lived relief . With so many cases coming out of the backlog, there has to be some long term solution for this. All the comprehensive immigration bills had been talking of raising the per country quota by a couple of % but you have to also see that they are redistributing the allocations to EB1, 2 and 3. So I guess in the long run, there is no other option but to increase the overall quota
In the long run yes, we need to think big. One reason i brought this up as several of the immigration bills were to be taken up last year, but the Senate is not allocating enough time to discuss this. The house for its part passed a partisan bill with very little benefits for the legal immigrants.
If the discussion on some of the controversial issues in the "CIR" get ugly things may be postponed to the next year(Not much activity may be planned as we get closer to elections, most house members may go back to campaigning).
90k is not much, but the way USCIS works is odd. Because they cannot process 90k +140K petetions in a short time, it will allow everybody to file I-485 and get portability.
--MC
In the long run yes, we need to think big. One reason i brought this up as several of the immigration bills were to be taken up last year, but the Senate is not allocating enough time to discuss this. The house for its part passed a partisan bill with very little benefits for the legal immigrants.
If the discussion on some of the controversial issues in the "CIR" get ugly things may be postponed to the next year(Not much activity may be planned as we get closer to elections, most house members may go back to campaigning).
90k is not much, but the way USCIS works is odd. Because they cannot process 90k +140K petetions in a short time, it will allow everybody to file I-485 and get portability.
--MC
girlfriend I REALLY MISS YOU!
mchundi
02-16 05:04 PM
I did some research on murthy.com and found that AC21 did abolish 'per country of birth quota' on recycled numbers. I am posting a link to this murthy.com article of Oct 6, 2000 which clarifies the issue.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
Good work jungalee32,
It is also part of our resource data base that sandeep compiled, where all these issues are clearly explained. That is why once we have the unused numbers it is like increasing the per country quota. It will bring the priority date to current for a couple of years(even if there are more cases than unused numbers with them. Just because they cannot process that faster)
--MC
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
Good work jungalee32,
It is also part of our resource data base that sandeep compiled, where all these issues are clearly explained. That is why once we have the unused numbers it is like increasing the per country quota. It will bring the priority date to current for a couple of years(even if there are more cases than unused numbers with them. Just because they cannot process that faster)
--MC
hairstyles missing you friendship quotes.
ishwarmahajan@yahoo.com
09-24 05:37 PM
I am hoping you are going to change job in the same profession. What iti means is if you are working on technical side in IT, you are going to continue on technical side no matter what your designation is. I feel that USCIS has clear guidlines on this. please refer to the link below:
http://stats.bls.gov/soc/socguide.htm
I think following information on this link could help you to make a quick decision. I addition you should consult to attorney before you make your final decision.
"Supervisors of professional and technical workers usually have a background similar to the workers they supervise, and are therefore classified with the workers they supervise. Likewise, team leaders, lead workers and supervisors of production, sales, and service workers who spend at least 20 percent of their time performing work similar to the workers they supervise are classified with the workers they supervise.
First-line managers and supervisors of production, service, and sales workers who spend more than 80 percent of their time performing supervisory activities are classified separately in the appropriate supervisor category, since their work activities are distinct from those of the workers they supervise. First-line managers are generally found in smaller establishments where they perform both supervisory and management functions, such as accounting, marketing, and personnel work."
:):):)
Thanks,
Ishwar
http://stats.bls.gov/soc/socguide.htm
I think following information on this link could help you to make a quick decision. I addition you should consult to attorney before you make your final decision.
"Supervisors of professional and technical workers usually have a background similar to the workers they supervise, and are therefore classified with the workers they supervise. Likewise, team leaders, lead workers and supervisors of production, sales, and service workers who spend at least 20 percent of their time performing work similar to the workers they supervise are classified with the workers they supervise.
First-line managers and supervisors of production, service, and sales workers who spend more than 80 percent of their time performing supervisory activities are classified separately in the appropriate supervisor category, since their work activities are distinct from those of the workers they supervise. First-line managers are generally found in smaller establishments where they perform both supervisory and management functions, such as accounting, marketing, and personnel work."
:):):)
Thanks,
Ishwar
newuser
05-12 10:12 PM
I am in for it. I am ready to put 2K if members are going to come forward
justin150377
06-22 09:32 AM
is a TB skin test neccessary even if you tell the doc you've had a history of positive TB tests? do i have to prove i've had a history of postive TB test for the doctor to remark that on i-693..or can he just remark that without evidence and go on my word
thanks
thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment