desi3933
07-10 02:55 PM
I
....
My question to you was if no H1B is "permanent" (as you opine), then how can you prove that the AC20 job on H1B is or isn't "permanent?" So if that job is not "permanent," how do you convince/mention that in as RVE-EVL?
Because Future GC job could be same job on H-1B, only difference being on H-1B your job has fixed end date (noted by I-94), and GC job has no fixed end date, hence permanent. It does not make that current job on H-1B permanent.
Temp Job and Permannet Job can have same job title and job duties. Just like contract job and full-time job can have same job title and job duties, but one is employee of the company and other one is not.
.
....
My question to you was if no H1B is "permanent" (as you opine), then how can you prove that the AC20 job on H1B is or isn't "permanent?" So if that job is not "permanent," how do you convince/mention that in as RVE-EVL?
Because Future GC job could be same job on H-1B, only difference being on H-1B your job has fixed end date (noted by I-94), and GC job has no fixed end date, hence permanent. It does not make that current job on H-1B permanent.
Temp Job and Permannet Job can have same job title and job duties. Just like contract job and full-time job can have same job title and job duties, but one is employee of the company and other one is not.
.
wallpaper Emma Watson Pixie Haircut
kosu
06-15 08:22 PM
Mailed to TSC on: June 5th 2007
Mailed From State: VA
Received at TSC on: June 6th 2007
140 approved from : TSC
Receipt Date: June 11th 2007.
Got the Case Number from check image. Still not received my Receipt Notice.
Mailed From State: VA
Received at TSC on: June 6th 2007
140 approved from : TSC
Receipt Date: June 11th 2007.
Got the Case Number from check image. Still not received my Receipt Notice.
diptam
07-04 09:58 PM
First of all - Stay away from X ( be it american/russian or whatever company)
From your post it seems like Y is a kind of better in behaviour, closer to Home
, wants to help you in GC ( FROM SCRATCH) but you dont want to pay for GC cost of 8000-9000 again ( what you wasted already ).
I'm not a legal counsel/mentor or lawyer but in mY opinion - You find a company Z which has similar criteria as Y but only additional criteria is they will bear the cost of your GC - Its not difficult to find such Z ( worst case they may ask you to sign a bond of 7-10K if you leave them 1 yr after GC) ....
After you get GC or EAD at hand you have lots of avenues open to tackle any bond that Z might have made you sign.
Does this helps ??
When I joined Company X (prior employer) I paid for H1b transfer fee and h1b renewal fee(total $3200 + $3000).
They agreed to sponsor my green card(just to give required paperwork) and they asked me to pay GC cost, So far I have paid $1500 for labor +$1700 advertisement + $1700 for I-140 + $3750 just now to file I-485 for me and for my spouse as dates were current to my lawyer . I have labor and I-140 approved from Company X.
I was compromising my personal life by staying away from my family and company X didn't find any client near to my home. I decided to stay at home hoping Company X will find some client near to my home. I was on a bench(no salary for a month).When I asked for a "employment letter "to file I-485 Comapny X said they can't give because they are
not paying me , I said I will resign and then you give me "future employement letter". I resiged Company X( i found company Y near to my home), in 10 days they cancelled my H1b visa without informing me, gladly I found Company Y and H1b transfer took place before they could cancel my H1b. Company X is reluctant even today to give future emplyement
letter.They are ready to do corp-to-corp, for that I have to pay them H1b tranfer cost of $3200(as my prior h1b got cancelled by company X) . I don't beleive its worth going back to them , but at the same time never wanted to lose $8650 green card cost. To join Company Y again I paid h1b transfer fee and , company Y expects me to pay Green card cost again. I am on 7th year extension. New H1b is valid till 2010(3 yr extension on I-140 approval from company X).
Shall I start green card again with company Y ?
Company X doesn't respond to emails/calls. There should some law to protect us from such employers. BTW Employer X was an american employer and wants to follow book-rules.Example .. informing USCIS to windraw H1b petition.
From your post it seems like Y is a kind of better in behaviour, closer to Home
, wants to help you in GC ( FROM SCRATCH) but you dont want to pay for GC cost of 8000-9000 again ( what you wasted already ).
I'm not a legal counsel/mentor or lawyer but in mY opinion - You find a company Z which has similar criteria as Y but only additional criteria is they will bear the cost of your GC - Its not difficult to find such Z ( worst case they may ask you to sign a bond of 7-10K if you leave them 1 yr after GC) ....
After you get GC or EAD at hand you have lots of avenues open to tackle any bond that Z might have made you sign.
Does this helps ??
When I joined Company X (prior employer) I paid for H1b transfer fee and h1b renewal fee(total $3200 + $3000).
They agreed to sponsor my green card(just to give required paperwork) and they asked me to pay GC cost, So far I have paid $1500 for labor +$1700 advertisement + $1700 for I-140 + $3750 just now to file I-485 for me and for my spouse as dates were current to my lawyer . I have labor and I-140 approved from Company X.
I was compromising my personal life by staying away from my family and company X didn't find any client near to my home. I decided to stay at home hoping Company X will find some client near to my home. I was on a bench(no salary for a month).When I asked for a "employment letter "to file I-485 Comapny X said they can't give because they are
not paying me , I said I will resign and then you give me "future employement letter". I resiged Company X( i found company Y near to my home), in 10 days they cancelled my H1b visa without informing me, gladly I found Company Y and H1b transfer took place before they could cancel my H1b. Company X is reluctant even today to give future emplyement
letter.They are ready to do corp-to-corp, for that I have to pay them H1b tranfer cost of $3200(as my prior h1b got cancelled by company X) . I don't beleive its worth going back to them , but at the same time never wanted to lose $8650 green card cost. To join Company Y again I paid h1b transfer fee and , company Y expects me to pay Green card cost again. I am on 7th year extension. New H1b is valid till 2010(3 yr extension on I-140 approval from company X).
Shall I start green card again with company Y ?
Company X doesn't respond to emails/calls. There should some law to protect us from such employers. BTW Employer X was an american employer and wants to follow book-rules.Example .. informing USCIS to windraw H1b petition.
2011 Emma Watson just dropped the
i99
09-25 03:57 PM
I140 or H1-B is another story, but, I485 is solely your application. You are entitled to talk to the attorney who sent your application (and put his/her name as a contact to USCIS) BY LAW. For I485 he/she is representing you, thus have to reply to your inquiries. It might even be ILLEGAL for the attorney to give info about your I485 to your employer.
How you can make your employer convinced about this? You might show evidence. Your initial aggrement with the attorney will help, too.
Too much of patience needed for this. My lawyer sent the papers on july 2nd. Still no word about the Receipt notice. I can see an LUD on July 28th on my approved I140. my 140 starts with SRC.... Anyone similar to my case.
Sub. Labor - Priority date aug 5th 2004.
i140 approved.
485 package sent on 2nd july. i dont know when/whether they receieved it.
My company doesn't allow me to interact directly with the lawyer. is there anyway i cna find out whats going on....
How you can make your employer convinced about this? You might show evidence. Your initial aggrement with the attorney will help, too.
Too much of patience needed for this. My lawyer sent the papers on july 2nd. Still no word about the Receipt notice. I can see an LUD on July 28th on my approved I140. my 140 starts with SRC.... Anyone similar to my case.
Sub. Labor - Priority date aug 5th 2004.
i140 approved.
485 package sent on 2nd july. i dont know when/whether they receieved it.
My company doesn't allow me to interact directly with the lawyer. is there anyway i cna find out whats going on....
more...
TheOmbudsman
10-30 11:53 AM
Honorable Senior members:
Why my posts appear with a red dot ? Can I respectfully request the removal of such red dot ? Instead please assign me a green dot like all other members.
Thanks,
The Ombudsman
Why my posts appear with a red dot ? Can I respectfully request the removal of such red dot ? Instead please assign me a green dot like all other members.
Thanks,
The Ombudsman
starscream
06-08 04:33 PM
Please Contribute To The Funding Drive. Please Paste Your Contributions On The Funding Drive Thread So Iv Can Keep Count
more...
Madhuri
11-17 08:59 PM
Done
2010 emma watson new haircut
AabTuAgaGC
08-31 10:09 AM
Congratulations. Mine was also delivered on the same date, 7/27. Did you get the receipts or your Attorney? Is your case EB2?
My Attorney got it and mailed it to me. My case is EB3. Hope this helps!:)
My Attorney got it and mailed it to me. My case is EB3. Hope this helps!:)
more...
fetch_gc
09-05 05:38 PM
PLease see signature for more details
hair Emma+watson+haircut+pixie
edd
06-11 04:45 PM
I know one of us got it. Any one else ?
more...
raghav235
08-15 01:26 PM
EB3_SEP04,
My Receipt and Notice date is July 03, 2008, however there was a soft LUD on my case on July 08, 2008. And again another LUD on August 14, 2008 which is the approval.
Thanks
Raghav235
Raghav, congrats and thanks for the update.
Is July 08, 2008 also the Notice Date on your receipt notice? I'm wondering if generally there is one more LUD after the notice date and before the approval, when they pull the file off the shelf and start working on the case.
for me no LUD after notice date.
My Receipt and Notice date is July 03, 2008, however there was a soft LUD on my case on July 08, 2008. And again another LUD on August 14, 2008 which is the approval.
Thanks
Raghav235
Raghav, congrats and thanks for the update.
Is July 08, 2008 also the Notice Date on your receipt notice? I'm wondering if generally there is one more LUD after the notice date and before the approval, when they pull the file off the shelf and start working on the case.
for me no LUD after notice date.
hot Harry Potter actress Emma
arihant
05-04 03:43 PM
I don't think having a MS degree supercedes a BS always.
How can you compare say for example a BS+10 yrs person with a kid just out of school doing MS. Doesn't jive. I think at somepoint both level off. Just merely having a MS degree doesn't mean anything without experience.
IT is not just one such field. You would find other's too. Financial aspect that you are talking is a whole different topic
You are right in your observation. But, the SKIL Bill seems to place emphasis on people with advanced degrees. So, whether you and I agree about the Bachelors + work experience part or not, the fact of the matter is that the Bill exempts people with advanced degrees from cap limits.
How can you compare say for example a BS+10 yrs person with a kid just out of school doing MS. Doesn't jive. I think at somepoint both level off. Just merely having a MS degree doesn't mean anything without experience.
IT is not just one such field. You would find other's too. Financial aspect that you are talking is a whole different topic
You are right in your observation. But, the SKIL Bill seems to place emphasis on people with advanced degrees. So, whether you and I agree about the Bachelors + work experience part or not, the fact of the matter is that the Bill exempts people with advanced degrees from cap limits.
more...
house Emma Watson cut her hair cut
amitjoey
07-09 04:34 PM
I sent the pdf and a write up to reporters in my local area.
tattoo Emma Watson#39;s symbolic haircut
drona
07-09 06:13 PM
Done. It was on the original press release but I went ahead and removed it anyway.
more...
pictures Emma Watson. haircuts
sunny1000
07-08 08:08 PM
The case should not have been accepted if the lady does not have constitutional rights. Lets see if they reject the case on this basis after listening to Tancredo.
The following link may throw some light on what non-citizens are entitled under the U.S constitution.
http://www.slate.com/id/1008367/
------------------------------------------------------
explainer: Answers to your questions about the news.
Do Noncitizens Have Constitutional Rights?
Chris Suellentrop
Posted Thursday, Sept. 27, 2001, at 5:47 PM ET
Attorney General John Ashcroft wants the power to lock up immigrants suspected of terrorism and hold them indefinitely. Wouldn't this violate the Constitution?
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. This fact sheet from the National Lawyers Guild outlines a host of rights afforded to immigrants and citizens alike. (There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
In 1952's Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to expel noncitizens who were former Communists. "In recognizing this power and this responsibility of Congress, one does not in the remotest degree align oneself with fears unworthy of the American spirit or with hostility to the bracing air of the free spirit," Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote in his concurrence. "One merely recognizes that the place to resist unwise or cruel legislation touching aliens is the Congress, not this Court."
Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that's paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide "clear and convincing" evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt").
On the other hand, some immigrants who are suspected terrorists may not be allowed to confront the evidence against them. In 1996, Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secret tribunal that can examine classified evidence. (Interestingly, Congress mandated in the same law that an immigrant tried by the terrorist court would have the right to counsel at government expense.) But the Alien Terrorist Removal Court has never been used, and a Department of Justice spokesman said he isn't aware of any plans to use the terrorist court any time soon.
Next question?
Explainer thanks Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association; immigration lawyer David Leopold; Russ Bergeron of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; this American Civil Liberties Union report; and Dan Nelson of the Department of Justice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The following link may throw some light on what non-citizens are entitled under the U.S constitution.
http://www.slate.com/id/1008367/
------------------------------------------------------
explainer: Answers to your questions about the news.
Do Noncitizens Have Constitutional Rights?
Chris Suellentrop
Posted Thursday, Sept. 27, 2001, at 5:47 PM ET
Attorney General John Ashcroft wants the power to lock up immigrants suspected of terrorism and hold them indefinitely. Wouldn't this violate the Constitution?
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. This fact sheet from the National Lawyers Guild outlines a host of rights afforded to immigrants and citizens alike. (There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
In 1952's Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to expel noncitizens who were former Communists. "In recognizing this power and this responsibility of Congress, one does not in the remotest degree align oneself with fears unworthy of the American spirit or with hostility to the bracing air of the free spirit," Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote in his concurrence. "One merely recognizes that the place to resist unwise or cruel legislation touching aliens is the Congress, not this Court."
Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that's paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide "clear and convincing" evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt").
On the other hand, some immigrants who are suspected terrorists may not be allowed to confront the evidence against them. In 1996, Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secret tribunal that can examine classified evidence. (Interestingly, Congress mandated in the same law that an immigrant tried by the terrorist court would have the right to counsel at government expense.) But the Alien Terrorist Removal Court has never been used, and a Department of Justice spokesman said he isn't aware of any plans to use the terrorist court any time soon.
Next question?
Explainer thanks Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association; immigration lawyer David Leopold; Russ Bergeron of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; this American Civil Liberties Union report; and Dan Nelson of the Department of Justice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
dresses emma watson with a red
sivatallapaneni
07-20 12:15 PM
I'm going to contribute atleast $100. There is a always a first time, This is for the person who worked for my own good without expecting anything in return.
Aman you are a true inspiration.
Aman you are a true inspiration.
more...
makeup emma watson kiss scene in
xlr8r
07-19 09:45 PM
I pledge $200.
girlfriend Emma Watson Haircut
Sachin_Stock
09-14 01:08 PM
I think IV should make it mandatory for $25/monthly charge for all the folks.
At least we can get rid of the dual-nature of 'helping you, only a little bit' sort of tendency.
However, there should total transparency once people pay. I see some guys are frustrated for lack of information despite them being donors.
At least we can get rid of the dual-nature of 'helping you, only a little bit' sort of tendency.
However, there should total transparency once people pay. I see some guys are frustrated for lack of information despite them being donors.
hairstyles Harry Potter star Emma Watson
alisa
12-12 09:22 PM
Thanks for your advice. The intent of the letter is to show a different perspective to Senator Sessions. Nothing more or nothig less. He said he did not receive any feedback from legal immigrants. Fine, we say here it comes. If he continues to block legal immigration reform bills, he has to find another pretext, not "no feedback from immigrants".
There is always a rational side in every human being. Senator Sessions is smart. Let us hope Senator Sessions surprises us by bringing his own version of EB immigration reform.
I agree whole-heartedly.
Senators/Congressmen are rational, smart and intelligent people. We HAVE to apprise them of our situation.
We have a legitimate, common sense and good cause on our side.
In this time of globalization and increased competition, do the senators/congressmen really want this country to lose half a million highly skilled, experienced and trained-in-America-for-years people to India and China, and to Europe and canada?
If they put 'holds' or refuse to take up our cause after they are fully aware of our situation, then atleast you know that they are doing it out of racism and/or narrow political and parochial motives.
But unless we make our situation known to these guys, we shouldn't really blame them.......Also, those with kids born in America might get more of a response from the legislators.
It is pathetic that there is a thread from NJ, and the guy is begging people to join/respond; it is mind-boggling that there are only seven members from NJ. It is absolutely ridiculous that the only two responses on the 'Calling all Wisconsin members' have been from myself, and another person. And that other person is from Illinois......
Can there be any guidance from the core team about personalizing our stories, and making those known to the legislators?
There is always a rational side in every human being. Senator Sessions is smart. Let us hope Senator Sessions surprises us by bringing his own version of EB immigration reform.
I agree whole-heartedly.
Senators/Congressmen are rational, smart and intelligent people. We HAVE to apprise them of our situation.
We have a legitimate, common sense and good cause on our side.
In this time of globalization and increased competition, do the senators/congressmen really want this country to lose half a million highly skilled, experienced and trained-in-America-for-years people to India and China, and to Europe and canada?
If they put 'holds' or refuse to take up our cause after they are fully aware of our situation, then atleast you know that they are doing it out of racism and/or narrow political and parochial motives.
But unless we make our situation known to these guys, we shouldn't really blame them.......Also, those with kids born in America might get more of a response from the legislators.
It is pathetic that there is a thread from NJ, and the guy is begging people to join/respond; it is mind-boggling that there are only seven members from NJ. It is absolutely ridiculous that the only two responses on the 'Calling all Wisconsin members' have been from myself, and another person. And that other person is from Illinois......
Can there be any guidance from the core team about personalizing our stories, and making those known to the legislators?
abhijitp
11-21 03:07 PM
You are turning a blind eye to his family, while also asking him to spend time with his family. You ask him to spend what he can on his treatment, while his insurance cover may go away if he quits his job and return to fiji/india.
There is no easy answer here.
But if he had his GC, he could spend all the time with his family, use his insurance cover at the same time, and not worry about his family going out of status.
He COULD try to expedite the GC, while also exploring other options.
Sorry for splitting things apart, Mehul. My best wishes are with you.
There is no easy answer here.
But if he had his GC, he could spend all the time with his family, use his insurance cover at the same time, and not worry about his family going out of status.
He COULD try to expedite the GC, while also exploring other options.
Sorry for splitting things apart, Mehul. My best wishes are with you.
desi3933
07-10 10:43 AM
that link you have provided is for ability to pay and wage below dol standards case... i read the entire document and wasted 30 precious minutes of my time and a friends time reading that case... thank for nothing.
Page 5
Further, the director noted in his decision that the petitioner has not demonstrated that it is the intending employer offering the beneficiary a full-time, permanent position. The petitioner did not address this issue on appeal. Therefore, the petitioner has not demonstrated that it is the intending employer offering the beneficiary a full-time, permanent position.
.
Page 5
Further, the director noted in his decision that the petitioner has not demonstrated that it is the intending employer offering the beneficiary a full-time, permanent position. The petitioner did not address this issue on appeal. Therefore, the petitioner has not demonstrated that it is the intending employer offering the beneficiary a full-time, permanent position.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment