supernova
09-05 05:04 PM
YSR's dad, YSR himself, and his son are all violent criminals killed countless people, ruined the state to stone age, robbed real estate from middle class, etc............ and yet some people love him. Values of human life are at all time low in that part of the region.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. Cute Babies Wallpapers
Pawankalyan
11-16 12:21 PM
Don't worry about processing dates..
In a brief all centers will move 1 month forward and NSB with move 15 day forward....
The good thing regarding the processing date is we don't have retrogation..
In a brief all centers will move 1 month forward and NSB with move 15 day forward....
The good thing regarding the processing date is we don't have retrogation..
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
Kitiara
05-27 10:25 AM
Consider it a back handed compliment. :)
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies with
vin13
09-30 08:03 AM
:( I just got an RFE on my case...I had 2 soft LUD from past 2 days and now the status says "Request for additional evidence sent."
I have used AC21 to change jobs but I am still on H1....Now i am worried.
I have used AC21 to change jobs but I am still on H1....Now i am worried.
more...
wallpapers of babies with quotes. quotes for abies. Wallpapers
seahawks
06-29 11:30 PM
Thank you for your input, do you know where I should call, if there is a number and so on? There is absolutely no information on any place on fixing 485 form.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
feedfront
09-16 02:51 PM
Done
more...
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
kirupa
06-07 01:42 AM
Never heard of this contest??
You mean, you missed out on the Get out the Stamp and Rock the Stamp campaigns? It was ALL over cable TV :P
faster - in one week.
You mean, you missed out on the Get out the Stamp and Rock the Stamp campaigns? It was ALL over cable TV :P
faster - in one week.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
kishdam
03-19 12:16 PM
I-140 withdrawal is not mandatory but it's good for both - employer and employee.
Not sure how withdrawing an approved I140 is good for the employee??
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
Not sure how withdrawing an approved I140 is good for the employee??
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
more...
wallpapers of babies with quotes. Beautiful Babies Graphics
kaisersose
06-02 01:42 PM
you are right, but isnt that found only when you are travelling outside of the USA? If I am in USA till i get a gc and then add my wife, how will anyone know if she is out of status ?
If they know you changed employers to use EAD (your previous employer has to cancel your H-1b by law which also cancels the H-4), then they will know.
Check some of the RFEs that are coming in these days. They want to see documentation in support of lawful presence right from day one of the applicant's entry, even if it was 10 years ago.
If they know you changed employers to use EAD (your previous employer has to cancel your H-1b by law which also cancels the H-4), then they will know.
Check some of the RFEs that are coming in these days. They want to see documentation in support of lawful presence right from day one of the applicant's entry, even if it was 10 years ago.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. Wallpaper Girls and oys
anindya1234
07-17 10:15 PM
Bump
more...
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
ck_b2001
07-17 07:37 PM
Hi All,
I applied for my 485 on June 30th 2007, It reached USCIS on July 2nd. On July 2nd morning USCIS announced that all applications will be rejected because there are no VISA numbers. Considering that I went to Mexico on July 12th and got my H1 stamped. Today USCIS has announced that it will accept applications through 8/17/2007.
My question is: In my 485 app. I entered my old I-94# and VISA #. Since I went to Mexico and got my H1 stamped and entered US my I-94 and VISA #'s have changed. Will this be an issue?
I heard that USCIS will verify my status using the I-94 on the 485 form before issuing a 485 reciept. In which case my old I-94 would show that I have left the country & USCIS can abondon my application!! Is this true? Has this happend to any of you?
Please advise.
Thanks,
Nachi
You should seek legal advice. you are correct in saying that at POE they need to know that you had applied for 485 so that when they issue I-94, your filed petition is still vaild and not considered abandoned.
I applied for my 485 on June 30th 2007, It reached USCIS on July 2nd. On July 2nd morning USCIS announced that all applications will be rejected because there are no VISA numbers. Considering that I went to Mexico on July 12th and got my H1 stamped. Today USCIS has announced that it will accept applications through 8/17/2007.
My question is: In my 485 app. I entered my old I-94# and VISA #. Since I went to Mexico and got my H1 stamped and entered US my I-94 and VISA #'s have changed. Will this be an issue?
I heard that USCIS will verify my status using the I-94 on the 485 form before issuing a 485 reciept. In which case my old I-94 would show that I have left the country & USCIS can abondon my application!! Is this true? Has this happend to any of you?
Please advise.
Thanks,
Nachi
You should seek legal advice. you are correct in saying that at POE they need to know that you had applied for 485 so that when they issue I-94, your filed petition is still vaild and not considered abandoned.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. Baby Wallpapers. Download
chi_shark
03-11 11:06 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?
i think you need to have intent to work for the employer when filing 140... without intent, it is likely that this will be considered fraud. but all this comes up only if you are called for interview or if there are detailed rfe(s)... then, when you go for citizenship, this could come up again... but like someone else said, you are better off with a lawyer's opinion...
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?
i think you need to have intent to work for the employer when filing 140... without intent, it is likely that this will be considered fraud. but all this comes up only if you are called for interview or if there are detailed rfe(s)... then, when you go for citizenship, this could come up again... but like someone else said, you are better off with a lawyer's opinion...
more...
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
admin
04-08 09:22 AM
I have changed the title of this thread to make it less controversial.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies with quotes. Families with abies and; Families with abies and. ct2k7. Apr 24, 06:32 PM
aa_ke_phas_gaya
06-24 06:13 PM
Remember you are bonded labor if you are on H1B or Work Permit. They will use you & your illegal brothers every election year and this is one of those years ..... everything is chatter until something heppens.
Don't get your hopes high.... just get your head down and work for them.
Don't get your hopes high.... just get your head down and work for them.
more...
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
Refugee_New
03-19 03:05 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 ]
Its unfortunate that you have a very recent RD. I talked to an IO at NSC yesterday and i was told that they will process the case based on the order they recieved. So they go by RD. If this is true then i guess you will have to wait some more time. Because thousands of people applied I-485 between June first to July 30.
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 ]
Its unfortunate that you have a very recent RD. I talked to an IO at NSC yesterday and i was told that they will process the case based on the order they recieved. So they go by RD. If this is true then i guess you will have to wait some more time. Because thousands of people applied I-485 between June first to July 30.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. Cute Love Wallpapers with
.jpg "Cute Love Wallpapers with")
krajani2007
12-14 12:11 AM
Cross country chargeability worked for me but you have to be persistent in sending the docs couple of times ; call them or take an appointment with IO as last resort. I got it in 3 months after using this option. I had an RFE for using AC21 but finally got it approved
more...
wallpapers of babies with quotes. fat abies wallpapers.
sandy_anand
11-06 04:38 PM
I did not want to start a new thread for this. But I had earlier last month contacted many senators with the official I-485 pending inventory as proof and asking them whether it was humane, ethical and moral to ask someone wait more than 15 years for a green card! And what they are doing to remedy the situation.
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
Thanks for posting this information! Gave you green!:D
This is the reply I received today from Sen. Frank Lautenberg. May be this is very standard format, I am not sure but it does mention specific bill and recapture provision.
In Response to Your Message
From: Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (senator@lautenberg.senate.gov)
Sent: Fri 11/06/09 1:00 PM
To:
1 attachment
0A953776.gif (2.8 KB)
Dear Mr. Mundada:
Thank you for contacting me about employment-based immigrant visas. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total.
This bill is currently pending before the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind should this or other relevant legislation come before the full Senate. Thank you again for contacting me.
Sincerely,
FRL: mts
Thanks for posting this information! Gave you green!:D
wallpapers of babies with quotes. wallpapers of abies
spicy_guy
04-21 11:43 PM
Anyone from Chicago near downtown? Not Napreville or Aurora. We are moving from (bay area) Santa Clara to Chicago. Office is in Downtown. Looking for a place closest to download. We are a family with small (1.5 year old) kid.
Please suggest.
Please suggest.
wallpapers of babies with quotes. Photos Funny Babies Images
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.
rakeshverma72
03-30 12:44 PM
PD: 06/26/2006
Category: EB2
I140 Approved: 02/14/2006
485 Filed: 07/02/2007 (NSC) -- Pending
H1-B:- 9th year expiring on May 26th 2010
EAD:-Valid till 09/2/2010
AP:- Valid till 09/2/2010
I work for big consulting firm - Lockheed Martin. Where they have different business groups under different VP. And Pretty much my project works as it's own company. And I try to maintain both H1-B and EAD(AP) valid.
While filing my Green card I was filed under Lockheed Martin-Federal(Subsidiary of Lockheed Martin) and also I got my H1-B approved in May 2007(Valid until May 2010) under Lockheed Martin-Federal. End of 2008 my business unit's VP changed and so the name of Subsidiary with different FEIN and from September 2008 I work for Lockheed Martin-S&L(Subsidiary of Lockheed Martin). So for the year 2008 I got two W2 one from Lockheed Martin-Federal and another from Lockheed Martin-S&L. As I was working for Lockheed Martin and the same project since I have filed my Green Card; I never thought my case would be of any issue.
But after reading about AC-21 I have following questions from the community
1) In case above, do I need to file for AC-21. Or will I be okay at the time of my Green Card approval.
2) I have travel plans in the month of June 2010 to Europe. Should I worry about re-entering US with AP.
3) My lawyer is applying for H1-B under new companies name, do you think my H1-B will get approved with the new company name.
Thanks a lot
Category: EB2
I140 Approved: 02/14/2006
485 Filed: 07/02/2007 (NSC) -- Pending
H1-B:- 9th year expiring on May 26th 2010
EAD:-Valid till 09/2/2010
AP:- Valid till 09/2/2010
I work for big consulting firm - Lockheed Martin. Where they have different business groups under different VP. And Pretty much my project works as it's own company. And I try to maintain both H1-B and EAD(AP) valid.
While filing my Green card I was filed under Lockheed Martin-Federal(Subsidiary of Lockheed Martin) and also I got my H1-B approved in May 2007(Valid until May 2010) under Lockheed Martin-Federal. End of 2008 my business unit's VP changed and so the name of Subsidiary with different FEIN and from September 2008 I work for Lockheed Martin-S&L(Subsidiary of Lockheed Martin). So for the year 2008 I got two W2 one from Lockheed Martin-Federal and another from Lockheed Martin-S&L. As I was working for Lockheed Martin and the same project since I have filed my Green Card; I never thought my case would be of any issue.
But after reading about AC-21 I have following questions from the community
1) In case above, do I need to file for AC-21. Or will I be okay at the time of my Green Card approval.
2) I have travel plans in the month of June 2010 to Europe. Should I worry about re-entering US with AP.
3) My lawyer is applying for H1-B under new companies name, do you think my H1-B will get approved with the new company name.
Thanks a lot
InTheMoment
08-09 09:29 PM
And how may I ask you came to this conclusion?
Any reference, link would be helpful.
This bill is mostly for aviation safety. It doesn't necessarily applies to immigrants who are applying for permanent residency.
Any reference, link would be helpful.
This bill is mostly for aviation safety. It doesn't necessarily applies to immigrants who are applying for permanent residency.
No comments:
Post a Comment