arc
10-01 09:02 PM
NSC probably sent applications to CSC for data entry, I am a july 2 filer, my EAD(I131)/AP(I765) and all receipt notices were sent to me by CSC all are WAC### numbers which means its from CSC, then they sent just the AOS (I485) back to NSC saying they do not have Jurisdiction on the AOS application (Logic behind this is - because my I140 was approved by NSC, I have a LIN### on I140 application).
This transfers happens in the 4 centers all the time no need to worry, there is delay associated though... :(
Anywayz all said and done... I have not received my FP notice as yet...My Receipt Notice date : Aug23
This transfers happens in the 4 centers all the time no need to worry, there is delay associated though... :(
Anywayz all said and done... I have not received my FP notice as yet...My Receipt Notice date : Aug23
wallpaper Royalty-free clipart picture
bomber
08-08 06:46 PM
Does that mean 180 after the I140 is approved or 180 after the RN of the I485 as long as the I140 is approved? (Even if it has been approved for only 2 months)
You are right...
180 after the RN of the I485 as long as the I140 is approved Even if it has been approved for only 2 months or days!
You are right...
180 after the RN of the I485 as long as the I140 is approved Even if it has been approved for only 2 months or days!
shana04
02-16 01:32 PM
Hi,
I am talking to different lawyers for using AC21 - new position title and functions are almost similar with similar salaries in the same region, old employer might revoke the approved I140 but 180 days are over and I140 is approved - couple lawyers mentioned that the case is straight forward but still mentioned that they are not going to take the case because they decided not to do AC21 in many cases. Reason they mentioned is that underlying I485 is not filed by them and if its rejected for any reason there is a chance of mal-practise suit against them. The fact that they didnt do anything after taking the case might work against them. Their current insurance against mal-practise is not enough to cover these types of instances. I found the argument a bit weird but wondering if anyone else heard same - I heard this from 2 of the 3 lawyers I called locally.
- kishdam
kishdam,
Logically thinking, first thing 485 is your petition.
you are giving them the right to act on your behalf.
There is nothing that an employer has provided except the offer letter.
Now you are using new employers offer letter, how in the world would an old employer sue this attorney. This is your petition and not employers petition.
Scenario:
What if you use G28 representing your self and send a AC21 letter.
Latter (God forbidden this does not happen to any one) but you get RFE, then you choose attorney. You explain that you are represting your self and now need attorneys help. Now who is going to sue this attorney.
This is all B*** S**t to make money or to fear people. I know people who have used G28 representing them selves and got GC. my self I am using a attorney, coz he did not charge more and he said in case you are not satisfied you can always use different lawyer. And all that he has charged is $500.00 and if he is not up to the mark then I would find a differnet attorney. $500 is not a huge sum.
So, good luck and find a better attorney.
I am talking to different lawyers for using AC21 - new position title and functions are almost similar with similar salaries in the same region, old employer might revoke the approved I140 but 180 days are over and I140 is approved - couple lawyers mentioned that the case is straight forward but still mentioned that they are not going to take the case because they decided not to do AC21 in many cases. Reason they mentioned is that underlying I485 is not filed by them and if its rejected for any reason there is a chance of mal-practise suit against them. The fact that they didnt do anything after taking the case might work against them. Their current insurance against mal-practise is not enough to cover these types of instances. I found the argument a bit weird but wondering if anyone else heard same - I heard this from 2 of the 3 lawyers I called locally.
- kishdam
kishdam,
Logically thinking, first thing 485 is your petition.
you are giving them the right to act on your behalf.
There is nothing that an employer has provided except the offer letter.
Now you are using new employers offer letter, how in the world would an old employer sue this attorney. This is your petition and not employers petition.
Scenario:
What if you use G28 representing your self and send a AC21 letter.
Latter (God forbidden this does not happen to any one) but you get RFE, then you choose attorney. You explain that you are represting your self and now need attorneys help. Now who is going to sue this attorney.
This is all B*** S**t to make money or to fear people. I know people who have used G28 representing them selves and got GC. my self I am using a attorney, coz he did not charge more and he said in case you are not satisfied you can always use different lawyer. And all that he has charged is $500.00 and if he is not up to the mark then I would find a differnet attorney. $500 is not a huge sum.
So, good luck and find a better attorney.
2011 The Crown of Thorns,
vivid_bharti
04-24 02:42 PM
People are thinking they give $100-$200 or $1000 to IV and their duty is done, they have no clue what we are up against...
more...
H4_losing_hope
02-25 11:01 PM
my new total 105 ish
maybe a few more this week.
If anyone wants about 50 hand addressed envelops to President then PM me.
May be NORCAL might need them? I will be sending them about 30+ letters this week.
Cheers!
maybe a few more this week.
If anyone wants about 50 hand addressed envelops to President then PM me.
May be NORCAL might need them? I will be sending them about 30+ letters this week.
Cheers!
IneedAllGreen
06-27 05:18 PM
Yes my in-laws are fine and they were not disappointed seeing me in person. But I am gigling by looking at this thread is growing and at page 3 someone put a shame on this thread. As for me sometime its fun and Ok to share minor detail or personal detail to give confidence to someone doing same thing which we went thru(like I have beein using photos taken at Kinkos and Sears). Nevertheless since date is coming closer to file our 485 it makes me happy to see several smiley face and helping hands in IV forums. Glad to be helping others and ignore rants of others.
I am just here to share my thoughts and knowledge nothing personal to anyone. So to everyone Dont worry:( ! Be happy :) .
Thanks :D (This extra smile for all IV members)
I am sure SEARS pictures are great.
Hope your in-laws are not disappointed when they saw you in person :) :).... No ... I am just kidding .......No offense meant :):).... I am sure they like you and that is why you are married happily now :) Just wanted to bring a lighter moment tho this stingy thread.
I am just here to share my thoughts and knowledge nothing personal to anyone. So to everyone Dont worry:( ! Be happy :) .
Thanks :D (This extra smile for all IV members)
I am sure SEARS pictures are great.
Hope your in-laws are not disappointed when they saw you in person :) :).... No ... I am just kidding .......No offense meant :):).... I am sure they like you and that is why you are married happily now :) Just wanted to bring a lighter moment tho this stingy thread.
more...
sandy_anand
11-10 11:49 AM
I think I have joined IV in last 3 years or so...
Donated money once & have called congressmen & senators many times ...
Could someone please tell me -
What has been achieved by IV till date? I know we all meet elected reps, officials in washington dc ..... but I am interested in end result like not wasting visa numbers , implementing spillover & along these lines.
I have asked few friends to join IV but then if they ask me for IV accomplishments - i can't count any....
If IV has accomplished its objectives, then there is no need for any of us to join. But anyway, the following might be listed...hope this helps.
Immigration Voice Achievements
1. September 2009. Streamlining of Security Screening Process for Foreign Scientists: DHS reduced the wait times for Visa stamping in foreign consulates to 2 weeks. A successful campaign was run by IV members. http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/654080-iv-update-good-news-for-people-stuck-due-to-security-checks-while-waiting-for-visas.html
2. September, 2009. Successful completion of FOIA campaign: After filing hundreds of FOIA requests USCIS released the data of pending applications on their website. http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/630599-iv-update-on-visa-numbers-and-foia-data.html
3. 2008: Admin Fix campaign. 2 Year EAD announced by USCIS for all that have filed AOS.
4. 2008. Successful introduction of 3 bills in the House by Rep Zoe. Lofgren. This included elimination of per country limits Bill on which no other organization or business interest had ever advocated until that time. Immigration Voice successfully advocated these bills, brought in co-sponsors and received support from other interests for these bills.
H.R.5882
Title: To recapture employment-based immigrant visas lost to bureaucratic delays and to prevent losses of family- and employment-based immigrant visas in the future.
Sponsor: Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] (introduced 4/23/2008) Cosponsors (31)
H.R.5921
Title: To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the per country level for employment-based immigrants and to end the spill-over of unused immigrant visa numbers between employment-based and family-sponsored categories.
Sponsor: Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] (introduced 4/29/2008) Cosponsors (24)
H.R.6039
Title: To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to authorize certain aliens who have earned a master's or higher degree from a United States institution of higher education in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics to be admitted for permanent residence.
Sponsor: Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] (introduced 5/13/2008) Cosponsors (34)
5. September 18, 2007
1. DC Rally: Thousands of high-skilled immigrants march in the US Capital!
2. Lobby day: IV volunteers attend close to 125 meetings with lawmakers� offices to lobby for congressional intervention
3. Paid Advertisement in the Roll Call- the newspaper that covers the Capitol Hill
4. Media coverage: New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo, BBC, OC Register, Business Week
5.
6. July 2007 Visa bulletin reversal
1. IV breaks the good news!
2. Flower campaign
i. USCIS takes note of the flower campaign
ii. Media coverage: Business Week, Reuters, Washington Post, New York Times, NPR, Others, Video coverage
3. San Jose Rally
i. Media coverage: Business Week
3. CIR 2006: Manager's amendment
1. IV lobbies to ensure that this amendment contains favorable provisions for high-skilled immigrants
2. The amendment was PASSED, although the bill itself did not survive
4. Access to lawmakers
1. IV is in close contact with Hon. Rep. Zoe Lofgren�s office on several issues related to Employment Based Immigration
2. IV closely worked with Hon. Rep. Zoe Lofgren who played an instrumental role in bringing about reversal of July Visa Bulletin
5. Contact with USCIS. IV was the first one to bring news of the July 2007 Visa Bulletin reversal
6. IV Spokesperson invited to conference at top US University
7. Only organization FOR high-skilled immigrants BY high skilled immigrants
1. Most visited site by high-skilled immigrants in the
2. Number of registered members has risen from 50 to 25000 in less than 2 years! The following are approximate figures:
i. 1/2006: 60
ii. 2/2006: 600
iii. 7/2006: 4500
iv. 1/2007: 7500
v. 7/2007: 15000
vi. 8/2007: 20000
vii. 11/2007: 25000
viii. 07/2008: 30000
IX. 09/2009: 36,810
Donated money once & have called congressmen & senators many times ...
Could someone please tell me -
What has been achieved by IV till date? I know we all meet elected reps, officials in washington dc ..... but I am interested in end result like not wasting visa numbers , implementing spillover & along these lines.
I have asked few friends to join IV but then if they ask me for IV accomplishments - i can't count any....
If IV has accomplished its objectives, then there is no need for any of us to join. But anyway, the following might be listed...hope this helps.
Immigration Voice Achievements
1. September 2009. Streamlining of Security Screening Process for Foreign Scientists: DHS reduced the wait times for Visa stamping in foreign consulates to 2 weeks. A successful campaign was run by IV members. http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/654080-iv-update-good-news-for-people-stuck-due-to-security-checks-while-waiting-for-visas.html
2. September, 2009. Successful completion of FOIA campaign: After filing hundreds of FOIA requests USCIS released the data of pending applications on their website. http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/630599-iv-update-on-visa-numbers-and-foia-data.html
3. 2008: Admin Fix campaign. 2 Year EAD announced by USCIS for all that have filed AOS.
4. 2008. Successful introduction of 3 bills in the House by Rep Zoe. Lofgren. This included elimination of per country limits Bill on which no other organization or business interest had ever advocated until that time. Immigration Voice successfully advocated these bills, brought in co-sponsors and received support from other interests for these bills.
H.R.5882
Title: To recapture employment-based immigrant visas lost to bureaucratic delays and to prevent losses of family- and employment-based immigrant visas in the future.
Sponsor: Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] (introduced 4/23/2008) Cosponsors (31)
H.R.5921
Title: To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate the per country level for employment-based immigrants and to end the spill-over of unused immigrant visa numbers between employment-based and family-sponsored categories.
Sponsor: Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] (introduced 4/29/2008) Cosponsors (24)
H.R.6039
Title: To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to authorize certain aliens who have earned a master's or higher degree from a United States institution of higher education in a field of science, technology, engineering, or mathematics to be admitted for permanent residence.
Sponsor: Rep Lofgren, Zoe [CA-16] (introduced 5/13/2008) Cosponsors (34)
5. September 18, 2007
1. DC Rally: Thousands of high-skilled immigrants march in the US Capital!
2. Lobby day: IV volunteers attend close to 125 meetings with lawmakers� offices to lobby for congressional intervention
3. Paid Advertisement in the Roll Call- the newspaper that covers the Capitol Hill
4. Media coverage: New York Times, Washington Post, Yahoo, BBC, OC Register, Business Week
5.
6. July 2007 Visa bulletin reversal
1. IV breaks the good news!
2. Flower campaign
i. USCIS takes note of the flower campaign
ii. Media coverage: Business Week, Reuters, Washington Post, New York Times, NPR, Others, Video coverage
3. San Jose Rally
i. Media coverage: Business Week
3. CIR 2006: Manager's amendment
1. IV lobbies to ensure that this amendment contains favorable provisions for high-skilled immigrants
2. The amendment was PASSED, although the bill itself did not survive
4. Access to lawmakers
1. IV is in close contact with Hon. Rep. Zoe Lofgren�s office on several issues related to Employment Based Immigration
2. IV closely worked with Hon. Rep. Zoe Lofgren who played an instrumental role in bringing about reversal of July Visa Bulletin
5. Contact with USCIS. IV was the first one to bring news of the July 2007 Visa Bulletin reversal
6. IV Spokesperson invited to conference at top US University
7. Only organization FOR high-skilled immigrants BY high skilled immigrants
1. Most visited site by high-skilled immigrants in the
2. Number of registered members has risen from 50 to 25000 in less than 2 years! The following are approximate figures:
i. 1/2006: 60
ii. 2/2006: 600
iii. 7/2006: 4500
iv. 1/2007: 7500
v. 7/2007: 15000
vi. 8/2007: 20000
vii. 11/2007: 25000
viii. 07/2008: 30000
IX. 09/2009: 36,810
2010 Crown of Thorns Head Piece
micofrost
06-02 02:07 PM
Two from our family.
Called up the 202... .... number. Got fwded to Senator Boxter's office. Although she isn't a supporter yet, but talked to her office and left a message for the Senator asking for her support.
thx
Called up the 202... .... number. Got fwded to Senator Boxter's office. Although she isn't a supporter yet, but talked to her office and left a message for the Senator asking for her support.
thx
more...
pkpalta
12-20 06:28 PM
Guys,
I think we should post this on http://www.immigrationportal.com and ask Rajeev Khanna or ask Mathew Oh of http://www.immigration-law.com.
I'm sure they might help us by putting up a post for this.
I think we should post this on http://www.immigrationportal.com and ask Rajeev Khanna or ask Mathew Oh of http://www.immigration-law.com.
I'm sure they might help us by putting up a post for this.
hair Crown of Thorns: Mark
mmj
04-19 03:46 PM
You joined today just to post this?
Dude you need to first fill your profile details and earn some credibility before you ask people to do something.
Hey Bozo - I've been following IV for about 2 years now using my spouse's ID - I just created one for myself today - My wife and I have contributed to IV also. Know the facts before shooting your mouth off - NUT JOB!!!
Dude you need to first fill your profile details and earn some credibility before you ask people to do something.
Hey Bozo - I've been following IV for about 2 years now using my spouse's ID - I just created one for myself today - My wife and I have contributed to IV also. Know the facts before shooting your mouth off - NUT JOB!!!
more...
payur
06-27 08:15 AM
You seem to have got your case approved and you have filed your wife's I485, correct me if I am wrong.
What do you say to people who have been waiting from 2002 and 2003 and 2004, as of today there is no difference for person who got labor approved in May 2007 and case with priority date May 2003. For lot of them it has been a frustrating and stressful period, mainly because their spouses have been idle.
How on earth can you come with this idea, see the traffic on this site now, when core IV team was fighting for the retrogression and other benefits for our cause, there were very few. The world is selfish buddy. I wish you good luck on this idea.
What do you say to people who have been waiting from 2002 and 2003 and 2004, as of today there is no difference for person who got labor approved in May 2007 and case with priority date May 2003. For lot of them it has been a frustrating and stressful period, mainly because their spouses have been idle.
How on earth can you come with this idea, see the traffic on this site now, when core IV team was fighting for the retrogression and other benefits for our cause, there were very few. The world is selfish buddy. I wish you good luck on this idea.
hot house Princess Crown Tattoos.
greensignal
11-09 12:30 PM
Still waiting for FP and no SR is filed
more...
house does a crown of thorns sea
anilsal
07-25 11:27 PM
to channel all your frustrations and anxiety toward a noble cause. Life is hard. GC is just a milestone, just the way you experienced your first process (H1,J1,F1) to get to the US.
I think worrying a lot about the GC has increased my blood pressure (and I need to relax). :) It is just like the COLTS disease - men are made to worry about the future. ;) IV allows to share your pain with others and also work together for a cause.
Remember life can be worse than what it is for you now (http://anilgeneral.blogspot.com/2008/07/when-going-gets-tough.html) Chill, it is a friday.
I think worrying a lot about the GC has increased my blood pressure (and I need to relax). :) It is just like the COLTS disease - men are made to worry about the future. ;) IV allows to share your pain with others and also work together for a cause.
Remember life can be worse than what it is for you now (http://anilgeneral.blogspot.com/2008/07/when-going-gets-tough.html) Chill, it is a friday.
tattoo Drawing of thorn crown on
harsh
12-30 12:56 PM
USCIS will not look into your tax records for H1b approval. They might ask you for your previous H1b approval notices and or pay stubs but thats all. However when you go to the embassy for the stamping they might ask for tax returns.
more...
pictures Pictures of Crown Tattoos
kak1978
01-13 09:39 AM
You should be ok. The purpose of COBRA is to have a continued coverage. usually insurance is month to month, so the coverage nessasarly doesn't end the day you quit. All COBRA does is allow you to pay the next months entire premium and keep the existing coverage.
I tried using COBRA last year and in my case the gap was 3 months and my monthly COBRA payments were about $900/month, since I did not have any ongoing medical conditions or foresee any like pregnancy etc, I went for short term private insurance to fill the gap.
Pardon my ignorance Gurus.
But Hypothetical....what would be the scenario, if,
- I leave the job-A on 1st of the month.
- join new job-B on 2nd of the month (very next day) but new employer wants me to complete 30 days before providing medical insurance
- my job-A insurance company sends me COBRA option in two weeks time as required by law
- Prior to I fill and send out the COBRA docs (roughly 2 - 3 weeks), I have to make some urgent visit to doctor...say in 1st week (say, on 4th of the month)
- will my job-A company will deny this claim as they only received my COBRA paperwork by 18th of the month whereas I went to doctor on 4th????
I tried using COBRA last year and in my case the gap was 3 months and my monthly COBRA payments were about $900/month, since I did not have any ongoing medical conditions or foresee any like pregnancy etc, I went for short term private insurance to fill the gap.
Pardon my ignorance Gurus.
But Hypothetical....what would be the scenario, if,
- I leave the job-A on 1st of the month.
- join new job-B on 2nd of the month (very next day) but new employer wants me to complete 30 days before providing medical insurance
- my job-A insurance company sends me COBRA option in two weeks time as required by law
- Prior to I fill and send out the COBRA docs (roughly 2 - 3 weeks), I have to make some urgent visit to doctor...say in 1st week (say, on 4th of the month)
- will my job-A company will deny this claim as they only received my COBRA paperwork by 18th of the month whereas I went to doctor on 4th????
dresses The Crown of Thorns,
Jimi_Hendrix
12-12 01:01 PM
In short they do not want us here.. they want to suck the money out of you, all the money you earned and saved.
Were you making sure that we are not disappointed? :)
Thanks for living upto the expectations buddy :D
Were you making sure that we are not disappointed? :)
Thanks for living upto the expectations buddy :D
more...
makeup palm weaving, crown of thorns:
sgkgops
07-07 02:29 PM
Wow...good publicity....
>>http://video.msn.com/v/us/fv/msnbc/f...e-91f2915adc79
Is it right episode? I didn't see anything relate to july bulletin. Can you sent the right padcast?
>>http://video.msn.com/v/us/fv/msnbc/f...e-91f2915adc79
Is it right episode? I didn't see anything relate to july bulletin. Can you sent the right padcast?
girlfriend #11: Crown Of Thorns - Faith
anai
08-19 10:36 AM
Does anyone have an LUD on 04/20/2008?
Yes, on the already-approved I-140. I am not sure if LUDs mean anything at all.
EB2-I.
PD: Nov 2004
RD: July 2007
ND: Sep 2007
Yes, on the already-approved I-140. I am not sure if LUDs mean anything at all.
EB2-I.
PD: Nov 2004
RD: July 2007
ND: Sep 2007
hairstyles and crown of thorns tattoo
obviously
02-12 09:59 PM
hi. sorry to hear that you are going through this harrassment.
i would recommend the following strategy:
1. file a case of harrassment with the state DOL / agency.
2. contact an immig attorney and have them 'on your side'
3. contact the IRS via registered mail and document your case, with FACTS, not OPINIONS or EMOTIONS. send a copy of the IRS letter to the State DOL.
4. further, file a complaint with the DOJ (if applicable). check out their Website.
5. finally, send a 30 day demand note (if applicable in your state) stating YOUR demands against the former employer, asking for immediate cessation of all activities which can be considered as coercive, amounting to emotional stress and harrassment. if possible, get a Doctor's medical advice and keep that on record.
6. eventually, think about getting a lawyer to do this case 'pro bono' . some might do if you can get good local press about thsi case and effectively 'market the lawyers costlessly'. of course, all privacy goes out of the window.
good luck.
i would recommend the following strategy:
1. file a case of harrassment with the state DOL / agency.
2. contact an immig attorney and have them 'on your side'
3. contact the IRS via registered mail and document your case, with FACTS, not OPINIONS or EMOTIONS. send a copy of the IRS letter to the State DOL.
4. further, file a complaint with the DOJ (if applicable). check out their Website.
5. finally, send a 30 day demand note (if applicable in your state) stating YOUR demands against the former employer, asking for immediate cessation of all activities which can be considered as coercive, amounting to emotional stress and harrassment. if possible, get a Doctor's medical advice and keep that on record.
6. eventually, think about getting a lawyer to do this case 'pro bono' . some might do if you can get good local press about thsi case and effectively 'market the lawyers costlessly'. of course, all privacy goes out of the window.
good luck.
LegallyGC
08-09 10:46 AM
Guys,
There was a question and answer section on this site and i found this which might help us..
---------------------------------
12. Question(08/03/10): It has taken several years for me to receive the I-485 approval yesterday based on the employment-based petition filed by my employer. I have never changed employer. Neither have I invoked AC 21 change of employment. Since the 485 is approved, I am seeking new employment and started sending out employment applications to various employers. Is there any law that forces me to work for the green card sponsoring employer even after the green card is approved?
Answer: The green card employment is "permanent" employment. "Permanent" means the employment term is not temporary and must be for a period of "indefinite" duration. Inasmuch as there is no ending date, it can be considered a permanent terms of employment. The employer sponsed employment based immigration requires both the employer and employee to retain "intent" to offer such permanent employment and accept such permanent employment on or before the I-485 is approved. If the employer does not maintain such "intent" and file a labor certification and I-140 petition, It can be construed a fraud. If the employee does not have such "intent" and sign the labor certification application and and file I-485 application based on the employer-sponsored I-140 petition, it can also be considered a fraud. The issue is "intent" which is a mental state as judged from the actions of the employer or employee. AC-21 portability of approved I-140 petition changed the picture and both the employer and employee are freed from such obligation if two conditions are met. One is that until AC-21 is invoked, the employer and employee retain such intent. Practically, in the context of AC-21, such oblication is limited until the alien invokes the AC-21 change of employment after 180 days of filing of I-485 application in similar or same occupational classification. There is a grey area where the alien does not invoke AC-21 and change of employment. In such context, it may be assumed that both the employer and the employee retain such intent at the time I-485 is approved. In old days, the legacy INS was active in initiating a revocation of green card proceeding before the immigration courts to stip off the approved green card and launch a deportation proceeding based either on the ground that there was a fraud on the parties or the INS approved the I-485 application without the knowledge of such fact of ill-conceived intent of the parties. The theory of the law is that "had the agency known the true facts." the agency would not have approved the employment-based I-485 because the I-485 could have been ineligible without such intent. Intent is proven in most cases by the circumstantial evidence since no one can go into the state of mind of other person. The evidence they used to use was the evidence of search of another employment immediately before or after I-485 was approved. For the reasons, even though there is no fixed period of time for a new green card holder to work for the sponsoring employer, legal counsels advised the employees not to send out employment application in writing to other employers immediately prior to the approval of I-485 application or at least for certain period of time like two months not to change employment, because such behavior can be construed as relection of the true state of mind and intent of the employee not to work for the sponsoring employer before or on the date of approval of I-485 application owing to short period of time that lapsed when they changed employment. This problem used to pop up during the naturalization proceeding when the agency learned that the alien changed employment immediately before or after the green card is granted. The foregoing inent issue can be overridden when the alien left the job because of employer's decision to terminate the employment or because of change of circumstances which are beyond the control of the parties such as slow-down of business and layoffs. Again AC-21 affected this issue, and it appears that the agency may no longer actively look for this issue. But theoretically, the issue still exists and a law is a law. Accordingly, there is always a potential risk of this issue popping up after green card is approved, especially when there is a grudged sponsoring employer who obtained and possessed such adverse evidence and contact the agency to revoke the green card. Just beware.
------------------------
Hope this helps.
Pappu, there is nothing wrong in seeking exact clarification though from USCIS because things are not really clear on this regard and its better to get clear cut answer to the immigrant community..
There was a question and answer section on this site and i found this which might help us..
---------------------------------
12. Question(08/03/10): It has taken several years for me to receive the I-485 approval yesterday based on the employment-based petition filed by my employer. I have never changed employer. Neither have I invoked AC 21 change of employment. Since the 485 is approved, I am seeking new employment and started sending out employment applications to various employers. Is there any law that forces me to work for the green card sponsoring employer even after the green card is approved?
Answer: The green card employment is "permanent" employment. "Permanent" means the employment term is not temporary and must be for a period of "indefinite" duration. Inasmuch as there is no ending date, it can be considered a permanent terms of employment. The employer sponsed employment based immigration requires both the employer and employee to retain "intent" to offer such permanent employment and accept such permanent employment on or before the I-485 is approved. If the employer does not maintain such "intent" and file a labor certification and I-140 petition, It can be construed a fraud. If the employee does not have such "intent" and sign the labor certification application and and file I-485 application based on the employer-sponsored I-140 petition, it can also be considered a fraud. The issue is "intent" which is a mental state as judged from the actions of the employer or employee. AC-21 portability of approved I-140 petition changed the picture and both the employer and employee are freed from such obligation if two conditions are met. One is that until AC-21 is invoked, the employer and employee retain such intent. Practically, in the context of AC-21, such oblication is limited until the alien invokes the AC-21 change of employment after 180 days of filing of I-485 application in similar or same occupational classification. There is a grey area where the alien does not invoke AC-21 and change of employment. In such context, it may be assumed that both the employer and the employee retain such intent at the time I-485 is approved. In old days, the legacy INS was active in initiating a revocation of green card proceeding before the immigration courts to stip off the approved green card and launch a deportation proceeding based either on the ground that there was a fraud on the parties or the INS approved the I-485 application without the knowledge of such fact of ill-conceived intent of the parties. The theory of the law is that "had the agency known the true facts." the agency would not have approved the employment-based I-485 because the I-485 could have been ineligible without such intent. Intent is proven in most cases by the circumstantial evidence since no one can go into the state of mind of other person. The evidence they used to use was the evidence of search of another employment immediately before or after I-485 was approved. For the reasons, even though there is no fixed period of time for a new green card holder to work for the sponsoring employer, legal counsels advised the employees not to send out employment application in writing to other employers immediately prior to the approval of I-485 application or at least for certain period of time like two months not to change employment, because such behavior can be construed as relection of the true state of mind and intent of the employee not to work for the sponsoring employer before or on the date of approval of I-485 application owing to short period of time that lapsed when they changed employment. This problem used to pop up during the naturalization proceeding when the agency learned that the alien changed employment immediately before or after the green card is granted. The foregoing inent issue can be overridden when the alien left the job because of employer's decision to terminate the employment or because of change of circumstances which are beyond the control of the parties such as slow-down of business and layoffs. Again AC-21 affected this issue, and it appears that the agency may no longer actively look for this issue. But theoretically, the issue still exists and a law is a law. Accordingly, there is always a potential risk of this issue popping up after green card is approved, especially when there is a grudged sponsoring employer who obtained and possessed such adverse evidence and contact the agency to revoke the green card. Just beware.
------------------------
Hope this helps.
Pappu, there is nothing wrong in seeking exact clarification though from USCIS because things are not really clear on this regard and its better to get clear cut answer to the immigrant community..
Anna35
09-19 02:58 PM
Ok, I've seen a lot of threads about go to the rally, actions items, I've reading a lot of guys saying dont ask for your receipt status, dont waste your time etc, etc.
Yes we did the rally we were great with all those signs, and appearing in the Indy TV but...
Question remains open:
1. When are they going to increase the GC quota?
2. When congress id going to do something?
I've the feeling that that's it we made our point but we are still with no GC, waiting receipts..............
Yes we did the rally we were great with all those signs, and appearing in the Indy TV but...
Question remains open:
1. When are they going to increase the GC quota?
2. When congress id going to do something?
I've the feeling that that's it we made our point but we are still with no GC, waiting receipts..............
0 comments:
Post a Comment