lost_in_migration
05-14 09:09 PM
Done.. Its in the thread EB2-General Poll. I would have liked to keep just one thread but only allows 10 options at the max. Hope ppl don't vote at both places :)
Can you create one for EB2, please? Thanks!
Can you create one for EB2, please? Thanks!
wallpaper wallpaper justin bieber baby
Ramba
03-26 11:42 AM
There is a little chance to overcome this issue. Because of promotion in same occupation classification, one can not upgrade the education requirement to Master degree, if the same occupation required Bachelors degree in junior level. If your employer requested more experience (rather than education), probabaly they may approve the second LC, as it is geneune for asking more experience for senor level.
Now DOL and USCIS is tightening the requirement as everyone is shooting for higher requirement to apply in EB2.
Now DOL and USCIS is tightening the requirement as everyone is shooting for higher requirement to apply in EB2.
seeking_GC
07-28 02:08 PM
Hi Everyone,
My I140 which has been approved for more than 4 years now was transferred from Texas to Nebraska.
Trying to find the method in USCIS madness - has this happened to anyone else also and any reason why they might suddenly have decided to do this?
One reason I can think of is my 485s are in NE so maybe they are trying to consolidate all information in one file??
Appreciate peoples inputs.
My I140 which has been approved for more than 4 years now was transferred from Texas to Nebraska.
Trying to find the method in USCIS madness - has this happened to anyone else also and any reason why they might suddenly have decided to do this?
One reason I can think of is my 485s are in NE so maybe they are trying to consolidate all information in one file??
Appreciate peoples inputs.
2011 ticket, Justin
GooblyWoobly
09-25 03:19 PM
Let me clarify point 3) again
I told it because the same way my spouse received SSN# < 10days but those people will say it take minimum 15days or so.But before you go to SSN office you need proof of EAD approval or best is EAD card,passport handly.
HTH,
No, No. Your answer was perfectly correct. But the OP had asked this:
"Is the there a time frame within which one has to get the SSN#?"
So, I thought he is probably asking if there is any time limit by which you have to get SSN or you don't get SSN at all.
It's better to apply ASAP. In my wife's case, after her H1 came along, we just took two weeks to apply after she started working. The result was, at the end of the month, we were in a legal limbo. The company (one of the big companies in the valley) couldn't pay her because she doesn't have her SSN. The company cannot keep the money as she is legally employed, and has worked. So, not paying her that month will break the H1B terms. Luckily for us, SSN arrived on 29th of that month!!
I told it because the same way my spouse received SSN# < 10days but those people will say it take minimum 15days or so.But before you go to SSN office you need proof of EAD approval or best is EAD card,passport handly.
HTH,
No, No. Your answer was perfectly correct. But the OP had asked this:
"Is the there a time frame within which one has to get the SSN#?"
So, I thought he is probably asking if there is any time limit by which you have to get SSN or you don't get SSN at all.
It's better to apply ASAP. In my wife's case, after her H1 came along, we just took two weeks to apply after she started working. The result was, at the end of the month, we were in a legal limbo. The company (one of the big companies in the valley) couldn't pay her because she doesn't have her SSN. The company cannot keep the money as she is legally employed, and has worked. So, not paying her that month will break the H1B terms. Luckily for us, SSN arrived on 29th of that month!!
more...
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
According to Reuters: “A U.S. senator has asked Microsoft Corp about its plans to slash up to 5,000 jobs, urging the world’s biggest software company to preserve the jobs of Americans ahead of foreigners working on visas.““The letter asked Microsoft Chief Executive Steve Ballmer to provide a breakdown of the jobs to be eliminated, and [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1228&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/25/us-senator-asks-microsoft-about-job-cuts-h1b-visas/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/25/us-senator-asks-microsoft-about-job-cuts-h1b-visas/)
otovarm@hotmail.com
03-03 12:29 PM
Hi everyone, I am seeking some help:
-My wife's Labor Certification was approved on Oct-09-2006
-Priority Date: April-30-2001
We did stay on H1B (wife) and H4 (me) in the US for about 9 years total, we did extend the H1B year by year once the initial 6year period ended (labor was still pending). We left the US on Dec-27-2007 and have been outside the US since. Now we have our new 5year Turist Visa B1/B2.
1st Question:
Can we still apply for next steps towards the GC based on that approved labor cert, even though more than 2 years have passed since it was approved? (I believe next steps are I-140 and 485, right?
If answer is YES, can we go premium processing?
IMPORTANT: One of the partners in the company which filed the labor for her did die about 3 years ago. It seems like a new partner came in but still one of the original partners and the one who was my wife's boss when she was working for the company is still there. We are a little concerned because when we first approached the guy at the company about 2 years ago (when we got the LC approval notice) he told us that they had to restructure the company because of the other partner's death and they decided to change the company's name (slightly) and start all over again. At that time he told us that original company didn't have strong balance sheets, bank balances or tax docs to support the I-140 and that he wasn't sure if the new partner would agreed to sign the petition. He told us to wait 1-2 years and see if he could do it.
When we got that response we decided to leave the country (didn't have other option) and stay outside the country for at least a year to have the option to come again thru H1B with another company. (We also had twin boys - americans - and it has helped us to be in our home country while they were small babies).
Now we want to return to the US but we would like to know if we still have a chance to apply for the I-140 with that company. Anybody has any insights about this? Does it matter that the company changed its original name, even though the person who signed the LC petition would be the same person who signs the I-140 petition?
In the worst case scenario that this guy won't help us signing the I-140, can we apply thru another company under the original approved LC? I guess that if it is possible, then it should be thru a company under similar industry, or located in same region and Job description should match the one in the LC.
Thanks for taking the time to read this and any insights would be greatly appreciated.
-My wife's Labor Certification was approved on Oct-09-2006
-Priority Date: April-30-2001
We did stay on H1B (wife) and H4 (me) in the US for about 9 years total, we did extend the H1B year by year once the initial 6year period ended (labor was still pending). We left the US on Dec-27-2007 and have been outside the US since. Now we have our new 5year Turist Visa B1/B2.
1st Question:
Can we still apply for next steps towards the GC based on that approved labor cert, even though more than 2 years have passed since it was approved? (I believe next steps are I-140 and 485, right?
If answer is YES, can we go premium processing?
IMPORTANT: One of the partners in the company which filed the labor for her did die about 3 years ago. It seems like a new partner came in but still one of the original partners and the one who was my wife's boss when she was working for the company is still there. We are a little concerned because when we first approached the guy at the company about 2 years ago (when we got the LC approval notice) he told us that they had to restructure the company because of the other partner's death and they decided to change the company's name (slightly) and start all over again. At that time he told us that original company didn't have strong balance sheets, bank balances or tax docs to support the I-140 and that he wasn't sure if the new partner would agreed to sign the petition. He told us to wait 1-2 years and see if he could do it.
When we got that response we decided to leave the country (didn't have other option) and stay outside the country for at least a year to have the option to come again thru H1B with another company. (We also had twin boys - americans - and it has helped us to be in our home country while they were small babies).
Now we want to return to the US but we would like to know if we still have a chance to apply for the I-140 with that company. Anybody has any insights about this? Does it matter that the company changed its original name, even though the person who signed the LC petition would be the same person who signs the I-140 petition?
In the worst case scenario that this guy won't help us signing the I-140, can we apply thru another company under the original approved LC? I guess that if it is possible, then it should be thru a company under similar industry, or located in same region and Job description should match the one in the LC.
Thanks for taking the time to read this and any insights would be greatly appreciated.
more...
i-serf
04-20 04:46 PM
I am on H1/valid I-94/ expired visa/ I-140 in progress.
My NJ license is set to expire in about two months.
Given the recent situation with MD state bill HB387 is anybody in the saimilar boat, and what avenues do we have?
My NJ license is set to expire in about two months.
Given the recent situation with MD state bill HB387 is anybody in the saimilar boat, and what avenues do we have?
2010 wallpaper justin bieber baby
jay75
05-06 11:23 PM
Both my wife and myself got soft LUD today on 485. Aug'07 filed, EB3 India, PD 2004.
more...
needhelp!
02-13 12:41 PM
We need a few catchy words to put in a community newsletter. This is for people who don't know about IV. It has to be something that will make people click on the text and come to IV website.
Here are a few suggestions I have got so far:
"Do H1Bs have the right to free speech? Check out ImmigrationVoice.org letter campaign working for you."
"Please join Immigration Voice and participate actively in the Administrative Fix campaign"
"If you are in this country legally, prepare for getting whacked"
"Is GREEN CARD holding up your future and career? - Liberate yourself by participating in the Administrative Fix campaign done by Immigration Voice.
Come on guys.. let your creative juices flow.. but keep it very short.
Here are a few suggestions I have got so far:
"Do H1Bs have the right to free speech? Check out ImmigrationVoice.org letter campaign working for you."
"Please join Immigration Voice and participate actively in the Administrative Fix campaign"
"If you are in this country legally, prepare for getting whacked"
"Is GREEN CARD holding up your future and career? - Liberate yourself by participating in the Administrative Fix campaign done by Immigration Voice.
Come on guys.. let your creative juices flow.. but keep it very short.
hair justin bieber baby video.
newfoundland
08-04 03:48 PM
Hello,
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
more...
Karthikthiru
06-15 01:47 PM
Tell the previously employer EXPLICITY that it is only a employment verification letter NOT A REFERENCE letter. Because by default lot of them assume it is a reference letter. Aslo by law they have to provide the experience letter
Thanks
Karthik
Thanks
Karthik
hot If you had Justin Bieber
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
house Baby Baby Baby Oh - Small Girl
pappu
07-20 05:10 PM
I asked this question several times, this is what the answer I got.
To get L-1 visa, you need to work for sister or parent company for a year outside USA. Here is the problem come.
I am on the Same boat, How care about GC. But I care about my wife's work authorisation, she has done her Ph.D and completed her 6 year H-4 too. Even if some one offers her H-1B she cannot take up, until there is a decoupling of H-1 and H-4
if your wife has no time left on her H visa, and she is a phd. .. she can do research on J1 visa. She can work and also apply for greencard.
To get L-1 visa, you need to work for sister or parent company for a year outside USA. Here is the problem come.
I am on the Same boat, How care about GC. But I care about my wife's work authorisation, she has done her Ph.D and completed her 6 year H-4 too. Even if some one offers her H-1B she cannot take up, until there is a decoupling of H-1 and H-4
if your wife has no time left on her H visa, and she is a phd. .. she can do research on J1 visa. She can work and also apply for greencard.
tattoo hot justin bieber baby video
nhfirefighter13
June 4th, 2004, 01:36 PM
Who'd have thought a photo of a bubble could be so neat? :)
Those are cool (I like the very first one best) what shutter speed were those taken at?
Those are cool (I like the very first one best) what shutter speed were those taken at?
more...
pictures justin bieber baby video.
pappu
12-28 02:23 PM
NSC Dec 2007 Processing Times says:
Also, when they are mentioning "April 24, 2007" date , are they ignoring the applicants who are stuck in namecheck process for years? If a person has filed 485 in 2005 or 2006 but stuck in namecheck, how come 485 is completed?
If a person is stuck in namecheck, or has an RFE... his/her case in not counted in II485 backlog at that time.
Also, when they are mentioning "April 24, 2007" date , are they ignoring the applicants who are stuck in namecheck process for years? If a person has filed 485 in 2005 or 2006 but stuck in namecheck, how come 485 is completed?
If a person is stuck in namecheck, or has an RFE... his/her case in not counted in II485 backlog at that time.
dresses justin bieber baby video girl.
cbpds
06-01 07:00 PM
Cant agree with you more, the below request should be dealt with separately instead of been clubbed with other major issues( akin to legal immigration clubbed with CIR), will need Congress approval though.
Request IV to highlight this issue separately as it will surely help a small section hanging between H1 and EAD, who are not in the "safe" zone.
There should be boat load of people who have their I140 approved and stuck. Irrespective of the population, it is important that this be addressed. They are one job away from loosing status. By issuing a 3 year employer independent EAD before a PR number becomes available is worthy cause. By this way, everyone in the pipeline knows that someday their paperwork will be cleared for good and until then they have the EAD to keep them going. The very fact that an I140 has been approved for a petitioner and the intent to immigrate has been approved, should allow the petitioner the temporary relief of having the choice to work and live little better. The the only thing that is preventing your status validated is the availability of Visa number, which is more of a procedural/legislative issue. So, hope this request is pushed in one or another form.
Request IV to highlight this issue separately as it will surely help a small section hanging between H1 and EAD, who are not in the "safe" zone.
There should be boat load of people who have their I140 approved and stuck. Irrespective of the population, it is important that this be addressed. They are one job away from loosing status. By issuing a 3 year employer independent EAD before a PR number becomes available is worthy cause. By this way, everyone in the pipeline knows that someday their paperwork will be cleared for good and until then they have the EAD to keep them going. The very fact that an I140 has been approved for a petitioner and the intent to immigrate has been approved, should allow the petitioner the temporary relief of having the choice to work and live little better. The the only thing that is preventing your status validated is the availability of Visa number, which is more of a procedural/legislative issue. So, hope this request is pushed in one or another form.
more...
makeup justin bieber baby video girl.
EB3June03
06-25 06:47 PM
So after going through the medical and knowing that i will have a positive PPD (due to my history of positive PPD), and having clear X Ray results - the civil surgeon said you need to treatment for TB. I was surprised to hear it and as I had read from the CDC website and read the instructions - I saw the Treatment is Recommended - NOT Required and it also mentioned that the doctor should sign Part 5 and the applicant is clear for USCIS purposes and explain to the applicant the implications and recommend going for Evaluation to the health department.
I showed the points to the doctor but he did NOT want to sign it without any entry in the part 3 and part 4 - which from what i read is for those that are going to REQUIRE treatment.
Reference :- 2008 Tuberculosis Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons | CDC DGMQ (http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/civil_tb_ti_2008.htm)
View Page 6 of FAQ booklet: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/civil_surgeons_faq.pdf
17. Should Part 3 of Form I-693 be completed when the civil surgeon is referring the applicant for evaluation for treatment of Latent TB Infection (LTBI)?
The 2008 TB TIs recommend that civil surgeons refer applicants with “Class B—Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment (LTBI)” to the TB Control Program of the local health department. The referral for evaluation for treatment of LTBI is recommended, not required. Part 3 of Form I-693 should be used only for required referrals, therefore the civil surgeon should not complete Part 3 of Form I-693 when making this referral. It follows that the health department is not required to complete Part 4 of Form I-693 after evaluation for treatment of LTBI is completed or after treatment for LTBI is completed. Please see question 18 for related information
Did any of you folks run into similar situation?
I showed the points to the doctor but he did NOT want to sign it without any entry in the part 3 and part 4 - which from what i read is for those that are going to REQUIRE treatment.
Reference :- 2008 Tuberculosis Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons | CDC DGMQ (http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/civil_tb_ti_2008.htm)
View Page 6 of FAQ booklet: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/civil_surgeons_faq.pdf
17. Should Part 3 of Form I-693 be completed when the civil surgeon is referring the applicant for evaluation for treatment of Latent TB Infection (LTBI)?
The 2008 TB TIs recommend that civil surgeons refer applicants with “Class B—Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment (LTBI)” to the TB Control Program of the local health department. The referral for evaluation for treatment of LTBI is recommended, not required. Part 3 of Form I-693 should be used only for required referrals, therefore the civil surgeon should not complete Part 3 of Form I-693 when making this referral. It follows that the health department is not required to complete Part 4 of Form I-693 after evaluation for treatment of LTBI is completed or after treatment for LTBI is completed. Please see question 18 for related information
Did any of you folks run into similar situation?
girlfriend Justin Bieber
.jpg "justin bieber baby video girl.")
redcard
08-23 11:29 AM
I have a approved I-140 (Jan 2005). My PD is March 2004 and I have already filed I-485 (filed simultaneously with 140). Now I am waiting for the PD to become current for 485 approval. My 6 years on H1 will expire in March 2007. I checked with my GC lawyer and he said that since I have a approved 140 I can apply for a 3 year extension on H1 six months before the H1 expiry. I have to travel to India in Feb-March 2007 and so my questions are:
1. Can I travel to India while my H1 extension application is still pending and return to US before the current H1 expires? What will happen if the application gets approved while I am in India?
2. If I get my H1 extension approved effective April 2007 and I travel to India in Feb-March 2007 while my current H1 is still valid do I still need to get the new H1 stamped on the passport or I can enter US on the current stamped H1.
3. If none of the above is possible then can I return from India in mid-March 2007 and apply for H1 ext and still continue to stay in US if I get the receipt of H1 ext application before March 31, 2007?
Thanks in advance.
I am not sure if you need an extension ..since you have already applied for 485..you should have a EAD which is authorization to work and you must have applied for AP which is required for travel..and you dont need a stamp to enter back in case you have an Advance Parole..
1. Can I travel to India while my H1 extension application is still pending and return to US before the current H1 expires? What will happen if the application gets approved while I am in India?
2. If I get my H1 extension approved effective April 2007 and I travel to India in Feb-March 2007 while my current H1 is still valid do I still need to get the new H1 stamped on the passport or I can enter US on the current stamped H1.
3. If none of the above is possible then can I return from India in mid-March 2007 and apply for H1 ext and still continue to stay in US if I get the receipt of H1 ext application before March 31, 2007?
Thanks in advance.
I am not sure if you need an extension ..since you have already applied for 485..you should have a EAD which is authorization to work and you must have applied for AP which is required for travel..and you dont need a stamp to enter back in case you have an Advance Parole..
hairstyles 5 Things to Know about Justin
justin150377
07-17 02:20 PM
Screw Murthy !!! I have never seen him picking up any good news.
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
perm2gc
08-30 09:38 AM
Immigration gurus, need your advice ASAP
my current H1B visa expires 03/07 . If I can fill for extension and while petion is pending with USCIS for processing can I travel outside USA ?
I asked lawyer to apply for extension first week of september . I have I140 approved and he will request 3 years increment .
my job requires traveling outside USA and I'm wonder if I can travel back and forth until petition is approved .
I know that after approval I need to get visa stamp .
Your quick inputs will be highly appreciated
thank you in advance
You can travel back and forth until you have valid visa stamp.You can do it until 03/07.
my current H1B visa expires 03/07 . If I can fill for extension and while petion is pending with USCIS for processing can I travel outside USA ?
I asked lawyer to apply for extension first week of september . I have I140 approved and he will request 3 years increment .
my job requires traveling outside USA and I'm wonder if I can travel back and forth until petition is approved .
I know that after approval I need to get visa stamp .
Your quick inputs will be highly appreciated
thank you in advance
You can travel back and forth until you have valid visa stamp.You can do it until 03/07.
jkmc
02-16 11:02 AM
not really, but close.
i-94 expire 10/01/2007. married 09/12/2007. i-485 received by uscis on 11/26/2007.
Hi Surge
You should then consult a lawyer.
i-94 expire 10/01/2007. married 09/12/2007. i-485 received by uscis on 11/26/2007.
Hi Surge
You should then consult a lawyer.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기