franklin
06-15 07:30 PM
Franklin,
I had OPT in 2003 , so should i be using that A# and should i mention YES for question, have you ever applied for employment authorization with USCIS
in G325A,
should i need to mention my part time jobs i worked while on F1 visa (i did not mention anything during 140)
Good question - I"ll dig around and see if I can find an answer, but you might want to check with lawyer too
I had OPT in 2003 , so should i be using that A# and should i mention YES for question, have you ever applied for employment authorization with USCIS
in G325A,
should i need to mention my part time jobs i worked while on F1 visa (i did not mention anything during 140)
Good question - I"ll dig around and see if I can find an answer, but you might want to check with lawyer too
wallpaper New Nike Air Max Lebron 8 V2
onemorecame
06-07 10:28 AM
Contributed $50...
Transaction ID: 0376-4645-8164-2141
Transaction ID: 0376-4645-8164-2141
shirish
02-05 02:08 PM
I am currently looking for any observership positions on B1/B2. Please let know if you have any friends who are doctors or who know any hospitals which offer observerships to international medical graduates.
Thanks
I doubt, you can do that on B1/B2. But again i am not the expert.
Thanks
I doubt, you can do that on B1/B2. But again i am not the expert.
2011 Basketball Shoes LEBRON 8 V
raj2007
06-20 01:28 PM
I was working for company A as a Title X through H1 B visa
And company A filed my GC sponsorship petition with title Y and I-140 cleared.
I resigned company A for job Title X and joined company B (H1 transfer) (I did not rejected or asked him to cancel my EB based GC petition)
But Company A revoked my EB based sponsored petition.
Is there a legal right for me to ask why did he revokes my EB based sponsorship petition when I have not rejected his offer for GC Title Y
Please clarify
You have no legal right. Employer can sponser and revoke the petition.
And company A filed my GC sponsorship petition with title Y and I-140 cleared.
I resigned company A for job Title X and joined company B (H1 transfer) (I did not rejected or asked him to cancel my EB based GC petition)
But Company A revoked my EB based sponsored petition.
Is there a legal right for me to ask why did he revokes my EB based sponsorship petition when I have not rejected his offer for GC Title Y
Please clarify
You have no legal right. Employer can sponser and revoke the petition.
more...
yagw
08-04 06:33 PM
I've applied for EAD/AP renewal for both myself and my wife. I spent $1,290 for this.
Say I got my GC approved and then I call USCIS and withdraw my pending EAD/AP application. Will I get a refund for pending EAD/AP application, if I get my GC approved before EAD/AP approval?
Thanks,
India EB2; PD - Nov 05
I-140 - Filed Mar '06; Approved Jun '06
I-485 - Reached NSC July 26'07;
Nope. You will be asked to pay double the amount for 485 since they approved it before your EAD :D
Say I got my GC approved and then I call USCIS and withdraw my pending EAD/AP application. Will I get a refund for pending EAD/AP application, if I get my GC approved before EAD/AP approval?
Thanks,
India EB2; PD - Nov 05
I-140 - Filed Mar '06; Approved Jun '06
I-485 - Reached NSC July 26'07;
Nope. You will be asked to pay double the amount for 485 since they approved it before your EAD :D
paskal
07-16 07:27 PM
Hi,
Just FYI. The original poster (GCKabhayega) has a long history of posting such messages with sensitive titles, by giving an impression as if the Visa Bullettin or Processing Times were released. You can confirm this by looking at his/her old posts.
hey inskrish,
you should be getting a welcome e mail any day now!
where's the party man?
Just FYI. The original poster (GCKabhayega) has a long history of posting such messages with sensitive titles, by giving an impression as if the Visa Bullettin or Processing Times were released. You can confirm this by looking at his/her old posts.
hey inskrish,
you should be getting a welcome e mail any day now!
where's the party man?
more...
ilwaiting
09-27 11:26 AM
Unless one were being paid a EB2 salary back then but employer filed you in EB3.
this is a hot topic right now..!!
many of us who filed our labor right in the age-old days, atleast me,had no idea of EB2/3 category and it will affect our life so drastically. The paralegal/attnys just filed it(at that point of time just filing the LC was crucial..)
anyway,for retaining the old EB3 PD for the later EB2 date..should the salaries match..?? obviuosly, they wouldnt...?? then how will this be doable..
In no way,this situation can be treated as a substituted labor...
So may I take it from this thread, bottom line that we cant do it..
this is a hot topic right now..!!
many of us who filed our labor right in the age-old days, atleast me,had no idea of EB2/3 category and it will affect our life so drastically. The paralegal/attnys just filed it(at that point of time just filing the LC was crucial..)
anyway,for retaining the old EB3 PD for the later EB2 date..should the salaries match..?? obviuosly, they wouldnt...?? then how will this be doable..
In no way,this situation can be treated as a substituted labor...
So may I take it from this thread, bottom line that we cant do it..
2010 Nike Air Max Lebron 8 VIII
pbojja
08-04 04:18 PM
[QUOTE=aamchimumbai;266413]All,
I feel that those who concurrently filed I-140/485 in July 2007 are very lucky!
What makes you think I-140/485 July filers are lucky ? Our cases are straight forward and we are able to file in July 07 .
I m sorry to be little rude but you can just post a question with out mentioning how lucky others are or not .
I feel that those who concurrently filed I-140/485 in July 2007 are very lucky!
What makes you think I-140/485 July filers are lucky ? Our cases are straight forward and we are able to file in July 07 .
I m sorry to be little rude but you can just post a question with out mentioning how lucky others are or not .
more...
Leo07
11-14 09:41 PM
All the thoughts...and suggestions in the heat of the moment is fine....but let'sa ll stick to the same passion and participate in IV efforts with the same enthusiasm.
hair Nike Air Max Lebron 8 Vii
Saralayar
05-14 06:28 PM
Hello friends,
On May 01,2009 my wife's I-485 status changed online that they requested additinal evidence. I have not received RFE letter as of now and also I am touch base with my attorney, my attorney's office also not received RFE letter. Please advice me what steps I have to take in this regard.
Please provide all your GC personal details in IV so that you will get better answers.
On May 01,2009 my wife's I-485 status changed online that they requested additinal evidence. I have not received RFE letter as of now and also I am touch base with my attorney, my attorney's office also not received RFE letter. Please advice me what steps I have to take in this regard.
Please provide all your GC personal details in IV so that you will get better answers.
more...
mankusunny
04-07 09:37 AM
Hi,
I noticed I voted in by mistake. I didn't realize this poll was only for people who got received a fee invoice. I thought this a poll to see where the PD's were. Sorry about that. I think a few others might have incorrectly voted as well.
I noticed I voted in by mistake. I didn't realize this poll was only for people who got received a fee invoice. I thought this a poll to see where the PD's were. Sorry about that. I think a few others might have incorrectly voted as well.
hot The series of LeBron 8 shoes
saiimmi
02-16 11:01 PM
3) If I invoke AC21 using my EAD and in the worst case scenario, if my 140 and 485 is rejected, can I then transfer my H1B to an other company (I still have some years left) or will that be a problem because I was not on H-1b at that time?
I think you can still re-capture any year left in your 6 your term on your H1B. That is, even after going to EAD you can revert back to H1B in case of any issues. As always, this is just my understanding and could be wrong even.
I think you can still re-capture any year left in your 6 your term on your H1B. That is, even after going to EAD you can revert back to H1B in case of any issues. As always, this is just my understanding and could be wrong even.
more...
house Shoes,lebron shoes highly
vgc
07-26 10:37 AM
SA 2428. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 2638, making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated to employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
[Page: S9966] GPO's PDF ``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated to employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
[Page: S9966] GPO's PDF ``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
tattoo LeBron 8 (VIII) Miami Heat
yabadaba
09-26 09:02 PM
Cool down yabadaba. No need to generalise stuff.
There are cases where people who are qualified to be in EB2 were put in EB3 for xyz reasons. To assume that everyone who does a category switch or PD switch or labor substitution is exploiting the system is an incorrect assumption.
OP feels he is in bad shape - the least you can do is to be a nice person and either ignore his post or to give him moral support at the least.
Regarding what my views are about what has pissed you off so much, well, this is not the right thread to talk about it - so I'll keep it to myself.
OP - If you can provide more details about your case, it will be helpful.
what exactly is it then if it is not exploitation of the system? time and time again we have line jumpers which ends up causing problems for the other indians. time and time again we hear the crab story and thats what we have become collectively. if u didnt file in the category you are in for whatever reason, be it that your lawyer thought of playing it safe or whatever...you are in that category now. just wait in line for your turn.
There are cases where people who are qualified to be in EB2 were put in EB3 for xyz reasons. To assume that everyone who does a category switch or PD switch or labor substitution is exploiting the system is an incorrect assumption.
OP feels he is in bad shape - the least you can do is to be a nice person and either ignore his post or to give him moral support at the least.
Regarding what my views are about what has pissed you off so much, well, this is not the right thread to talk about it - so I'll keep it to myself.
OP - If you can provide more details about your case, it will be helpful.
what exactly is it then if it is not exploitation of the system? time and time again we have line jumpers which ends up causing problems for the other indians. time and time again we hear the crab story and thats what we have become collectively. if u didnt file in the category you are in for whatever reason, be it that your lawyer thought of playing it safe or whatever...you are in that category now. just wait in line for your turn.
more...
pictures Nike LeBron 8 “New York
pappu
05-08 10:26 AM
Hello all,
While I was out, the office of Congress called my home last night in regards to the email i sent them a month ago about the GC retrogression and H1B shortage. They asked me to return their call, I hold off calling them back because I'm confused of what to say, the thing is i don't want to disclose where I work (don't want to get my company involved). But really I am not sure what they have called me for given that email i sent them. Any ideas would be appreciated.
Good to hear that.
You must follow up with them and tell them that you are an IV member and stuck in rertrogression. Educate them a bit about the long delays in the green card process and seek an appointment with them so that you can discuss the issues in person. As soon as you seek an appointment, get in touch with IV. (varsha at immigrationvoioce.org and sanjay at immigrationvoice.org )and they will guide you for the meeting.
These are good signs that the office wants to discuss your concerns. Make use of the opportunity and help this community and yourself by following it up. If you would not like to disclose your employer to the lawmaker, that is fine. Generally lawmaker offices are considerate and very friendly. You will like the experience after you have met them.
While I was out, the office of Congress called my home last night in regards to the email i sent them a month ago about the GC retrogression and H1B shortage. They asked me to return their call, I hold off calling them back because I'm confused of what to say, the thing is i don't want to disclose where I work (don't want to get my company involved). But really I am not sure what they have called me for given that email i sent them. Any ideas would be appreciated.
Good to hear that.
You must follow up with them and tell them that you are an IV member and stuck in rertrogression. Educate them a bit about the long delays in the green card process and seek an appointment with them so that you can discuss the issues in person. As soon as you seek an appointment, get in touch with IV. (varsha at immigrationvoioce.org and sanjay at immigrationvoice.org )and they will guide you for the meeting.
These are good signs that the office wants to discuss your concerns. Make use of the opportunity and help this community and yourself by following it up. If you would not like to disclose your employer to the lawmaker, that is fine. Generally lawmaker offices are considerate and very friendly. You will like the experience after you have met them.
dresses Nike lebron 8 Silver Blue
Rb_newsletter
08-20 03:35 PM
I would suggest get the passport renewed in India using tatkal system. That way you don't have to worry about POE or getting your passport renewed in USA.
more...
makeup Lebron James 8-Nike
santb1975
04-10 06:02 PM
Together we can accomplish a lot
girlfriend $84.99. Air Jordan Lebron 8
jsb
08-31 03:00 PM
jsb thanks.
Basically what this all tells me is that there is no motivation from USCIS to clear things up. They like things muddied so that they can define the processing date either as Received or Notice or Receipt as per their comfort. :)
No. They believe they are working their best. Think of an assignment received by your company's Headoffice on July 2, 07, but it came to you to work, on Oct 11, 07. If you are to provide periodical progress, what will you call your Receiving Date of assignment? Oct 11, 07.
Processing Centers provide their monthly progress report to be published. They treat the date when they, the centers, (not the USCIS mail room) received, as the receive date, which is close to the Notice Date. Hence the confusion. If you ask them if they use ND sequence, they will confidentally tell you that they use the receiving date for sequencing their work, which to their belief is true.
Logically RD on your receipt should be used. Even if some senior guy at USCIS decides and instructs centers to process cases in that order, can they do it. No, as their sorting of cases is in order they (the centers) physically received them. It will be too tedious to re-sort tens of thousands of cases manually, particularly when mailroom RD is nowhere other than a stamp on the file, and as manually entered info on your receipt. Many follow up documents don't even mention that date, or even PD, as they are not part of the system information. Online info also shows some date close to ND as "your case was received on...".
There is a motivation to use up visas by Sep 30, as bosses question if they don't do that. But if they don't give visas in order of priority (whatever it be), no one questions, as it is difficult to prove someone to be wrong, or to correct even when something is proven wrong.
Bottomline is that the whole process translates to Luck.
Basically what this all tells me is that there is no motivation from USCIS to clear things up. They like things muddied so that they can define the processing date either as Received or Notice or Receipt as per their comfort. :)
No. They believe they are working their best. Think of an assignment received by your company's Headoffice on July 2, 07, but it came to you to work, on Oct 11, 07. If you are to provide periodical progress, what will you call your Receiving Date of assignment? Oct 11, 07.
Processing Centers provide their monthly progress report to be published. They treat the date when they, the centers, (not the USCIS mail room) received, as the receive date, which is close to the Notice Date. Hence the confusion. If you ask them if they use ND sequence, they will confidentally tell you that they use the receiving date for sequencing their work, which to their belief is true.
Logically RD on your receipt should be used. Even if some senior guy at USCIS decides and instructs centers to process cases in that order, can they do it. No, as their sorting of cases is in order they (the centers) physically received them. It will be too tedious to re-sort tens of thousands of cases manually, particularly when mailroom RD is nowhere other than a stamp on the file, and as manually entered info on your receipt. Many follow up documents don't even mention that date, or even PD, as they are not part of the system information. Online info also shows some date close to ND as "your case was received on...".
There is a motivation to use up visas by Sep 30, as bosses question if they don't do that. But if they don't give visas in order of priority (whatever it be), no one questions, as it is difficult to prove someone to be wrong, or to correct even when something is proven wrong.
Bottomline is that the whole process translates to Luck.
hairstyles Nike Air Max Lebron 8 VIII
GC_Applicant
07-31 01:54 PM
Is your approved PERM (I-140/I-485 applied based on that PERM) and your earlier LC (in BEC) are from the same employer??
anilsal
01-28 12:25 AM
What about others?
Ready to file your EAD/AP renewal? :cool:
Ready to file your EAD/AP renewal? :cool:
desi3933
06-25 04:33 PM
>> 1. What was your original I-94 date before H-1B amendment was filed by Company A?
September 30 2009
>> 2. What was amendment for?
amendment is for change in annual salary
>> 3. Why H-1B amendment was denied?
The amendment was filed way back in Sep 2007 and they got the RFE in Nov 2008. The amendment is denied because of the Annual salary specified & also because we couldn't get the End client letter (Client told me that it's company police not to provide such type of letter). We provided main vendor contract.
Based on the information provided, it seems that only original H-1 petition (before amendment) is likely to be valid for Employer A. You can probably work for Employer A, under original LCA conditions (including salary and job location), until I-94 expiration date (Sep 30th, 2009). However, if you were getting paid less at the time of Employer A H-1B amendment denial, then it becomes more complex.
If you had been out of status on H1 in past (for example - not getting paid on bench, getting paid less than LCA), then you are out of status now. You may need re-entry in US to get back into status.
>> Can I work after Company B files MTR?
No. Since H-1B petition is denied, you can not work for Employer B, even if Employer B files for MTR.
I would suggest you get professional advice from immigration attorney. Based on the facts so far, I see limited options for you.
Good Luck.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
September 30 2009
>> 2. What was amendment for?
amendment is for change in annual salary
>> 3. Why H-1B amendment was denied?
The amendment was filed way back in Sep 2007 and they got the RFE in Nov 2008. The amendment is denied because of the Annual salary specified & also because we couldn't get the End client letter (Client told me that it's company police not to provide such type of letter). We provided main vendor contract.
Based on the information provided, it seems that only original H-1 petition (before amendment) is likely to be valid for Employer A. You can probably work for Employer A, under original LCA conditions (including salary and job location), until I-94 expiration date (Sep 30th, 2009). However, if you were getting paid less at the time of Employer A H-1B amendment denial, then it becomes more complex.
If you had been out of status on H1 in past (for example - not getting paid on bench, getting paid less than LCA), then you are out of status now. You may need re-entry in US to get back into status.
>> Can I work after Company B files MTR?
No. Since H-1B petition is denied, you can not work for Employer B, even if Employer B files for MTR.
I would suggest you get professional advice from immigration attorney. Based on the facts so far, I see limited options for you.
Good Luck.
_______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
