Bpositive
01-05 10:20 PM
Thanks. We are answering the 221g questions. Not clear about the format of the "invitation letter" from the sponsor/employer. Should this be in txt format and in the same document as the answers to the other questions? Or can this be a separate scanned pdf...
Anyone?
This thing is driving me crazy...
Do we need to send an invitation letter in a .txt format? How do I send an invitation letter with letterhead and signature in a .txt format?
Anyone?
This thing is driving me crazy...
Do we need to send an invitation letter in a .txt format? How do I send an invitation letter with letterhead and signature in a .txt format?
wallpaper formulas matematicas. e na
howzatt
11-14 01:29 PM
Yes you are true, FP doesn't have anything to do with EAD approval.
However if you apply EAD online, then you will get FP notice as a part of the process.
good luck :)
We did not apply online. It is a paper-based application that reached USCIS on AUg 14th.
However if you apply EAD online, then you will get FP notice as a part of the process.
good luck :)
We did not apply online. It is a paper-based application that reached USCIS on AUg 14th.
logiclife
12-22 06:03 PM
There is no such thing as "H1B grace period". Nowhere in Immigration laws or USCIS regulations there is anything like a fixed number.
You are out of status(not illegal) when you stop working. If you are laid off suddenly, you are out of status.
Most people are ok coz they find new job and starting working and the "gap" in employment is usually less than a month. If its more than a month then you can face inquiries during H1B transfer to your new employer about your gap and they may ask you for missing paystubs. If you cant provide paystubs for the gap in employment between jobs, then it can go 2 ways:
1. They will give you H1 approval with I-94 attached at bottom ... meaning H1 petition is approval and the transfer is also approved.
2. If you are unluckly, the would give you just the I-797 H1 approval without the I-94 attached at the bottom of 797. That means that H1 petition for new employer is approved but the transfer is not approved. Then in that case you are required to travel out of the country and get another I-94 to get back in status.
This loosely defined grace period is a pain for those who work in consulting and switch jobs or those who get laid off without advance notice.
You are out of status(not illegal) when you stop working. If you are laid off suddenly, you are out of status.
Most people are ok coz they find new job and starting working and the "gap" in employment is usually less than a month. If its more than a month then you can face inquiries during H1B transfer to your new employer about your gap and they may ask you for missing paystubs. If you cant provide paystubs for the gap in employment between jobs, then it can go 2 ways:
1. They will give you H1 approval with I-94 attached at bottom ... meaning H1 petition is approval and the transfer is also approved.
2. If you are unluckly, the would give you just the I-797 H1 approval without the I-94 attached at the bottom of 797. That means that H1 petition for new employer is approved but the transfer is not approved. Then in that case you are required to travel out of the country and get another I-94 to get back in status.
This loosely defined grace period is a pain for those who work in consulting and switch jobs or those who get laid off without advance notice.
2011 formulas matematicas. formulas
meridiani.planum
02-17 12:44 AM
I have a feeling some good news is round the corner this "Election Year". Lets all keep our fingers crossed for any improvements in the increase of Visa numbers.
what has election year got to do with visa numbers?
what has election year got to do with visa numbers?
more...
alterego
08-21 07:19 PM
Congrats. on getting out of the queue!
Was your a physician HPSA NIW or another type of NIW?
Was your a physician HPSA NIW or another type of NIW?
dc4opera
05-19 01:07 PM
One more thing, never disclose anything with company's attorney, they will be loyal to your employer and not you. Look for soem other attorney.
A few more questions:
1. While the I-140 is pending, can I get a different lawyer to file the I-485?
2. If I wait until the I-140 is approved and then get a different lawyer to process my I-485 (or do it myself), will this be a problem?
3. Can my employer withdraw the I-140 AFTER it's been approved?
Please advise me.
A few more questions:
1. While the I-140 is pending, can I get a different lawyer to file the I-485?
2. If I wait until the I-140 is approved and then get a different lawyer to process my I-485 (or do it myself), will this be a problem?
3. Can my employer withdraw the I-140 AFTER it's been approved?
Please advise me.
more...
GCPagla
03-17 08:58 AM
Hi All,
Thanks for all your support and soothing words.
I have talked with my immegration attorney who filed my 140 and 485 on current employer's behalf. And surprisingly she is ready to file the AC21 for me. Obviously she is charging me for that, but I guess I am fine with that.
The excerpt form our communication is as following.
a) I need to get a AC21 letter signed by the new employer. This will describe my position and duties, which should be similar to the LC.
b) offer ltter need not describe word-word match of designation and duty.
c) if there is a huge rise 50% - no issue.
d) company size does not matter.
So I had decided to take the plunge, especially when I have my attorney guarding the case.
Write the market condition is not to well for H1B
a) My friend was laid off in Dec and he was serching for job. Suddenlt he realized that his earlier employer had revoked the H1B. So he was out of status for some days. He managed filing AC21 with his friend's company and managed.
b) I heard people ging for H1B extension was asked by USCIS to get a letter from the end client, saying the project will last for more than 3 years. I guess none will give that assurance in this market.
So I guess I will move on EAD. Let me check what happend and I will keep posting my experience here.
Thanks
Thanks for all your support and soothing words.
I have talked with my immegration attorney who filed my 140 and 485 on current employer's behalf. And surprisingly she is ready to file the AC21 for me. Obviously she is charging me for that, but I guess I am fine with that.
The excerpt form our communication is as following.
a) I need to get a AC21 letter signed by the new employer. This will describe my position and duties, which should be similar to the LC.
b) offer ltter need not describe word-word match of designation and duty.
c) if there is a huge rise 50% - no issue.
d) company size does not matter.
So I had decided to take the plunge, especially when I have my attorney guarding the case.
Write the market condition is not to well for H1B
a) My friend was laid off in Dec and he was serching for job. Suddenlt he realized that his earlier employer had revoked the H1B. So he was out of status for some days. He managed filing AC21 with his friend's company and managed.
b) I heard people ging for H1B extension was asked by USCIS to get a letter from the end client, saying the project will last for more than 3 years. I guess none will give that assurance in this market.
So I guess I will move on EAD. Let me check what happend and I will keep posting my experience here.
Thanks
2010 formulas matematicas. fórmulas
hemanth22
07-21 09:24 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
more...
Navigator
05-19 02:23 PM
Hello fellas...i had quit WIPRO @ USA giving 2 weeks notice on 2009.WIPRO Mangers tried to withdraw my resignation in all means.They even told that they ll sue me for breaking the contract that i have signed.
After this WIPRO bangalore office sent me 5 letters asking me to pay 6 lac rs indian money to them.I refused and didnt respond to it .
As general rule who ever resign the company should provide insurance for next 30 days as a coverage .I guess they didnt do that for me .
Also they didnt send me the relieving letter and others indian PF etc.
They even paid less that that was specified in the LCA.
I would like to know if you had complaint DOL on this ?
Regards
After this WIPRO bangalore office sent me 5 letters asking me to pay 6 lac rs indian money to them.I refused and didnt respond to it .
As general rule who ever resign the company should provide insurance for next 30 days as a coverage .I guess they didnt do that for me .
Also they didnt send me the relieving letter and others indian PF etc.
They even paid less that that was specified in the LCA.
I would like to know if you had complaint DOL on this ?
Regards
hair formulas matematicas. con las
tabletpc
11-29 04:45 PM
Thanks everyone..i will send it 2m with bank draft in C$.
its better to have plan B...
its better to have plan B...
more...
cjain
11-13 03:10 PM
From the Aytes memo:
Question 1
How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer:
If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it’s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A above.
Hope this clears stuff up. RFE's are generally issued for ability to pay issues. If all's clear on that front, there should simply be no issue
Question 1
How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer:
If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it’s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A above.
Hope this clears stuff up. RFE's are generally issued for ability to pay issues. If all's clear on that front, there should simply be no issue
hot fórmulas matemáticas
kish006
12-25 08:56 AM
agc2005,
Thanks for the reply.
I already send my EAD card. on Dec 11th. When did you resubmitted EAD Card and how many day USCIS took to reissue new EAD cards.
THanks
Any body who has simillary issue with AP and did you guys did. and how it took for u you to new cards.
Please send your experince.
Can I make this expedite. As I planning to go to India in Jan.
Thanks for the reply.
I already send my EAD card. on Dec 11th. When did you resubmitted EAD Card and how many day USCIS took to reissue new EAD cards.
THanks
Any body who has simillary issue with AP and did you guys did. and how it took for u you to new cards.
Please send your experince.
Can I make this expedite. As I planning to go to India in Jan.
more...
house fórmulas matemáticas
bmoni
01-22 04:33 PM
Talk to your attorney. I think recent supreme court rule gives us the ability to appeal it. If it was an wrongful denial.
Don't lose your hope. Keep up the fight.
Don't lose your hope. Keep up the fight.
tattoo formulas matematicas. as
hopein07
03-14 10:04 AM
Canada requires 3yrs plus one year of training in US and then you need to take one exam for Canada and that's it. If she is doing IM or FP residency then she should try to get into one year of Chief residency as well after completing 3 yrs of residency.
Canada has a severe shortage of doctors specially in rural areas but not in the cities like Toronto, Vancouver, Ottawa, Calgary, Windsor, or London. IT jobs are very scarce in Canada but are only in big cities. So, one of the two of you has got to sit at home depending on who decides to work.
Canada has a severe shortage of doctors specially in rural areas but not in the cities like Toronto, Vancouver, Ottawa, Calgary, Windsor, or London. IT jobs are very scarce in Canada but are only in big cities. So, one of the two of you has got to sit at home depending on who decides to work.
more...
pictures hot fórmulas matemáticas
ujjvalkoul
01-18 12:49 PM
try entering that number here
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do
BUT, I am assuming she gave u the Receipt number for online tracking, which you may already have from ur receipt notice...DOES it start with SRC or LIN?
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/caseStatusSearchDisplay.do
BUT, I am assuming she gave u the Receipt number for online tracking, which you may already have from ur receipt notice...DOES it start with SRC or LIN?
dresses tatuaje formula matemática
neverbefore
03-01 10:15 AM
Yes please explain that better.
Some grammar/spellings gremlins conspired to mash up what I believe was an illuminating post in the making.
No offence meant or intended, I suggest a repost of the one by Mark.:)
I am trying to figure out how much latency is to be expected in allotment of a GC for a case whose PD comes current sometime in the future and the processing date at whose service center too is later than the application date for the case at the time the PD comes current.
Thanks and best regards.
Some grammar/spellings gremlins conspired to mash up what I believe was an illuminating post in the making.
No offence meant or intended, I suggest a repost of the one by Mark.:)
I am trying to figure out how much latency is to be expected in allotment of a GC for a case whose PD comes current sometime in the future and the processing date at whose service center too is later than the application date for the case at the time the PD comes current.
Thanks and best regards.
more...
makeup Fórmulas Matemáticas Pro
Siddharta
09-26 12:48 AM
YES YES YES - go ahead screw your smalltime employer
You made my day. Thanks so much. :):):):):):):)
I don't understand why people are right now so worried about priority date retrogression. If you have passed 180 days after I140 approval, go ahead, change your job and incase your 485 gets denied, reapply with new employer, with new new job description, using old PD and get GC soon as your priority date will be current. Am I missing something?
There is no way I am going to spend 6-7 years in the same job with the same title(maybe even same company).
You made my day. Thanks so much. :):):):):):):)
I don't understand why people are right now so worried about priority date retrogression. If you have passed 180 days after I140 approval, go ahead, change your job and incase your 485 gets denied, reapply with new employer, with new new job description, using old PD and get GC soon as your priority date will be current. Am I missing something?
There is no way I am going to spend 6-7 years in the same job with the same title(maybe even same company).
girlfriend Permite editar fórmulas
ajju
02-27 02:48 PM
I have the file numbers etc since I got finger print notice last year so am set up online to track the applications. But just haven't see the receipt notices come through. Should I be concerned?
If your lawyer filed on your behalf.. the receipts might've just went to him... Check with your lawyer...
If your lawyer filed on your behalf.. the receipts might've just went to him... Check with your lawyer...
hairstyles das fórmulas matemáticas:
anantken
07-21 09:32 AM
I am also having the same case... my PD is May 2006. I filed for I-485 in July 2007. Until today I haven't received the FP Notice.. Last yr I have received AP, EAD but no FP yet..
Someone on this website mentioned that EAD Renewal should trigger FP notice. In June 2008 I have applied for EAD Renewal.. Online status shows that EAD card is in production. But Still no FP notice.
I went to local office too.. They were of no help. They said that FP notice should initiate from USCIS Service Center.
Also I have done 2 SRs.. 1st one was done in Nov 07. Still Nobody is assigned to my case.
I dont know what to do now. my service center is TSC.
Someone on this website mentioned that EAD Renewal should trigger FP notice. In June 2008 I have applied for EAD Renewal.. Online status shows that EAD card is in production. But Still no FP notice.
I went to local office too.. They were of no help. They said that FP notice should initiate from USCIS Service Center.
Also I have done 2 SRs.. 1st one was done in Nov 07. Still Nobody is assigned to my case.
I dont know what to do now. my service center is TSC.
hmehta
12-14 01:16 PM
Best course of action would be to go to your Home Country during that period....visa stamping is not a big deal at all.....njoy your vacation...for you might not get this much off/free time in the foreseeable future!!!!
You can not work after 7/9/2007.
The end of the OPT will determine when you must stop working.
The 60 days grace period is only for you to take care of business before you go back home. In your case you must wait for 2 months and 24 days before returning to work otherwise you will be in violation of your status.
andy
You can not work after 7/9/2007.
The end of the OPT will determine when you must stop working.
The 60 days grace period is only for you to take care of business before you go back home. In your case you must wait for 2 months and 24 days before returning to work otherwise you will be in violation of your status.
andy
buddhaas
02-02 03:57 PM
Why Is H-1B A Dirty Word?
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
1 comments:
Thank you for sharing this information. It was my pleasure to share it with you. I appreciate everything you did. I hope the information will be useful to others. h1b transfer grace period
Post a Comment