munnu77
06-16 09:47 PM
My labour got approved on May 23rd .
Is it possible to switch company and use this labour whihc got approved by this company?
Thanks for all your support and sharing for knowledge.
whoch perm processing centre did u apply labor???
Is it possible to switch company and use this labour whihc got approved by this company?
Thanks for all your support and sharing for knowledge.
whoch perm processing centre did u apply labor???
raysaikat
05-31 12:18 AM
Thanks a lot, Raysaikat.
I appreciate the response.Here are a few of my immidiate thoughts....
1)I have been unemployed for a little over 180 days now.The key question is what is the penalty for remaining in the country for doing so?
This is the year when most people actually did NOT get jobs...I am guessing there are a lot of people in my position.
There are two things: (i) out of status, (ii) unlawful presence. Unlawful presence is a narrower concept (a subset of out of status) with severe consequences: a person who has been unlawfully present for 180 days to 365 days is barred for 3 years from reentering; a person who has been unlawfully present for more than 1 year is barred from reentering for 10 years.
It is a complicated matter to determine if your "out of status" days have become "unlawfully present" days. I am not qualified to make that judgment: you need to ask an immigration lawyer, or your school's International Student's Office. I suspect that you are merely out of status and not yet unlawfully present:
In this document, "out of status" is defined as what I am referring to as "unlawful presence".
212(a)(9)(b) Out of Status Penalty Law: This section of law provides [snip]
* For purposes of this provision of the law only, a person who has violated the terms of their status, but who has not remained in the US past their fixed status expiration date as shown on their papers will not be considered to be “out of status” unless and until a government agency has officially informed them that they are “out of status.” In other word, it is possible for to be “out of status” for purposes of filing an extension or change of status in the US, but not be “out of status” for purposes of this penalty provision of the law.
[snip...]
It is not clear to me what should be regarded as the "fixed status expiration date" in your case. In the best case, that is the time your 12 month OPT expires and from that time you will start to accrue unlawfully present days. In the worst case, that is the time when your 90 days of OPT period expired, which means that you have already accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence and you will be barred from reentering US for 3 years.
Again, if you need to know this, please consult an immigration lawyer. Your school's international students' office should also be able to help you. But in my experience, they are not able to deal with complex situations and usually gives too conservative an answer that will save their behind should there be any complications. Once one staff of my school's ISSO asked me to apply for CPT for working in the UK! Thankfully the actual advisor was more knowledgeable. However, the advisors are not immigration lawyers.
2)How does USCIS actually track who is employed and who is not?
They may have multiple methods if they actually launch an investigation, but usually they will check their records the next time you apply for a VISA, inside or outside US. E.g., if you want to apply for H1-B, you will have to show that you are not out of status.
3)If I were to catch the next flight back home (India), will I face problems while leaving the US/or entering India?
Nope. You can merrily exit US. Entering home country of course is in the jurisdiction of the authority of your home country. Assuming you are an Indian citizen, they cannot prevent you from entering.
I.e., you will have no problem at all.
4)Can I get a letter from a firm/company stating that I was doing an unpaid internship with them?(which will be counted towards the employment period)Are there any repurcursions for the company?
Any thoughts/opinions wouldbe most appreciated.
Thanks!
My only suggestion is not to walk the path of doing fraudulent activities for staying in the US. If that means going back to India, please do so. Perhaps you will have an equally bright career in India.
I appreciate the response.Here are a few of my immidiate thoughts....
1)I have been unemployed for a little over 180 days now.The key question is what is the penalty for remaining in the country for doing so?
This is the year when most people actually did NOT get jobs...I am guessing there are a lot of people in my position.
There are two things: (i) out of status, (ii) unlawful presence. Unlawful presence is a narrower concept (a subset of out of status) with severe consequences: a person who has been unlawfully present for 180 days to 365 days is barred for 3 years from reentering; a person who has been unlawfully present for more than 1 year is barred from reentering for 10 years.
It is a complicated matter to determine if your "out of status" days have become "unlawfully present" days. I am not qualified to make that judgment: you need to ask an immigration lawyer, or your school's International Student's Office. I suspect that you are merely out of status and not yet unlawfully present:
In this document, "out of status" is defined as what I am referring to as "unlawful presence".
212(a)(9)(b) Out of Status Penalty Law: This section of law provides [snip]
* For purposes of this provision of the law only, a person who has violated the terms of their status, but who has not remained in the US past their fixed status expiration date as shown on their papers will not be considered to be “out of status” unless and until a government agency has officially informed them that they are “out of status.” In other word, it is possible for to be “out of status” for purposes of filing an extension or change of status in the US, but not be “out of status” for purposes of this penalty provision of the law.
[snip...]
It is not clear to me what should be regarded as the "fixed status expiration date" in your case. In the best case, that is the time your 12 month OPT expires and from that time you will start to accrue unlawfully present days. In the worst case, that is the time when your 90 days of OPT period expired, which means that you have already accumulated more than 180 days of unlawful presence and you will be barred from reentering US for 3 years.
Again, if you need to know this, please consult an immigration lawyer. Your school's international students' office should also be able to help you. But in my experience, they are not able to deal with complex situations and usually gives too conservative an answer that will save their behind should there be any complications. Once one staff of my school's ISSO asked me to apply for CPT for working in the UK! Thankfully the actual advisor was more knowledgeable. However, the advisors are not immigration lawyers.
2)How does USCIS actually track who is employed and who is not?
They may have multiple methods if they actually launch an investigation, but usually they will check their records the next time you apply for a VISA, inside or outside US. E.g., if you want to apply for H1-B, you will have to show that you are not out of status.
3)If I were to catch the next flight back home (India), will I face problems while leaving the US/or entering India?
Nope. You can merrily exit US. Entering home country of course is in the jurisdiction of the authority of your home country. Assuming you are an Indian citizen, they cannot prevent you from entering.
I.e., you will have no problem at all.
4)Can I get a letter from a firm/company stating that I was doing an unpaid internship with them?(which will be counted towards the employment period)Are there any repurcursions for the company?
Any thoughts/opinions wouldbe most appreciated.
Thanks!
My only suggestion is not to walk the path of doing fraudulent activities for staying in the US. If that means going back to India, please do so. Perhaps you will have an equally bright career in India.
sodh
07-27 05:03 PM
And one more thing notarize the request, its not neccesary,but its better to be safe.
katrina
01-04 03:34 PM
koppula09 please read the statement from below link.
http://www.lbl.gov/LBL-Work/HR/irss/FormI539.html
Contact your lawyer ask what they request when they fill the Form I539. If the request your wife h4 extension she should be OK but if they request to change your wife H4 status to H1b I don't think they made a good decision, you should find another lawyer :eek:
get a second opinion of what to do. My suggestion your wife should apply for her H1b ASAP (premium processing). I believe it possible for her company to apply her H1b but again find a good Lawyer ASAP.
remember not all lawyer is a good immigrant lawyer. Even a good immigrant lawyer could make a mistake too. It's your life you can't rely to anybody.
so act quickly to find out how to get out from this problem before too late.
Good luck. :o
http://www.lbl.gov/LBL-Work/HR/irss/FormI539.html
Contact your lawyer ask what they request when they fill the Form I539. If the request your wife h4 extension she should be OK but if they request to change your wife H4 status to H1b I don't think they made a good decision, you should find another lawyer :eek:
get a second opinion of what to do. My suggestion your wife should apply for her H1b ASAP (premium processing). I believe it possible for her company to apply her H1b but again find a good Lawyer ASAP.
remember not all lawyer is a good immigrant lawyer. Even a good immigrant lawyer could make a mistake too. It's your life you can't rely to anybody.
so act quickly to find out how to get out from this problem before too late.
Good luck. :o
more...
imm_pro
05-20 01:13 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26605
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
shortchanged
08-03 10:25 PM
I understand everyone is anxious but this is simple language. I am sure you can 'decipher' it
It means you have become an "undocumented or illegal", and you have to learn English and you are qualified for a Z visa :rolleyes: :D
Forget about your I-140; just focus on I-485. I-140 seems to be a foregone conclusion.
Enjoy your weekend man...............
It means you have become an "undocumented or illegal", and you have to learn English and you are qualified for a Z visa :rolleyes: :D
Forget about your I-140; just focus on I-485. I-140 seems to be a foregone conclusion.
Enjoy your weekend man...............
more...
GC_Aspirant101
09-28 05:23 PM
i am in the same boat. receipt notice says Jul5 25 .. online september 15 ( I guess it is notice date)
ss1026
02-07 12:44 AM
The immigrant visa dates for EB-2 ROW (France is part of ROW - Rest Of the World) are current. That means if you convince your company to apply for a EB-2 GC, it could be approved quickly, probably within a year or two. Just for comparision, EB-2 dates for India are in Early 2004 (that is a five year wait). It makes sense to go with EB-2 employment GC. I am an India and the wait for us is the longest across the board. In the current economic scenario, it might be prudent to wait a bit before starting your employment GC. It is best to follow your attorney/firms advice on the timing.
I am not sure if you have the patience or the desire to wait for your future daughter to grow to 21 and apply for a family GC. I am not sure what the wait times are for family based GC for ROW but they are not as attractive as employment based Green card. There is no comparision in the wait times though so I imagine the other person was probably kidding. And for clarification, the longest wait for employment based GC for EB-3 India which is currently at Oct 2001 (about 7.5 years).....and that is my category :-( . It certainly aint a decade yet though it seems headed that way.
I am not sure if you have the patience or the desire to wait for your future daughter to grow to 21 and apply for a family GC. I am not sure what the wait times are for family based GC for ROW but they are not as attractive as employment based Green card. There is no comparision in the wait times though so I imagine the other person was probably kidding. And for clarification, the longest wait for employment based GC for EB-3 India which is currently at Oct 2001 (about 7.5 years).....and that is my category :-( . It certainly aint a decade yet though it seems headed that way.
more...
GoneSouth
05-31 09:37 AM
You guys have my $100.00. 502(d)(2) must die ! ;-)
Good luck !
- GS
Good luck !
- GS
looivy
02-26 04:04 PM
Can a legal expert provide advice as to whether I can use EAD/AP to get in?
more...
HumHongeKamiyab
01-02 11:37 AM
The % displayed here is inconsequential. As about 90% of people who have not received their FP notice would vote, but only about 5% of people who have received the FP notice would do the same (As they see more interesting thread somewhere). But I am glad someone atleast created a thread and we see 40 odd people who are in the same situation.
I applied for 485 on july 12th to NSC, case transfered to TSC. Have not got FP for both me and my wife.
there are about 40%..... so lots of them....
I applied for 485 on july 12th to NSC, case transfered to TSC. Have not got FP for both me and my wife.
there are about 40%..... so lots of them....
MrWaitingGC
05-22 04:20 PM
If you have I140 cleared from company A you can use Priority date if you change Job and apply fresh GC from Company B in any catergory.
How will this change if the new legislation/amendment that are discussed passes.
Any ideas guys.
How will this change if the new legislation/amendment that are discussed passes.
Any ideas guys.
more...
singhsa3
10-21 06:42 PM
All,
I submitted my first application on July 2nd. since I did not get receipt notice till Aug 16th so I filled the second (as back up) one on Aug 16th. Later I did get my receipt notices for July 2nd.
Though, I did put stop payment on the checks for the appliaction filled on Aug 16th but yesterday, I received their receipt notices.
Now, I have two A#s one for July 2nd applications and another one for Aug 16th appliaction.
I was planning to just sit on it and do not respond to finger printing notice or any communciation from USCIS for Aug 16th application and hence causing it to get rejected.
The reason I do not want to communicate with USCIS is that I don't want any confusion and hence anything happen to my July 2nd application.
Is it a right strategy? Please comment.
I submitted my first application on July 2nd. since I did not get receipt notice till Aug 16th so I filled the second (as back up) one on Aug 16th. Later I did get my receipt notices for July 2nd.
Though, I did put stop payment on the checks for the appliaction filled on Aug 16th but yesterday, I received their receipt notices.
Now, I have two A#s one for July 2nd applications and another one for Aug 16th appliaction.
I was planning to just sit on it and do not respond to finger printing notice or any communciation from USCIS for Aug 16th application and hence causing it to get rejected.
The reason I do not want to communicate with USCIS is that I don't want any confusion and hence anything happen to my July 2nd application.
Is it a right strategy? Please comment.
willigetagc
09-06 01:13 PM
I finally got my AP, 15 days after my EAD (100 days total) . I was happy to open the packet, until this......
THEY SENT ME MY AP WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S PICTURE!!!!!!!
Everything else is Correct (address, DOB, A# etc...)
GURUS, please advise what should I do...... I am so pissed!!!!! Thankfully my EAD has the correct pic.... I had done an E-file....June 7th and my previous AP expires Sept 20
Awww, come on!!! stop cribbing. Here check out this link for some help. :D
http://www.plasticsurgery.org/
THEY SENT ME MY AP WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S PICTURE!!!!!!!
Everything else is Correct (address, DOB, A# etc...)
GURUS, please advise what should I do...... I am so pissed!!!!! Thankfully my EAD has the correct pic.... I had done an E-file....June 7th and my previous AP expires Sept 20
Awww, come on!!! stop cribbing. Here check out this link for some help. :D
http://www.plasticsurgery.org/
more...
FinalGC
04-14 08:57 AM
Guys:
All who have incorrect details on parents passport for visitor visa....all you may need is an affidavit during application to B1 visa. Since the parents record does not matter in India.
However, if you have not filed your 485 yet, then I encourage all to make the corrections related to your spouses birthday, name and whatever is needed, otherwise u will get an unnecessary RFE.
My wife's mother's name, father's name and her birth location was all messed up in her passport, between the birth certificate and parents passport. By God's grace I was able to correct all of it, after pleading at Indian Consulate and running between various courts in India......It is a time consuming effort, but looking back i am glad I did that...since now my wife's records are all accurate and were corrected before we filed 485.
All who have incorrect details on parents passport for visitor visa....all you may need is an affidavit during application to B1 visa. Since the parents record does not matter in India.
However, if you have not filed your 485 yet, then I encourage all to make the corrections related to your spouses birthday, name and whatever is needed, otherwise u will get an unnecessary RFE.
My wife's mother's name, father's name and her birth location was all messed up in her passport, between the birth certificate and parents passport. By God's grace I was able to correct all of it, after pleading at Indian Consulate and running between various courts in India......It is a time consuming effort, but looking back i am glad I did that...since now my wife's records are all accurate and were corrected before we filed 485.
waiting4gc02
03-06 01:41 PM
Guys:
Everyone is talking EB2....what are the prospects for EB3 - India??
Is it going to move forward..??
Good Luck..??
Everyone is talking EB2....what are the prospects for EB3 - India??
Is it going to move forward..??
Good Luck..??
more...
Refugee_New
04-08 11:58 AM
I called the TSC IO a few times and finally it got cleared. Yes my PD is current and I wish the case gets assigned to some one soon.
These IO's knows nothing and they talk all bullshit. They keep on changing the story whenever you call them. Thats what happened in my case.
In Feb '08 my NC was pending
Mid Feb' 08 NC cleared
March 1st, NC pending
March 15, NC cleard and good to go
March 26, NC pending and waiting to be assigned to officer
April4th, NC pending and still waiting to go to an officer.
These IO's knows nothing and they talk all bullshit. They keep on changing the story whenever you call them. Thats what happened in my case.
In Feb '08 my NC was pending
Mid Feb' 08 NC cleared
March 1st, NC pending
March 15, NC cleard and good to go
March 26, NC pending and waiting to be assigned to officer
April4th, NC pending and still waiting to go to an officer.
nomorelogins
06-25 02:26 PM
Since there has been a screw up in the payroll by your company, ask them to contact the CPA for advice. They should be able to work out how to issue a W2 ( amendment ) etc, refile company quarter results etc. So talk to company CPA ( else report to IRS )
krishmunn
03-04 12:31 PM
do you know what is the cost of filing a LCA amendment, and is it necessary to take a copy of that LCA and hang it on the client notice board ????????
There is no cost to file a LCA unless you engage a lawyer. The LCA process seems to be pretty easy but again, it is something your employer should (and allowed to ) do, not you. One reason why employer might be avoiding filing a new LCA is if the new location has a higher wage requirement (eg. moving from mid-west to New York city) , the LCA should reflect that and they need to pay you accordingly.
There is no cost to file a LCA unless you engage a lawyer. The LCA process seems to be pretty easy but again, it is something your employer should (and allowed to ) do, not you. One reason why employer might be avoiding filing a new LCA is if the new location has a higher wage requirement (eg. moving from mid-west to New York city) , the LCA should reflect that and they need to pay you accordingly.
sk8er
04-14 04:00 AM
Hi,
I am trying to find a job under the "new H1-B quota" after leaving the H1-B status last year even though I did NOT exhaust my initial 6 year quota.
So, can you
1. enter the US on B2 for a job search from June 2011 - September 2011
2. leave the US on September 29, 2011 ( right before October 1, 2011 ) with a new H1-B quota I-797
3. get an new H1 stamped outside under the new quota with a September 20 - October 7 , 2011 consular appointment date
4. enter the US for the job right after getting the visa stamped on let us say on October 15, 2011
and not raise any of the following red flags :
1. Why is this person applying for a new H1-B visa right after returning from a B2 after such a long stay ?
2. Did he complete 365 days outside the US since I had a previous 6 year H1-B. I would have done 365 days outside the US by June 2011 before re-entering on B2
3. want to be a little careful since between June 2010 - June 2011 I have made a few 3-4 days trips to the US on B2 already throughout that time ? Does this hurt anything ? Would the consulate for stamping care about this or the USCIS or both ? Are the 365 days supposed to be continuous ?
4. I dont want to change status from B2 to H1-B since people say this is very risky. Any comments ?
5. Would the consulate cancel my B2 visa after stamping H1-B ?
Please advise on where I should give gaps in my timeline or would cutting it so close work ?
I am trying to find a job under the "new H1-B quota" after leaving the H1-B status last year even though I did NOT exhaust my initial 6 year quota.
So, can you
1. enter the US on B2 for a job search from June 2011 - September 2011
2. leave the US on September 29, 2011 ( right before October 1, 2011 ) with a new H1-B quota I-797
3. get an new H1 stamped outside under the new quota with a September 20 - October 7 , 2011 consular appointment date
4. enter the US for the job right after getting the visa stamped on let us say on October 15, 2011
and not raise any of the following red flags :
1. Why is this person applying for a new H1-B visa right after returning from a B2 after such a long stay ?
2. Did he complete 365 days outside the US since I had a previous 6 year H1-B. I would have done 365 days outside the US by June 2011 before re-entering on B2
3. want to be a little careful since between June 2010 - June 2011 I have made a few 3-4 days trips to the US on B2 already throughout that time ? Does this hurt anything ? Would the consulate for stamping care about this or the USCIS or both ? Are the 365 days supposed to be continuous ?
4. I dont want to change status from B2 to H1-B since people say this is very risky. Any comments ?
5. Would the consulate cancel my B2 visa after stamping H1-B ?
Please advise on where I should give gaps in my timeline or would cutting it so close work ?
learning01
05-10 11:48 AM
immi2006
That's what we need to do in these forums.
You see, I tried to follow the second link; it didn't work. I tried the first link. It took me to a web site that is totally disorganized and poorly built; I dont have time to navigate and see what you posted about.
After this second corrected post, I follow the link. It is NOT about the CIR and the logjam; it is an attempt to arrive at an agreement to have a working methodology to verify and check illegal immigrants.
Hence, my title: please read and post your opinion, instead of just posting thie links or the story.
That's what we need to do in these forums.
You see, I tried to follow the second link; it didn't work. I tried the first link. It took me to a web site that is totally disorganized and poorly built; I dont have time to navigate and see what you posted about.
After this second corrected post, I follow the link. It is NOT about the CIR and the logjam; it is an attempt to arrive at an agreement to have a working methodology to verify and check illegal immigrants.
Hence, my title: please read and post your opinion, instead of just posting thie links or the story.
0 comments:
Post a Comment