vvr
12-18 08:57 PM
Pls. send your feedback to letters@mercurynews.com.
I called them today and cancelled my subscription today after 3 yrs of continued subscription. It's very ironic of mercury news to publish a one sided article against immigrants given their subscriber base.
I called them today and cancelled my subscription today after 3 yrs of continued subscription. It's very ironic of mercury news to publish a one sided article against immigrants given their subscriber base.
ArkBird
12-12 04:22 PM
Yes. If the company financials are problem, you may have the same problem with EB3. I suggest, get paid consultation from some reputed lawyers.
Refile as what lawyer says, get new H1. That will give you some breathing room. If you see that current financial problem may jeopardize the new GC process as well, then you should switch over.
I assume this lawyer is hired by the company. So he will never advise you to make a move. It is you who have to look at all the options and see if it makes sense.
Refile as what lawyer says, get new H1. That will give you some breathing room. If you see that current financial problem may jeopardize the new GC process as well, then you should switch over.
I assume this lawyer is hired by the company. So he will never advise you to make a move. It is you who have to look at all the options and see if it makes sense.
kaisersose
07-27 11:30 AM
Guys�
Urgent advise is required.
My PERM was approved in April-07 and now I have just filed the concurrent 140/485. Now the company is transferring me to a new location (State) early next month with a possible change in the salary than what�s mentioned on my PERM. Can anyone please advise if there will be some impact on my 140/485 applications if:
a) I moved to a different state and, (My work location on PERM is California).
b) If I will be getting less salary than what�s mentioned on my PERM
Thanks much,
a) As long as the company Head office does not move and that is where your Labor was filed, you are OK.
b) You can get lesser salary now. But if USCIS interviews you, you should have an offer letter with salary greater than or equal to PERM salary. In other words, your employer should not pay you lesser than PERM salary once you get the GC. of course, marginal differences may not be a problem.
Urgent advise is required.
My PERM was approved in April-07 and now I have just filed the concurrent 140/485. Now the company is transferring me to a new location (State) early next month with a possible change in the salary than what�s mentioned on my PERM. Can anyone please advise if there will be some impact on my 140/485 applications if:
a) I moved to a different state and, (My work location on PERM is California).
b) If I will be getting less salary than what�s mentioned on my PERM
Thanks much,
a) As long as the company Head office does not move and that is where your Labor was filed, you are OK.
b) You can get lesser salary now. But if USCIS interviews you, you should have an offer letter with salary greater than or equal to PERM salary. In other words, your employer should not pay you lesser than PERM salary once you get the GC. of course, marginal differences may not be a problem.
pd_recapturing
04-30 06:46 PM
I have done interfiling myself with PD of March 2000, no luck yet. Interfile is a matter of luck, there is no guarantee that the letter you send will reach your file. Also USCIS does not give any confirmation that received your interfile and will transfer the PD. All depends on when they process your case and see your interfile, they may take action.
I had sent my interfile January sent by Fax and also by Fedex, followed up with a phone call numerous times. Not discouraging, but wanted to share my experience.
Jai, Whats the fax # ? I am also in same boat. Have sent 3 letters so far. This is very frustrating. I do not know how come lawyers say that interfiling is easy and way to go rather than filing a new 485 ...
I had sent my interfile January sent by Fax and also by Fedex, followed up with a phone call numerous times. Not discouraging, but wanted to share my experience.
Jai, Whats the fax # ? I am also in same boat. Have sent 3 letters so far. This is very frustrating. I do not know how come lawyers say that interfiling is easy and way to go rather than filing a new 485 ...
more...
pappu
09-14 02:36 PM
http://ebcmyspice.com/Radio/WebPages/LiveRadio.aspx
at 4 PM EST
call 732-297-9886 and ask questions
==============
We also have another interesting interview coming up. We will announce it later. This one will be not worth missing.
=======
BTW: you will now hear some IV ads on this radio station. Thanks to the member LOL123 who suggested this and we followed up. Thanks for all the media budget contributions. We are going to do more publicity efforts.
at 4 PM EST
call 732-297-9886 and ask questions
==============
We also have another interesting interview coming up. We will announce it later. This one will be not worth missing.
=======
BTW: you will now hear some IV ads on this radio station. Thanks to the member LOL123 who suggested this and we followed up. Thanks for all the media budget contributions. We are going to do more publicity efforts.
sundarpn
04-16 06:40 PM
I have still not converted my I-140 to premium with my current employer, though I intend to right away. But, that will take a month (upto 15 bus. days) and then say 2 weeks to try to get the copy of I-140.
Till then I cannot hold the other job offer.
Till then I cannot hold the other job offer.
more...
ivgclive
04-13 09:24 AM
It is good that you came out at last to check in IV.
You and your employer are tied on a fraud rope strongly, you can not get out of it. If he wants to jump into the water or you, you guys pull each other.
Hi,
I am on H1B without job and no paystubs.
My employer has been trying to find a project for me but till now he couldnt get anything.
Its been 6 months alreay since I am on H1B visa.
He made me modify my actual experience to include fake projects .
Now I am thinking of filing a complaint to DOL.
I have my H1B petition and offer letter from the employer.
But I am worried that if I file complaint ,my employer will threaten me telling that I faked my experience and submitted fake resumes.
What should I do? Will DOL take any action against me?
Any success stories of DOL complaint filing?
You and your employer are tied on a fraud rope strongly, you can not get out of it. If he wants to jump into the water or you, you guys pull each other.
Hi,
I am on H1B without job and no paystubs.
My employer has been trying to find a project for me but till now he couldnt get anything.
Its been 6 months alreay since I am on H1B visa.
He made me modify my actual experience to include fake projects .
Now I am thinking of filing a complaint to DOL.
I have my H1B petition and offer letter from the employer.
But I am worried that if I file complaint ,my employer will threaten me telling that I faked my experience and submitted fake resumes.
What should I do? Will DOL take any action against me?
Any success stories of DOL complaint filing?
reachinus
08-25 09:38 AM
Hi There,
If ur 140 was sent to the processing center before 07/21/2008 you should be fine. The receipt notice may take 2 - 4 days to be generated some times and some times it has taken nearly 3 months(last july VB Fiasco). I think if you labour has expired you wouldn't have got the receipt notice, but not sure.
Hi,
My labour was approved on 23-Jan-08 and its expiration date is 21-Jul-08.
I recently got my 140 receipt notice with receipt date as 24-Jul-08.
I am wondering is my 140 is filed with in the valid time.
Is there any rule like do we need to file 140 with in 180 days of labour approval.If so will my 140 get approval or denial.
pl give me the response.
Thanks for looking this.
If ur 140 was sent to the processing center before 07/21/2008 you should be fine. The receipt notice may take 2 - 4 days to be generated some times and some times it has taken nearly 3 months(last july VB Fiasco). I think if you labour has expired you wouldn't have got the receipt notice, but not sure.
Hi,
My labour was approved on 23-Jan-08 and its expiration date is 21-Jul-08.
I recently got my 140 receipt notice with receipt date as 24-Jul-08.
I am wondering is my 140 is filed with in the valid time.
Is there any rule like do we need to file 140 with in 180 days of labour approval.If so will my 140 get approval or denial.
pl give me the response.
Thanks for looking this.
more...
Buran
12-28 09:25 AM
Can't see it in my browser, still shows November 14
chanduv23
10-09 05:33 PM
^^^^^^^^^^^
more...
amitkhare77
11-16 12:19 PM
you have to options -
1. your employer files change of status H1 to H4 (form I-539)
2. you go out of country and come back on previously stamped H4. you need not to apply H4 again as long as previous H4 is valid. remember - if you decide to work in future, your employer has to file change of status application from H4 to H1 again.
please double check before you make any decision.
Thank you for your reply.
Even though we get a new I-94, it is still with my consulting company as the company does not give me my I797.
If I go to India and apply for H4 again, then wont the officer ask me on why I am trying to get the H4 stamping again since it already has a previous valid H4 stamping on it? since there is no H1 stamping on my passport.
Or can I go out of USA and get back on the same revious H4 stamping?
Thanks,
Arpu
1. your employer files change of status H1 to H4 (form I-539)
2. you go out of country and come back on previously stamped H4. you need not to apply H4 again as long as previous H4 is valid. remember - if you decide to work in future, your employer has to file change of status application from H4 to H1 again.
please double check before you make any decision.
Thank you for your reply.
Even though we get a new I-94, it is still with my consulting company as the company does not give me my I797.
If I go to India and apply for H4 again, then wont the officer ask me on why I am trying to get the H4 stamping again since it already has a previous valid H4 stamping on it? since there is no H1 stamping on my passport.
Or can I go out of USA and get back on the same revious H4 stamping?
Thanks,
Arpu
NNReddy
04-01 04:42 PM
Did you port it thru same employer or a different employer?
more...
reddymjm
01-02 06:43 PM
Even if it is close to that 2020 do not get surprised
sankap
07-30 03:26 PM
Do you get the FP notice by email or snail mail?
more...
amoljak
05-21 09:04 AM
b. Do not make photocopies of official US Documents. Its a violation. The official will understand why you made a copy, but ITS A VIOLATION. On that note, please do make a photocopy.
Yes it is a violation. But guess what, USCIS asked me to send color copies of all the pages of my passport, approval notices and I-94 in one RFE. I spent a while trying to convince the law-abiding staples clerk that "the government" asked me to make copies. She kept pointing me to a document that clearly stated that it was illegal and they were told not to do it. Finally she agreed to look the other way, while I made copies in a self service copier.
Yes it is a violation. But guess what, USCIS asked me to send color copies of all the pages of my passport, approval notices and I-94 in one RFE. I spent a while trying to convince the law-abiding staples clerk that "the government" asked me to make copies. She kept pointing me to a document that clearly stated that it was illegal and they were told not to do it. Finally she agreed to look the other way, while I made copies in a self service copier.
tuhin
07-17 11:04 PM
Thanks again folks... I will get in touch with a lawyer and let y'all know what I learn.
more...
desi_voice
05-02 07:39 PM
Guys,
My visa stamping on my passport expires on end of Sep 2009. I am planning to go to India mid July 2009 and come back mid August 2009. I have H1B-I-797 extension upto August 2011. My I-94 which was issued at the POE and the I-94 at the bottom of the extended I-797 has the same number. From what I know when I leave US I should hand over bothe I-94s(given at POE & one below I-797). From what I heard from friends, IO is suppose to give new I-94 validity date based on the extended I-797 validity date and should not give based on date of expiry of visa stamp on the passport.
@bbct
I think IO did a mistake for you, you could have asked him to give I-94 based on your extended I-797.
@mckottayam
IO did the correct thing for you by giving I-94 validity date based on your extended I797.
Question is, incase IO gives a I-94 based on the visa stamping validity date and not on the validity of I-797 can we ask him to give a I-94 based on the I-797. If he refuses, how can we extend the I-94 validity based on I-797.
My visa stamping on my passport expires on end of Sep 2009. I am planning to go to India mid July 2009 and come back mid August 2009. I have H1B-I-797 extension upto August 2011. My I-94 which was issued at the POE and the I-94 at the bottom of the extended I-797 has the same number. From what I know when I leave US I should hand over bothe I-94s(given at POE & one below I-797). From what I heard from friends, IO is suppose to give new I-94 validity date based on the extended I-797 validity date and should not give based on date of expiry of visa stamp on the passport.
@bbct
I think IO did a mistake for you, you could have asked him to give I-94 based on your extended I-797.
@mckottayam
IO did the correct thing for you by giving I-94 validity date based on your extended I797.
Question is, incase IO gives a I-94 based on the visa stamping validity date and not on the validity of I-797 can we ask him to give a I-94 based on the I-797. If he refuses, how can we extend the I-94 validity based on I-797.
kishdam
03-25 10:11 AM
This sustain act is total BS. They want to increase H1-B numbers without reforming the EB system. They do not want to increase EB numbers. They do not want to do away with country quotas. They don't have country quotas in H1-B. This just creates more and more backlogs for everyone. I HOPE THIS BILL DOESN'T PASS. The companies and lawmakers just want cheap labor without "paying" for it. Just a bunch of self-serving bigots !
Seems like this bill has some EB provisions as well - like exempting PhD holders from visa numbers. Ofcourse thats too little but something is better than nothing.
Seems like this bill has some EB provisions as well - like exempting PhD holders from visa numbers. Ofcourse thats too little but something is better than nothing.
Earned_GC
06-17 10:11 AM
I am in the same boat. lets us wait and watch .
We should continue this thread and lets see what people has to say.
We should continue this thread and lets see what people has to say.
CADude
08-03 07:29 PM
Consult a good lawyer without any further delay. If you are out of status then it's problem for GC also.
PLEASE CONSULT A GOOD LAWYER TODAY ITSELF.
This is a really complicated case. You should consult a good attorney. The people in this forum are not lawyers. They just have some knowledge about immigration process and laws.
If I was in your place I will file for another H1B through Company B. There is a risk in this also as your current H1B extension is denied.
Stay in good terms with your current employer. Tell him once he is able to resolve the issue of H1B denial, you will come back to him. Also tell him once you get your EAD you will come back.
The problem is USCIS denied H1B extension due to non-compliance of rule in paying the employees, they can probably deny the 485 for the same reason.
PLEASE CONSULT A GOOD LAWYER TODAY ITSELF.
This is a really complicated case. You should consult a good attorney. The people in this forum are not lawyers. They just have some knowledge about immigration process and laws.
If I was in your place I will file for another H1B through Company B. There is a risk in this also as your current H1B extension is denied.
Stay in good terms with your current employer. Tell him once he is able to resolve the issue of H1B denial, you will come back to him. Also tell him once you get your EAD you will come back.
The problem is USCIS denied H1B extension due to non-compliance of rule in paying the employees, they can probably deny the 485 for the same reason.
Mohit_Malkani
10-08 11:13 AM
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
0 comments:
Post a Comment