shreekarthik
06-10 05:56 PM
Can anyone help with advice? Talk about frustration! I qualify for EB2 since I have a masters degree (and also more than 5 years of experience in my field). I could qualify for EB2 except that my job description "prefers" (rather than "requires") a masters degree. The language prevents my compay from filing EB2, yet my job responsibilities are such that they certaily warrant a masters degree. My compay doesn't want to change my position or wording even though they clearly know (through my explanations) that that means adding close to 5-6 years to the wait! They also fail to see that making me wait so long also affects them because the company cannot promote me or chage my responsibilities for the duration of the wait! Has anyone been through the same situation?
They get a well qualified employee at a lower salary for a longer period of time. If they don't listen try to find an employer that could file u at EB-2.
They get a well qualified employee at a lower salary for a longer period of time. If they don't listen try to find an employer that could file u at EB-2.
wallpaper nissan skyline car town,
sabr
09-19 06:06 PM
company A applied for my GC. They cant provide me jobs.
I am working with company B as a contractor (corp to corp with company A and B).. project will finish in a month. already did not work for 12 months even though my I-485 is pending with company A.
now company B offered me to work perm with them by using EAD. while my H1b renewal is pending with company A.
can I work with B while A is still my sponsoring company.
my Q is once h1b approves lets say in a month and renewal for 1 year( can I work with B with EAD for like another 6-8 months and then go out and reenter for H1b with A?
I am working with company B as a contractor (corp to corp with company A and B).. project will finish in a month. already did not work for 12 months even though my I-485 is pending with company A.
now company B offered me to work perm with them by using EAD. while my H1b renewal is pending with company A.
can I work with B while A is still my sponsoring company.
my Q is once h1b approves lets say in a month and renewal for 1 year( can I work with B with EAD for like another 6-8 months and then go out and reenter for H1b with A?
Vet04
12-08 12:39 AM
?
2011 Nissan+skyline+car+town+
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
phillyag
07-20 02:09 PM
As my employer wants it - only apply 90 days prior to H1 expiration.
This situation can lead me into limbo state. EAD pending and H1 expired !
What would happen then ?
This situation can lead me into limbo state. EAD pending and H1 expired !
What would happen then ?
Rockford
07-17 02:23 PM
What's the point of starting a new thread to throw in your opinion?
Servers and all members are already very stressed.
To begin with, it is not my opinion. It is an excerpt from other web site and I gave the link.
This is new thread because it is different info than the popular belief here that there is going to be a definite relief.
Hope you understand :)
Servers and all members are already very stressed.
To begin with, it is not my opinion. It is an excerpt from other web site and I gave the link.
This is new thread because it is different info than the popular belief here that there is going to be a definite relief.
Hope you understand :)
more...
justin150377
06-22 09:27 AM
any advice?
2010 NISMO Skyline GT-R R34
logiclife
02-23 11:28 AM
Hi,
Thanks for all the questions.
I will answer as much as possible without causing any damage to ongoing efforts. Please keep
in mind that not everything can be disclosed on public forums.
1. Funds:
We have about 30,000 collected so far. Major expense of running this organization is the fees for our lobbying firm QGA. Minor expenses include administrative costs such as website registration(one time), Organization registration in New Jersey(one time) etc. Other than that, we also have some advertising expenses as we put up ads on some popular websites. Sometimes we have to hire lawyers for certain org activities but those are minor expenses again. We are also paying for the webfax feature but not sure how much. Please dont suggest the free versions of webfax because they dont work and they DID NOT WORK during S 1932.
Please keep in mind that we are avoiding expenses as much as we can that results from members travelling to DC and so far all those expenses have been out of pocket.
QGA is currently working for us right now and we do not have to wait until we have 200K in the bank for QGA to start working.
The board members of IV(Board of directors) would decide if all the financial information could be made public to members on website for accountability reasons and transparency reasons without damaging anything else.
2. Labor backlogs:
Labor backlog problem is an administrative problem, not a legislative problem. There is nothing that is stopping the BECs from doing their job more efficiently as there is no quota restriction mandated by law on labors approved each year. That is the reason it is under "Administrative Goals". Would any law help improve labor backlogs? No. can we still involve congress in it? Yes. It is the intention of IV to draw the attention of lawmakers to the horrible job BECs have done so far as it is the constitutional right and privilege of congress to overlook and oversee the job of the executive.
However, if a backlog victims asks: How much of money/effort is going towards backlog and how much is going towards retrogression? I dont think anyone can answer that question. To be frank with you, this is not like cable TV where you pay $35 for basic cable and then you pay $7 for HBO and $7 more for cinemax etc. IF you think you do not want to contribute money no matter what...here is another choice: Use the resources tab to contact your local congressmen, write letters, send webfaxes etc. Use endorsement of Richard Florida. Prepare a glossy set of documents and drive to your local congressman's office(after appointment ofcourse) and talk to their staff. YOU HAVE THE POWER. ITS IN YOUR HANDS. Immigration voice is not a company providing a service to EB immigrants, its made up of EB immigrants who are serving themselves. See the "TEAM IV" menu on homepage.
[B]3. Sharp drop in contributions:
Yes, there has been a drop in contributions since one week. Part of the reason is that we have 30K which many members may feel is still in the bank. But please understand that we are using those funds and we will run out of them eventually and we would like to keep this effort ongoing until we meet our goals. Quite frankly if the current slowness of funds continue, we cannot last very long.
4. Contacting the lawmakers on your own:
Use all the links under resources tab to learn how to meet your lawmakers. Like I've said before, you owe it to yourself, not to immigration voice to work on this cause. Best case scenario of doing something: We make a difference. Worst case scenario: Nothing happens besides a polite reply from lawmakers' staff.
Thanks for all the questions.
I will answer as much as possible without causing any damage to ongoing efforts. Please keep
in mind that not everything can be disclosed on public forums.
1. Funds:
We have about 30,000 collected so far. Major expense of running this organization is the fees for our lobbying firm QGA. Minor expenses include administrative costs such as website registration(one time), Organization registration in New Jersey(one time) etc. Other than that, we also have some advertising expenses as we put up ads on some popular websites. Sometimes we have to hire lawyers for certain org activities but those are minor expenses again. We are also paying for the webfax feature but not sure how much. Please dont suggest the free versions of webfax because they dont work and they DID NOT WORK during S 1932.
Please keep in mind that we are avoiding expenses as much as we can that results from members travelling to DC and so far all those expenses have been out of pocket.
QGA is currently working for us right now and we do not have to wait until we have 200K in the bank for QGA to start working.
The board members of IV(Board of directors) would decide if all the financial information could be made public to members on website for accountability reasons and transparency reasons without damaging anything else.
2. Labor backlogs:
Labor backlog problem is an administrative problem, not a legislative problem. There is nothing that is stopping the BECs from doing their job more efficiently as there is no quota restriction mandated by law on labors approved each year. That is the reason it is under "Administrative Goals". Would any law help improve labor backlogs? No. can we still involve congress in it? Yes. It is the intention of IV to draw the attention of lawmakers to the horrible job BECs have done so far as it is the constitutional right and privilege of congress to overlook and oversee the job of the executive.
However, if a backlog victims asks: How much of money/effort is going towards backlog and how much is going towards retrogression? I dont think anyone can answer that question. To be frank with you, this is not like cable TV where you pay $35 for basic cable and then you pay $7 for HBO and $7 more for cinemax etc. IF you think you do not want to contribute money no matter what...here is another choice: Use the resources tab to contact your local congressmen, write letters, send webfaxes etc. Use endorsement of Richard Florida. Prepare a glossy set of documents and drive to your local congressman's office(after appointment ofcourse) and talk to their staff. YOU HAVE THE POWER. ITS IN YOUR HANDS. Immigration voice is not a company providing a service to EB immigrants, its made up of EB immigrants who are serving themselves. See the "TEAM IV" menu on homepage.
[B]3. Sharp drop in contributions:
Yes, there has been a drop in contributions since one week. Part of the reason is that we have 30K which many members may feel is still in the bank. But please understand that we are using those funds and we will run out of them eventually and we would like to keep this effort ongoing until we meet our goals. Quite frankly if the current slowness of funds continue, we cannot last very long.
4. Contacting the lawmakers on your own:
Use all the links under resources tab to learn how to meet your lawmakers. Like I've said before, you owe it to yourself, not to immigration voice to work on this cause. Best case scenario of doing something: We make a difference. Worst case scenario: Nothing happens besides a polite reply from lawmakers' staff.
more...
puskeygadha
12-03 10:22 AM
thanks so much guys
my labor is in bpc
I still have 18 months in H1B. but after I get my I140 I will switch
if I feel that I cant file 485 for a while
my labor is in bpc
I still have 18 months in H1B. but after I get my I140 I will switch
if I feel that I cant file 485 for a while
hair 1999 skyline gt r car town
eb3_nepa
08-25 12:01 PM
Best thing to do in this case is, simply use your AP. No H1b stamping is needed. You can still remain on an H1B even if you use the AP for travelling.
As per my lawyer, the H1B has 2 aspects to it. One is the fact that it maintains status, the second is the actual stamped visa which allows entry/re-entry into the USA. You dont HAVE to have the stamped visa, if you have alternate means of re-entry.
As per my lawyer, the H1B has 2 aspects to it. One is the fact that it maintains status, the second is the actual stamped visa which allows entry/re-entry into the USA. You dont HAVE to have the stamped visa, if you have alternate means of re-entry.
more...
pappu
07-18 02:14 PM
=======================
Message from IV
IV does not recommend any such actions.
We are aware of the issue and if there is any acion item, we will post it.
also be aware of what we posted earlier on this issue:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
=========================
Message from IV
IV does not recommend any such actions.
We are aware of the issue and if there is any acion item, we will post it.
also be aware of what we posted earlier on this issue:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6084
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=100024#post100024
=========================
hot 1999 Nissan Skyline GT-R (R32)
nhfirefighter13
October 31st, 2005, 06:48 PM
OTOH, maybe studio work isn't really for me...
I used to think the same thing until I realized what a great learning tool it can be. If you can learn to light a multitude of subjects with various lighting techniques you learn much more than just "studio photography". You learn ratios, composition, DOF, exposure, etc etc and the more you learn the better your other subjects will be because of it.
...and yes, I went right for the hurricanes. :D
I used to think the same thing until I realized what a great learning tool it can be. If you can learn to light a multitude of subjects with various lighting techniques you learn much more than just "studio photography". You learn ratios, composition, DOF, exposure, etc etc and the more you learn the better your other subjects will be because of it.
...and yes, I went right for the hurricanes. :D
more...
house Posted by Car Town Templates
freedom_fighter
06-24 09:44 PM
what is ur priority date, EB2/EB3 and how much time for u to reply the RFE?
tattoo skyline car town,
PD_Dec2002
07-22 10:10 PM
This is my GC application history
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
A1: Receipt date is assigned by USCIS when they re-enter or mark your case as PP. This is different from when FedEx delivered the PP request. In my friend's case, the difference in these two dates was 10 business days. This was in early June and his I-140 was approved in 3 business days.
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
A1: Receipt date is assigned by USCIS when they re-enter or mark your case as PP. This is different from when FedEx delivered the PP request. In my friend's case, the difference in these two dates was 10 business days. This was in early June and his I-140 was approved in 3 business days.
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
more...
pictures Car Town Templates
tinoue
09-27 08:24 AM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
dresses skyline car town template
guygeek007
07-26 09:41 AM
Lapisguy,
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
more...
makeup Kzee Car Town Free Templates:
aph0025
01-20 03:02 PM
Hi Amul,
Congratulations! Yes, it does mean your visa transfer went through. You will receive a new I797, with your current employer details on it.
Update:
I am the guy who started this thread. I was worried about not having paystubs from my previous H1B holder, and if that would affect my chances of H1B transfer with this other company I am with right now. My transfer got approved in TWO days (during mid Dec. last year). Yes, I did go through premium processing, but approval in TWO days! That was great.
Anyway, can anyone tell me where I go from here? To be precise, what is the maximum time limit to go for stamping to a visa consulate? Please advice.
Congratulations! Yes, it does mean your visa transfer went through. You will receive a new I797, with your current employer details on it.
Update:
I am the guy who started this thread. I was worried about not having paystubs from my previous H1B holder, and if that would affect my chances of H1B transfer with this other company I am with right now. My transfer got approved in TWO days (during mid Dec. last year). Yes, I did go through premium processing, but approval in TWO days! That was great.
Anyway, can anyone tell me where I go from here? To be precise, what is the maximum time limit to go for stamping to a visa consulate? Please advice.
girlfriend I ❤ CarTown!
meridiani.planum
03-06 02:28 PM
My Company is switching me to EAD and will cancel my H1. Saying that H1 is more expensive to maintain... They'll pay for my EAD renewal also... Anyway don't have a choice here unless I switch...
My question is that my lawyer told that Iam allowed to work up to 120 days post EAD expiry if EAD renewal is delayed... They'll file 90 days before current EAD expiry..
Does this sound okay.. Anyone heard anywhere that its allowed to work upto 120 days of EAD expiry pending EAD renewal??
you cannot work past EAD expiry. Does not matter if renewal is delayed. You need to stop working.
You can file upto 120 days in advance of current EAD expiry. 90 days seems a little tight looking at demand (tons of July filers) but will probably be ok. Dont cut it any closer than that.
My question is that my lawyer told that Iam allowed to work up to 120 days post EAD expiry if EAD renewal is delayed... They'll file 90 days before current EAD expiry..
Does this sound okay.. Anyone heard anywhere that its allowed to work upto 120 days of EAD expiry pending EAD renewal??
you cannot work past EAD expiry. Does not matter if renewal is delayed. You need to stop working.
You can file upto 120 days in advance of current EAD expiry. 90 days seems a little tight looking at demand (tons of July filers) but will probably be ok. Dont cut it any closer than that.
hairstyles Car Town Forums,
paskal
12-20 11:55 PM
Thanks Anil,
Please also update us on IL activities that you guys have planned
Please also update us on IL activities that you guys have planned
rajsenthil
09-16 05:21 PM
Done.
It's time to tell CNN not to give a platform for racists.
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
- JK
It's time to tell CNN not to give a platform for racists.
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
- JK
mrajatish
05-14 06:43 PM
Same here - keep the good job going
No comments:
Post a Comment