asdqwe2k
04-19 10:02 AM
Job location does not matter, as long as it is mentioned that it will be the case in the Labour application.
All the desi consulting companies do that, so that their employees can work anywhere in USA...
All the desi consulting companies do that, so that their employees can work anywhere in USA...
wallpaper each wallpaper hd
mhtanim
07-21 08:07 PM
In rare cases RFE has been issued. My doc also wrote that I need to follow-up with my PCP for INH treatment on my medical form. I visited my PCP and they sent me to a Infectious Disease specialist. The ID specialist said that there is no urgency for treatment although it is recommended to have the treatment. But said I can my take my own time to think if I need to go through the treatment.
Asked what if USCIS sends an RFE, the ID said that they usually do not ask for it for younger people but for someone over 50 , they may ask. In any case he said if I received any RFE he was willing to provide me a letter that INH treatment is not urgently needed.
You actually have active TB? Or you are saying your TB skin test came out positive as you had BCG?
If you had given BCG and your skin test came positive, that's very normal. If your doctor here wants to treat you because your skin test came positive although your chest x-ray is clear, then you probably should change your doctor.
Asked what if USCIS sends an RFE, the ID said that they usually do not ask for it for younger people but for someone over 50 , they may ask. In any case he said if I received any RFE he was willing to provide me a letter that INH treatment is not urgently needed.
You actually have active TB? Or you are saying your TB skin test came out positive as you had BCG?
If you had given BCG and your skin test came positive, that's very normal. If your doctor here wants to treat you because your skin test came positive although your chest x-ray is clear, then you probably should change your doctor.
gc4me
07-05 08:45 PM
I have sent a request 5 months back to FOIA to get my I-140 copy. No luck yet.
I'm not sure if you can do a PD transfer just based on receipt #. You may try the FOIA route - but please be aware that it will take about a year plus to get a copy of your 140. Now depending on your PD, you can take a guess and go ahead - either do FOIA and get a copy OR just wait until PD is current for you again.
I'm not sure if you can do a PD transfer just based on receipt #. You may try the FOIA route - but please be aware that it will take about a year plus to get a copy of your 140. Now depending on your PD, you can take a guess and go ahead - either do FOIA and get a copy OR just wait until PD is current for you again.
2011 hd. wallpaper beach hd
conchshell
08-13 02:48 PM
who is vld rao?
He is our cheer leader for monthly visa bulletins. You have posted 116 messages and you don't know Mr Rao?? High time for you to start reading other's posts, other than just writing yours :D
He is our cheer leader for monthly visa bulletins. You have posted 116 messages and you don't know Mr Rao?? High time for you to start reading other's posts, other than just writing yours :D
more...
rbalaji5
11-29 07:51 PM
Gurus,
Guide me. I am planning to apply for Canada Green Card (Permanent Resident). What I am going to do is.
1) Just download the application forms from Application for Permanent Residence in Canada [IMM 0008SW] from the website and just apply without any representative
Question is
1) Do I need a representative as this is a backup to US GC.
2) I dont have any Canadian temp work visa
3) How much bank Balance I need ?
Please clarify
Guide me. I am planning to apply for Canada Green Card (Permanent Resident). What I am going to do is.
1) Just download the application forms from Application for Permanent Residence in Canada [IMM 0008SW] from the website and just apply without any representative
Question is
1) Do I need a representative as this is a backup to US GC.
2) I dont have any Canadian temp work visa
3) How much bank Balance I need ?
Please clarify
sapota
08-22 02:50 PM
I know some of you will be attending the Rally in DC on Sep 18th.
But most wont be attending the rally in DC on the 18th. Wouldnt it be good if the people who are not able to attend the DC rally conduct a rally in Texas at the same day.
This way, there will be a multi pronged effect. In fact, it would have an even greater effect if simultaneous rallies are held in other places too. Like
West Coast (Bay area )
Midwest (Chicago)
Texas (one of the major cities - Dallas, Austin or Houston)
Think of all the local media attention this gets & also the ripple effect into national media.
Any thoughts ??
But most wont be attending the rally in DC on the 18th. Wouldnt it be good if the people who are not able to attend the DC rally conduct a rally in Texas at the same day.
This way, there will be a multi pronged effect. In fact, it would have an even greater effect if simultaneous rallies are held in other places too. Like
West Coast (Bay area )
Midwest (Chicago)
Texas (one of the major cities - Dallas, Austin or Houston)
Think of all the local media attention this gets & also the ripple effect into national media.
Any thoughts ??
more...
sanjay02
10-15 04:38 PM
moneyreallymatters.com
2010 Beach - HD Wallpapers
mhathi
07-20 09:15 AM
I searched for IV on orkut and got three communities back, one with 2 members and two empty.. which one are we joining?
more...
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)
hair Beach wallpaper beach.
chanduv23
06-30 07:59 AM
Chanduv23,
What about RFE without being current? Can it also be taken as Pre-adjudicated? Pls advise.
Thank you
Yes, RFEs could be a part of preadjudication. But at times people do receive random RFEs too. If you are lucky, you can get the answer from a officer on whether your case is preadjudicated or not.
What about RFE without being current? Can it also be taken as Pre-adjudicated? Pls advise.
Thank you
Yes, RFEs could be a part of preadjudication. But at times people do receive random RFEs too. If you are lucky, you can get the answer from a officer on whether your case is preadjudicated or not.
more...
perm2gc
11-03 04:30 PM
The health benefit is actually indicated in my employment contract as part of my employment package. However, they later informed me that the health benefit is already part of my salary.
I actually signed a non-compete contract with my current employer(which means I cannot work for my current client if I switch employer). Now, I'm planning to move to a different employer, but I would be assigned to the same client. Can I argue that since they did not give me the health benefit that they promised me, then it should be okay if I violate the non-compete contract? Do you guys think I have a point of defense?
Thanks!
Not Really..Your NCA will have clause that you will not sue/take legal action against employer and you are given time to legal consultation before signing the NCA contract...
Try to find out whether NCA's are valid in your employers state..For sure i know California does not honor NCA's..
I actually signed a non-compete contract with my current employer(which means I cannot work for my current client if I switch employer). Now, I'm planning to move to a different employer, but I would be assigned to the same client. Can I argue that since they did not give me the health benefit that they promised me, then it should be okay if I violate the non-compete contract? Do you guys think I have a point of defense?
Thanks!
Not Really..Your NCA will have clause that you will not sue/take legal action against employer and you are given time to legal consultation before signing the NCA contract...
Try to find out whether NCA's are valid in your employers state..For sure i know California does not honor NCA's..
hot each wallpapers
smurugan
11-01 05:38 PM
Hello
My PD is March 2006 and my 6th year on H1B ends in March 2007. My LC was approved in March 2006 and I-140 got approved in July 2006. My company has relocated me to a different state. (same job, same title and company)
I have updated INS about my address change by sending AR-11. Would the job location change (from CA to NJ) have any impact on my GC processing?
Could you please advice if you info on this?
Regards
My PD is March 2006 and my 6th year on H1B ends in March 2007. My LC was approved in March 2006 and I-140 got approved in July 2006. My company has relocated me to a different state. (same job, same title and company)
I have updated INS about my address change by sending AR-11. Would the job location change (from CA to NJ) have any impact on my GC processing?
Could you please advice if you info on this?
Regards
more...
house Beach HD - Beach, HD,
Jaime
06-10 05:17 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?
tattoo each wallpaper hd.
desi3933
08-04 11:14 AM
Hi, can someone help crack this puzzle?
I have an EB3 application with a PD of Nov 2002 (India). Filed I-485 in June 2007, along with medical forms etc. Of course, that category is 'unavailable' now.
In 2005, we started an EB2 application, within the same company, for a new job, this one requiring a Masters degree.
The EB2 I-140 was just approved, and the notice has the Nov 2002 Priority Date.
The attorney had earlier said they could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Now, he just called saying he is confused and not sure!
His views:
- There is no formal way to find out if the new I-140 was matched up with the old I-485.
- He says he will ask his peers and will also call USCIS Customer Service.
- He thinks we might need to file a new I-485 to support the new EB2 I-140 to show that there is a pending I-485 - because the underlying EB3 is Unavailable.
Appreciate any inputs!
Cheers!
>> could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Correct. You should be able to claim EB-2 with PD Nov 2002.
Also, no need to file new I-485. Send a letter with details of both approved I-140 and highlighted PD Recapture in yellow.
_____________________________
Not a legal advice.
US Permanent Resident since 2002
I have an EB3 application with a PD of Nov 2002 (India). Filed I-485 in June 2007, along with medical forms etc. Of course, that category is 'unavailable' now.
In 2005, we started an EB2 application, within the same company, for a new job, this one requiring a Masters degree.
The EB2 I-140 was just approved, and the notice has the Nov 2002 Priority Date.
The attorney had earlier said they could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Now, he just called saying he is confused and not sure!
His views:
- There is no formal way to find out if the new I-140 was matched up with the old I-485.
- He says he will ask his peers and will also call USCIS Customer Service.
- He thinks we might need to file a new I-485 to support the new EB2 I-140 to show that there is a pending I-485 - because the underlying EB3 is Unavailable.
Appreciate any inputs!
Cheers!
>> could port the priority dates from the EB3 to EB2 and interfile.
Correct. You should be able to claim EB-2 with PD Nov 2002.
Also, no need to file new I-485. Send a letter with details of both approved I-140 and highlighted PD Recapture in yellow.
_____________________________
Not a legal advice.
US Permanent Resident since 2002
more...
pictures Beaches Wallpaper Hd - Desktop
sathish_gopalan
07-05 04:21 PM
If you leave US for 2 or 3 years and get back through a new employer, does your I140 priority date still holds good. A friend of mine got his I140 approved, left to canada and got his citizenship. He intends to move back and want to know if he can still use his priority date. Thanks.
dresses HD Wallpapers Beach Girl
EB3_SEP04
09-16 04:32 PM
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
Don't worry, his viewership is something like 200k. considering 300 million population of the US, just think what %age of people watch him? i don't think his constant whining makes a diff. Americans are smart enough that these so called news anchors are nothing more than sales/marketing guys employed indrectly by the political parties.
People like Sean Hannity, rush linbaugh constantly bashed Obama (they still do), but how much diff does it make to the american people?
another comparison: people like Dobb and Hanitty make $8-10 million a year, whereas Howard Stern makes $100 million a year. If people took these jokers seriously they would worth much more.
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
Don't worry, his viewership is something like 200k. considering 300 million population of the US, just think what %age of people watch him? i don't think his constant whining makes a diff. Americans are smart enough that these so called news anchors are nothing more than sales/marketing guys employed indrectly by the political parties.
People like Sean Hannity, rush linbaugh constantly bashed Obama (they still do), but how much diff does it make to the american people?
another comparison: people like Dobb and Hanitty make $8-10 million a year, whereas Howard Stern makes $100 million a year. If people took these jokers seriously they would worth much more.
more...
makeup Okinawa Beach Wallpapers,
sledge_hammer
07-01 12:43 PM
I am in the same situation currently.
My company's attorneys believe that mine is not an AC21 case because I am going from Software Engineer (per PERM) to Lead Software Engineer, with substantial pay hike.
They are sending me papers for H-1B amendment and extension only (extension because my H-1B will expire soon).
Why is there a need to invoke AC21 in your case? Is there substantial change in responsibilities?
I am also in a simlar situation except that the job location is same but job position going to be Sr. Programmer analyst for the same employer who is sponsoring my GC and for whom i am working for last 6 + yrs.
According to our company attorney and HR, i am eligible for promotion using the AC-21 and they are preparing my AC-21 package to USCIS.
In the AC-21 letter to USCIS it is clearly mentioned that i will be using AC-21 provision of the immigration law to accept the new position for the same employer. HR also verified that this is a natural progression for my job position.
Anyways i would suggest please talk to your HR and company attorney as they would know the best course of action for you. Remember in the immigration world even if you think u r into similar situation with other person, it may not be true in all cases.
My company's attorneys believe that mine is not an AC21 case because I am going from Software Engineer (per PERM) to Lead Software Engineer, with substantial pay hike.
They are sending me papers for H-1B amendment and extension only (extension because my H-1B will expire soon).
Why is there a need to invoke AC21 in your case? Is there substantial change in responsibilities?
I am also in a simlar situation except that the job location is same but job position going to be Sr. Programmer analyst for the same employer who is sponsoring my GC and for whom i am working for last 6 + yrs.
According to our company attorney and HR, i am eligible for promotion using the AC-21 and they are preparing my AC-21 package to USCIS.
In the AC-21 letter to USCIS it is clearly mentioned that i will be using AC-21 provision of the immigration law to accept the new position for the same employer. HR also verified that this is a natural progression for my job position.
Anyways i would suggest please talk to your HR and company attorney as they would know the best course of action for you. Remember in the immigration world even if you think u r into similar situation with other person, it may not be true in all cases.
girlfriend Wallpapers
alex99
10-01 11:32 AM
Friends,
How to know if our name checking process is done without any issues?
Regards,
Alex
How to know if our name checking process is done without any issues?
Regards,
Alex
hairstyles Dark Beach HD wallpaper
desi3933
06-11 02:39 PM
I am in my 8 yr. Have a H1-B approved Untill 2008 Dec
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
3 year H1 extension from date of application (for example: June 2007 to June 2010).
If you move to Company B, you need to restart GC (i.e. new LC and new 140). One can port PD from old 140 to new I-140, however there is a risk involved if the previous I-140 is revoked or canceled.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please verify details with your lawyer/attorney. This is just my opinion and not be taken as legal advice.
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
3 year H1 extension from date of application (for example: June 2007 to June 2010).
If you move to Company B, you need to restart GC (i.e. new LC and new 140). One can port PD from old 140 to new I-140, however there is a risk involved if the previous I-140 is revoked or canceled.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please verify details with your lawyer/attorney. This is just my opinion and not be taken as legal advice.
inskrish
08-31 01:39 AM
So.. if anyone has the info on how to register a new country, I'd like to know.
Registering a new country? I hope you are not kidding, needhelp!:)
Regards,
IK
Registering a new country? I hope you are not kidding, needhelp!:)
Regards,
IK
chanduv23
04-08 04:06 PM
I have asked this question for 3rd straight day and yet no answer. Is it some kinda secret deal?. Thought its a public forum.
Come on my friend, Admins are like you and me. They are not having any magic wands. You may want to post your concerns in the public forum or the best thing is to contact your State chapter representative who will conduit you to the Admins.
These are tough times, so hang in there. IV is committed for our cause.
Come on my friend, Admins are like you and me. They are not having any magic wands. You may want to post your concerns in the public forum or the best thing is to contact your State chapter representative who will conduit you to the Admins.
These are tough times, so hang in there. IV is committed for our cause.
No comments:
Post a Comment