sunty
11-05 03:37 PM
You are not as bad as you think. Read USCIS guidance on the subject. If your I-140 is not approved by 180 days, you can still use AC21. In that case, the adjudicator while looking at your I-485, sees if filed I-140 was approvable. If so, you are good to go, provided you can prove that you have a new same/similar job offer.
For USCIS guidance see Page 3, Q1 at: http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2005,0520-ac21.pdf
Thanks jsb....I didn't know this....But I think its still better if I wait for 140 approval...Then atleast one other uncertainty will be removed from my GC journey...Hopefully it would only take a month or two more than normal processing time for my 140...If it gets delayed further, then I might use it anyways..It's nice to know though that I have an option..Thanks again
For USCIS guidance see Page 3, Q1 at: http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2005,0520-ac21.pdf
Thanks jsb....I didn't know this....But I think its still better if I wait for 140 approval...Then atleast one other uncertainty will be removed from my GC journey...Hopefully it would only take a month or two more than normal processing time for my 140...If it gets delayed further, then I might use it anyways..It's nice to know though that I have an option..Thanks again
WillIBLucky
05-22 03:11 PM
Bill Gates testified in front of most of the important senators who wrote this bill. Even he could not make a difference. There is nothing in this bill he had asked for.
Not IV or Lobby group that IV has, can it really make a difference? There is as much as we can do and everything else becomes uncontrolable. Even IV core group are normal people like us but with connections more than us. But they have their own regular job to do as well.
So I guess we can only try calling the senators and hope they will change their mind and hope for the best. Expecting and/or trusting IV or Lobby group will really help would be sacrificial.
I am not questioning what IV does. The core group really does what is their in their hands and we should appreciate that.
Good Luck!
Not IV or Lobby group that IV has, can it really make a difference? There is as much as we can do and everything else becomes uncontrolable. Even IV core group are normal people like us but with connections more than us. But they have their own regular job to do as well.
So I guess we can only try calling the senators and hope they will change their mind and hope for the best. Expecting and/or trusting IV or Lobby group will really help would be sacrificial.
I am not questioning what IV does. The core group really does what is their in their hands and we should appreciate that.
Good Luck!
smisachu
04-26 11:18 AM
If your previous company has closed down, there isnt any way you can port the PD.
PD transfer can be done if you have an approved I-140. Since you didnt reach that stage and also since the company is no longer around ( which kills any possibility of filing 140 with them ) , you wouldnt be able to port your PD.
Also for PD transfer through approved I140, your job responsibilities, your location of work etc do not play any role.
Thanks for the reply. I guess no luck is good luck in the present immigration system.:mad:
PD transfer can be done if you have an approved I-140. Since you didnt reach that stage and also since the company is no longer around ( which kills any possibility of filing 140 with them ) , you wouldnt be able to port your PD.
Also for PD transfer through approved I140, your job responsibilities, your location of work etc do not play any role.
Thanks for the reply. I guess no luck is good luck in the present immigration system.:mad:
seahawks
01-10 11:36 PM
my friends have multiple experiences, I went through Lufthansa, had no problem. My friend was telling me in France you do require, they wont let you board the flight if you dont have transit! Even if you check the consulate, the airlines have no clue. Asian countries like Singapore, absolutely no problem, direct non stop flights no problem either.
more...
Blog Feeds
01-09 02:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9LWCPZmHsxACtFjvXrUO_kBLU8klJKTxLLsBqLrHfQrzKy8ACqKDrrO2xQlWuIIIYANaqWPqhGSV9UlnvKWNFNNyoQfqD4t50q40yg15syVKIJQ0jnPPU7mpiwR1mPSbdcgn2IIgy2FY/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9LWCPZmHsxACtFjvXrUO_kBLU8klJKTxLLsBqLrHfQrzKy8ACqKDrrO2xQlWuIIIYANaqWPqhGSV9UlnvKWNFNNyoQfqD4t50q40yg15syVKIJQ0jnPPU7mpiwR1mPSbdcgn2IIgy2FY/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9LWCPZmHsxACtFjvXrUO_kBLU8klJKTxLLsBqLrHfQrzKy8ACqKDrrO2xQlWuIIIYANaqWPqhGSV9UlnvKWNFNNyoQfqD4t50q40yg15syVKIJQ0jnPPU7mpiwR1mPSbdcgn2IIgy2FY/s320/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi9LWCPZmHsxACtFjvXrUO_kBLU8klJKTxLLsBqLrHfQrzKy8ACqKDrrO2xQlWuIIIYANaqWPqhGSV9UlnvKWNFNNyoQfqD4t50q40yg15syVKIJQ0jnPPU7mpiwR1mPSbdcgn2IIgy2FY/s1600-h/2010-01-07+international-business-industry-night.jpg)By Deborah Notkin, AILA Past President
Unfortunately, that's exactly what the Gutierrez bill is. While there are many excellent provisions on important components of immigration reform, especially family unity and legalization, the employment immigration provisions are overwhelmingly negative and geared to eliminate the employers from having any reasonable input on the specific types of foreign employees that are required in an evolving economy. The overarching provision is the establishment of a "Commission" that would determine U.S. immigration policy (numbers and categories) pertaining to temporary and permanent workers. A commission of seven "experts" would report to both houses of Congress annually the types and number of workers that could enter the U. S. Unless both houses of Congress acted to block them (a rarity in today's world), the Commission's "recommendations" would become the law of the land.
There are a number of reasons why substituting Congress with a commission is a bad idea. First, we don't have the statistical evidence available to make good measurements on an annual basis. Second, government commissions in DC overwhelmingly end up becoming unelected political entities, with their own agendas, often exceeding their original mission. Third, a politicized commission on such a controversial issue would be especially problematic because it would not be accountable directly to voters as are elected representatives. In a debate on the Commission concept that I attended in New York, proponents were struggling to find even a few examples of Beltway government commissions that worked and did not become politicized.
While the Gutierrez bill should be commended for including provisions requiring employers to take responsibility for utilizing ethical recruiters and providing a few exemptions from the employment based quota for certain types of professionals, it generally negates the legitimacy of corporate needs and lacks any concept of the global economy and the international, competitive personnel market.
Most egregious is the idea of bringing in a lesser skilled workforce through a sort of "hiring hall" lottery system that would eliminate employers entirely from the selection process. Foreign workers would be placed in a database and assigned to employers based on some computer's or bureaucrat's idea of a match. It reminds one of the unfortunate migrants who are day workers standing outside waiting to be randomly hired. Here, they can just stand in their own countries being assigned to an employer they may not have chosen if given the choice.
Additional provisions would eliminate the ability of employers to use entry level wages for entry level temporary workers. Forcing employers to pay foreign nationals more than their U.S. worker counterparts is totally absurd. Is this how we think America will benefit from the many foreign nationals who have just graduated from, among other fields, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathmatics, programs? And of course, the unworkable cap on H-1B temporary professional workers in a healthy economy is totally ignored, evidently to be left to the gang of seven commissioners.
It appears that Congressman Gutierrez put his heart and soul into legalization and family unity but left the employment provisions to be drafted by the most anti-employer parties in this debate. Much is borrowed from the Durbin-Grassley proposed H-1B and L-1B provisions and the Economic Policy Institute's piece on immigration, which starts out by labeling all employers using foreign workers as participants in indentured servitude.
I have only highlighted a few of the egregious provisions that promise to sink an otherwise good piece of legislation. And this does not serve anyone who sincerely wants to find a solution to the human tragedy faced by undocumented migrants in the United States.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4566215004987922662?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/01/gutierrez-billa-good-legalization-and.html)
ocpmachine
07-23 07:59 AM
Lately, USCIS has started looking into H1B transfers more carefully and giving applicants tough time approving it with all kinds of RFE, read through the forum for others experience, keep that in mind before making your move...I am not trying to scare you though, its just a pointer to whats going on currently.
more...
dxldad
05-12 01:25 PM
Hello,
I'm planning to get immigration medical examination done for my wife. We're also planning for pregnancy.
One doctor said we should not try for pregnancy for 4-6 months once she get the shots. He also said he will give a waiver for now for the shots but USCIS will ask for it later. Is that a good idea?
Another doctor said she can do a blood test and determine if she needs the shots.
Any body in the same situation?
Check with your OB/GYN for important matters like this. Also, we had taken most of the vaccinations in India and they could identify the antibodies through blood tests. You could even get the blood tests get at your PCP earlier. Also, check webmd.com. It is a good resource, or you could call up the nurse line that most insurance companies provide now.
I'm planning to get immigration medical examination done for my wife. We're also planning for pregnancy.
One doctor said we should not try for pregnancy for 4-6 months once she get the shots. He also said he will give a waiver for now for the shots but USCIS will ask for it later. Is that a good idea?
Another doctor said she can do a blood test and determine if she needs the shots.
Any body in the same situation?
Check with your OB/GYN for important matters like this. Also, we had taken most of the vaccinations in India and they could identify the antibodies through blood tests. You could even get the blood tests get at your PCP earlier. Also, check webmd.com. It is a good resource, or you could call up the nurse line that most insurance companies provide now.
ysnraju
12-07 12:02 AM
for my 8th Year extension I applied on 16th Nov.2007
and got approval notice on 28th Nov.2007 with 1 Yr extension.
Actually based on December bulletin my attorney asked for 3 yrs. but got 1 yr. as in Nov my PD is current.
Off-course on 30th my I485 is approved.
So there is no doubt your attorney is so wrong.......
and got approval notice on 28th Nov.2007 with 1 Yr extension.
Actually based on December bulletin my attorney asked for 3 yrs. but got 1 yr. as in Nov my PD is current.
Off-course on 30th my I485 is approved.
So there is no doubt your attorney is so wrong.......
more...
bbct
03-06 08:23 AM
In India, as of this day only Rs 1L is secured if a bank fails ............... isn't that way too low.
http://www.dicgc.org.in/GuideToDepositInsuranceInIndia.htm#q3
That is way too low compared to what FDIC insures us.
http://www.dicgc.org.in/GuideToDepositInsuranceInIndia.htm#q3
That is way too low compared to what FDIC insures us.
GCBy3000
07-06 12:00 PM
asked both the two questions posed by fellow members.
more...
pixi
10-28 07:09 PM
:smirk: Well done mate, u just passed photoshop 101, now onto actually learning some proper photoshop skillz ( sorry, its just well, ahem , so 1983). #My first year students do this in the first day at college.
BastardPixi :smirk:
BastardPixi :smirk:
FinalGC
03-24 10:37 AM
This is illegal, unless you agreed with your employer prior to joining them. They should have negotiated this prior to joining them. All H1 fees will need to be paid by employer.
Work with your employer, dont get angry....Talk and reason with them, however if they insist you to sign, I would get rid of (3) and (4), since it does not make sense.
Work with your employer, dont get angry....Talk and reason with them, however if they insist you to sign, I would get rid of (3) and (4), since it does not make sense.
more...
garybanz
10-15 04:02 PM
Go for PP, mine got approved through PP in 1 week.
garybanz
10-15 04:02 PM
Go for PP, mine got approved through PP in 1 week.
more...
alien2006
08-08 08:21 AM
Location: MA
Job: Software Engineer-Developer
Thanks for the reply.
Job: Software Engineer-Developer
Thanks for the reply.
garybanz
09-27 06:49 AM
Did some one call USCIS to get receipt numbers? Any pointers to calling USCIS...what do i give as reference numbers?
Thanks.
Thanks.
more...
vivekm1309
01-26 02:57 PM
Exactly, if $ 600 check per tax payer is being talked about to stimulate the economy, as one of measures ...I think it makes sense to push thru our point too ...
I will PM Jansilal as he suggested & meanwhile trying to contact my friends in Wall street to get the contact details for these popular Business journos.
I will PM Jansilal as he suggested & meanwhile trying to contact my friends in Wall street to get the contact details for these popular Business journos.
iluvgc
08-28 03:50 PM
I think there have been enuf members writing about visa limit being reached for india/china EB-2. I wonder why ppl are still calling each other names when somebody posts something he things others will benefit from. This will defeat the purpose of this forum.
sucker
sucker
sunny1000
04-07 04:02 PM
But what happens if they send out FP notice and she doesn't do FP...it is going to be few years to get divorce as we have daughter...So i am pretty much sure i will get GC before we get divorce...At this point i cannot let USCIS know also because we are not yet divorced.
At this time, you don't have to inform USCIS of anything as your status has not changed from "married" to "divorced". There is no "seperated" status in I-485.
If you get your GC and your wife is still back in India, hers will be considered abandoned for a lack of Parole (unless she comes back, renews her parole before Sept 2008 and goes back again).
My personal 2 cents, if I were you, I will make sure that the child's application is intact (unless she is a U.S citizen).
What did your lawyer say?
At this time, you don't have to inform USCIS of anything as your status has not changed from "married" to "divorced". There is no "seperated" status in I-485.
If you get your GC and your wife is still back in India, hers will be considered abandoned for a lack of Parole (unless she comes back, renews her parole before Sept 2008 and goes back again).
My personal 2 cents, if I were you, I will make sure that the child's application is intact (unless she is a U.S citizen).
What did your lawyer say?
abd
08-24 11:28 AM
Name: ABD
City/State: NJ
Question: My Company applied RIR EB3 labor for me in June 2004. It is stuck in backlog at PBEC. Meanwhile my company also filed new EB2 PERM (Without using old priority date) in March2006. This got approved and I-140 has been filed for it. Is it possible for me to use the priority date of June 2004 for EB2 case? Assuming the backlog labor gets approved.
Thanks in advance.
City/State: NJ
Question: My Company applied RIR EB3 labor for me in June 2004. It is stuck in backlog at PBEC. Meanwhile my company also filed new EB2 PERM (Without using old priority date) in March2006. This got approved and I-140 has been filed for it. Is it possible for me to use the priority date of June 2004 for EB2 case? Assuming the backlog labor gets approved.
Thanks in advance.
waitin_toolong
11-21 10:32 AM
yes
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий