tikka
05-31 01:06 PM
Confirmation Number: 56Y67421A1299244L.
thank you
anyone else?
thank you
anyone else?
wallpaper Flowers Mobile Wallpapers
gclongwaytogo
10-24 09:47 AM
:o:)
like_watching_paint_dry
02-27 07:43 AM
Congrats!! And 6 months more of working for a bad employer is a small price to pay in the big picture. And there are lots of creative ways to kill 180 days. Cut your productivity and actively engage in finding a good job... take paternity vacations etc.
2011 Picture of nature like scenery
tnite
07-26 03:16 PM
Lawyer told that after AOS filing one is in dual status so no worry. But I am not 100 % sure
To be safe change her to H4
To be safe change her to H4
more...
Honda
09-05 03:59 PM
You need to wait another 5 years to get your GC. That's my prediction.
immi_grant
06-25 06:47 AM
Hi Gurus / Attorneys,
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
more...
designserve
11-08 01:12 PM
The embassy is free nowadays... calendar opens up 2 weeks before. I went thru the process 2 months ago...It was the same.
2010 Beautiful flowers Wallpaper
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
sr77
09-26 11:45 AM
Hello,
The 485 applications for me and wife are still being processed by USCIS in Los Angeles. My priority date (August 1, 2005) became current almost 3 months ago.
We have waited patiently since the priority date became current. There has been no movement except that they wanted to fingerprint us again, which we completed 2 months ago. My lawyer says he put in two referral inquiries but of no avail.
I have already obtained InfoPass for a couple of weeks from now. I will go and check in with the USCIS office here in LA.
1. What should my next steps be? Write to my senator? Or should I wait until after the InfoPass appointment
2. Am I pushing too hard on USCIS? Is it that they are simply backlogged? Should I just wait more?
I am concerned that the dates will retrogress again. Any advice or comments will be helpful.
Thanks,
SR
The 485 applications for me and wife are still being processed by USCIS in Los Angeles. My priority date (August 1, 2005) became current almost 3 months ago.
We have waited patiently since the priority date became current. There has been no movement except that they wanted to fingerprint us again, which we completed 2 months ago. My lawyer says he put in two referral inquiries but of no avail.
I have already obtained InfoPass for a couple of weeks from now. I will go and check in with the USCIS office here in LA.
1. What should my next steps be? Write to my senator? Or should I wait until after the InfoPass appointment
2. Am I pushing too hard on USCIS? Is it that they are simply backlogged? Should I just wait more?
I am concerned that the dates will retrogress again. Any advice or comments will be helpful.
Thanks,
SR
hair Beautiful Nature Flowers
s_r_e_e
08-14 12:07 PM
Easy...
Q6: What happens if an application is filed at the wrong Service Center?
A6. Forms I-485 should be filed at either the Texas or Nebraska Service Centers. However, through August 17, 2007 only, employment-based adjustment applications filed at the California and Vermont Service Centers will not be rejected and will be relocated to the appropriate Service Center. Filing at the wrong location could result in processing delays.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q6: What happens if an application is filed at the wrong Service Center?
A6. Forms I-485 should be filed at either the Texas or Nebraska Service Centers. However, through August 17, 2007 only, employment-based adjustment applications filed at the California and Vermont Service Centers will not be rejected and will be relocated to the appropriate Service Center. Filing at the wrong location could result in processing delays.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
more...
smccrea
03-14 05:31 PM
What if a person creates a company (a c-corp) say to run a restaurant and works in it. I know a foreign national can own a corporation in the U.S.; but are there any estrictions on working in your own business?
hot wallpaper nature flower. wild
small2006
07-21 12:43 PM
I knew this would be the next obvious question and therefore I included that last line in my earlier post. Sorry but I tried to glean that from my attorney and there was no way he would give it to me.
If you have an attorney working on your case it should be a simple matter of him/her sending in the request. Please try that option. Also I think it would carry more weight if it goes from an attorney's office than from an applicant directly.
If you have an attorney working on your case it should be a simple matter of him/her sending in the request. Please try that option. Also I think it would carry more weight if it goes from an attorney's office than from an applicant directly.
more...
house nature#39;s wallpapers
sanjay
01-27 01:48 PM
According to CNNMoney: “Home Depot, the No. 1 home improvement retailer, announced Monday that it is shutting down its high-end EXPO business and shrinking its support staff, with both moves resulting in a reduction of 7,000 jobs.”Posted in Retail, US***Tagged: Home Depot layoff*** http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1231&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/home-depot-cutting-7000-jobs/)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23346
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23347
Idiot, why are you creating a thread for each company. you could have mentioned Home Depot, Catterpillar and pfizer in the same thread.
Before creating a thread, you should think that you are eating space and band width of a site which is run by a non - profitable organization.
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/home-depot-cutting-7000-jobs/)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23346
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23347
Idiot, why are you creating a thread for each company. you could have mentioned Home Depot, Catterpillar and pfizer in the same thread.
Before creating a thread, you should think that you are eating space and band width of a site which is run by a non - profitable organization.
tattoo /White-Angoras-Flowers.jpg
adumas
04-17 05:51 PM
Hi,
I'm in the same situation as Sahil.
Was told by my company's HR that a certain percentage of PERM applications are pulled for audit. Now having enough staff available to audit, means months and months of wait. For that reason, my application of late September 05 can take a year while someone who applied in December can take only two months.
I'm soooo not surprised....
I'm in the same situation as Sahil.
Was told by my company's HR that a certain percentage of PERM applications are pulled for audit. Now having enough staff available to audit, means months and months of wait. For that reason, my application of late September 05 can take a year while someone who applied in December can take only two months.
I'm soooo not surprised....
more...
pictures Flowers Nature Wallpaper
kondur_007
03-29 06:06 PM
Good; So this is what I understand:
You are working for employer A. Before the expiry of I 94, you applied for extension with employer A and that extension is still pending.
After the expiry of I 94 (and pending extension) you applied for employer B, that did get approved but came without attached I 94.
You are still working for employer A and that extension with employer A is still pending.
If above facts are correct, you may be fine; however question is, why is your extension with employer A still pending; and what can you do about that. Depending on specifics of your case it may be time to make it premium or simply leave the country and return back on employer B's H1B and work for that employer.
You still need to talk to a good attorney to see which one of the above options are good for you.
Good Luck.
You are working for employer A. Before the expiry of I 94, you applied for extension with employer A and that extension is still pending.
After the expiry of I 94 (and pending extension) you applied for employer B, that did get approved but came without attached I 94.
You are still working for employer A and that extension with employer A is still pending.
If above facts are correct, you may be fine; however question is, why is your extension with employer A still pending; and what can you do about that. Depending on specifics of your case it may be time to make it premium or simply leave the country and return back on employer B's H1B and work for that employer.
You still need to talk to a good attorney to see which one of the above options are good for you.
Good Luck.
dresses flowers background wallpapers.
vsuri
09-10 08:26 PM
I had no experience with a prior employer when my employer applied for PERM in January 2007.
Education: MS
PERM Category: EB2
Company Sector: Finance
Job Profile: Technology
PERM & I140 were approved by DoL & USCIS respectively without any RFEs. I485 pending since Aug 2007.
hello every1,
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience for EB2 category..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
Education: MS
PERM Category: EB2
Company Sector: Finance
Job Profile: Technology
PERM & I140 were approved by DoL & USCIS respectively without any RFEs. I485 pending since Aug 2007.
hello every1,
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience for EB2 category..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
more...
makeup Filed in: Flowers, Nature
new_horizon
03-08 06:44 AM
Filed online on Dec 20 for both me and my wife. Send additional docs in 1 week. EAD and AP approved on Feb 23. Nebraska center. Only sad thing is EAD and AP are not in one card. I got EAD approved for 2 years, but AP for only 1 year in paper form.
Can anyone offer suggestion if I should call USCIS why they did not give it in a single card. 'coz I thought they were supposed to issue both the EAD and AP in one card starting Feb 11. I applied for both together.
Can anyone offer suggestion if I should call USCIS why they did not give it in a single card. 'coz I thought they were supposed to issue both the EAD and AP in one card starting Feb 11. I applied for both together.
girlfriend All these wallpapers are of
gimmeliberty
07-17 05:34 PM
Congratulations to IV and all it's members. Time to celebrate!
hairstyles Flowers and Nature
redcard
04-02 10:01 AM
Hmm really? I thought that is not possible anymore. Can you give me the details or refer me to a website that has them? Thank you!
Get married to your partner.. its legal in states like CT, MA. Not sure if USCIS will consider it legal.
Get married to your partner.. its legal in states like CT, MA. Not sure if USCIS will consider it legal.
acecupid
04-14 10:10 AM
One of my collegues who works for the same company and has the same priority date as myself (March, 05 EB3 ) got his GC last year. Thats the only person I know personally who got his GC out of turn. I havent heard of any other cases, so I am guessing its a pretty rare occurance.
rraina
05-21 02:56 AM
When your second I-140 under EB2 gets approved do you have to apply for a new I-485 ??
0 comments:
Post a Comment