Vsach
07-12 10:12 PM
Dear All,
If IV as a organization decides to file a law suite I shall contribute, decide the amount!
Regards
VSach:)
If IV as a organization decides to file a law suite I shall contribute, decide the amount!
Regards
VSach:)
wallpaper modelling SHEGSY tattoo design
solaris27
08-15 08:58 AM
Q. How soon can I leave my petitioning employer once I get my green card approval?
A. There is no brief answer to this question. Let me explain. The basic premise (or theory) behind permanent residence through offer of employment is that an employee is accepting a job on a "permanent" bases. What does "permanent" mean? Does it mean for ever. Obviously not. That would be unreasonable. But "permanent" also does not mean that you pack your bags the moment you receive your green card. So what is the answer? No one really knows. Each case has to be determined upon its own merits. Normally, I would say working for one year or more with the same employer after getting your GC is PROBABLY enough indication of permanency. Less than 4-5 months is perhaps evidence to the contrary
But REMEMBER, this is just my own guess. Technically speaking, the moment you decide that you will leave after a certain period of time, "permanent" intent is gone. Catch-22 eh? Well that is the way it is.
There may be considerable relaxation in this interpretation because in the year 2001 Congress enacted a law that permits employees to leave an employer even while their I-485 is pending. We do not have the regulations or any detailed guidance on these issues.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
----------------------------------------------
Q. I did not willingly left the GC sponsor employer but actually after three months I got my GC, i got laid off from the project and due to the bad economy , my employer was not able to get me other project so he gave me letter saying that he wont be able to pay me salary since he doesnt have any project for me.And, after getting that letter I resigned from GC sponsor employer.
This is the whole scenario, now considering it, Am I still at risk?
A. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
Q. I am employed at the XYZ University (XYZU). I applied for 485 myself (without attorney). My 485 was approved last month and I got my passport stamped in July. My contract with XYZU is coming to an end. My job is renewed every year based on the availability of funding. I have been with XYZU for the last 5 years. There is a possibility that they (XYZU) may not extend the contract because the research grant I got is coming to an end in september.
Will my termination from the job at XYZU affect my Green Card in the future, and is it better to be terminated from service (based on unavailability of funding) by the WVU or is it better to offer my resignation?
A. I think it is better to be terminated. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
A. There is no brief answer to this question. Let me explain. The basic premise (or theory) behind permanent residence through offer of employment is that an employee is accepting a job on a "permanent" bases. What does "permanent" mean? Does it mean for ever. Obviously not. That would be unreasonable. But "permanent" also does not mean that you pack your bags the moment you receive your green card. So what is the answer? No one really knows. Each case has to be determined upon its own merits. Normally, I would say working for one year or more with the same employer after getting your GC is PROBABLY enough indication of permanency. Less than 4-5 months is perhaps evidence to the contrary
But REMEMBER, this is just my own guess. Technically speaking, the moment you decide that you will leave after a certain period of time, "permanent" intent is gone. Catch-22 eh? Well that is the way it is.
There may be considerable relaxation in this interpretation because in the year 2001 Congress enacted a law that permits employees to leave an employer even while their I-485 is pending. We do not have the regulations or any detailed guidance on these issues.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
----------------------------------------------
Q. I did not willingly left the GC sponsor employer but actually after three months I got my GC, i got laid off from the project and due to the bad economy , my employer was not able to get me other project so he gave me letter saying that he wont be able to pay me salary since he doesnt have any project for me.And, after getting that letter I resigned from GC sponsor employer.
This is the whole scenario, now considering it, Am I still at risk?
A. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
Q. I am employed at the XYZ University (XYZU). I applied for 485 myself (without attorney). My 485 was approved last month and I got my passport stamped in July. My contract with XYZU is coming to an end. My job is renewed every year based on the availability of funding. I have been with XYZU for the last 5 years. There is a possibility that they (XYZU) may not extend the contract because the research grant I got is coming to an end in september.
Will my termination from the job at XYZU affect my Green Card in the future, and is it better to be terminated from service (based on unavailability of funding) by the WVU or is it better to offer my resignation?
A. I think it is better to be terminated. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
monikainusa
03-22 09:46 AM
Sorry for any confusion. Here are the details :
My husband is on H1B visa and he is in US from past 4 years. I am on H-4 Visa and was in USA from past 2 years. We got extension in 2009 for another 3 years for H1 and H4. My husband stays in US but I came back to India for vacation. I appeared for H-4 visa stamping in US consulate in Delhi. After long wait they denied my H4 visa. My question is:
1) what are the options for me
2) Do they revoke my husband I797 H1 who is in US
3) What I have to do ..like appeal ..new petition..
Please advise..
My husband is on H1B visa and he is in US from past 4 years. I am on H-4 Visa and was in USA from past 2 years. We got extension in 2009 for another 3 years for H1 and H4. My husband stays in US but I came back to India for vacation. I appeared for H-4 visa stamping in US consulate in Delhi. After long wait they denied my H4 visa. My question is:
1) what are the options for me
2) Do they revoke my husband I797 H1 who is in US
3) What I have to do ..like appeal ..new petition..
Please advise..
2011 most common tattoo designs
pcs
05-31 11:06 AM
If all active 7000 members drop $10 in a single day, it will be $70K
I can not start any thread due to some funny problem on the computer or the site.
I do not know how fix this. Earlier, I could start a new thread. I hope, I am not blocked.
Can some one help with this
I can not start any thread due to some funny problem on the computer or the site.
I do not know how fix this. Earlier, I could start a new thread. I hope, I am not blocked.
Can some one help with this
more...
hsingh82
03-12 09:50 PM
Congrats!! I can just feel your excitement in the title!
asanghi
09-15 02:15 PM
We can send these to Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid. I am in. However it will only be effective if we manage PR well. The only reason flower campaign worked so well was because it was all over in the news. So I guess we should either copy some reporters (which I think may be too much data for them to appreciate) or make a press release through IV.
more...
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
2010 sexy tattoo
michael_trs
05-13 10:06 AM
Here are my concerns:
1) I put only 1 year of experience. I guess a senior position requires 3-5 years of experience but it will exceed SVP for sure. On the other hand I don�t want to answer NO to H.12 (requirements normal for the occupation) because requirements look pretty normal and NO automatically triggers audit.
2) Do I have to specify that alternative education and experience is allowed (quest. 8/8A)? (For example BS + 5 years) I don�t really need it because I have Master�s. But I don�t want DOL to decide that requirements are too high or restrictive.
What do you think?
Thank you,
1) I put only 1 year of experience. I guess a senior position requires 3-5 years of experience but it will exceed SVP for sure. On the other hand I don�t want to answer NO to H.12 (requirements normal for the occupation) because requirements look pretty normal and NO automatically triggers audit.
2) Do I have to specify that alternative education and experience is allowed (quest. 8/8A)? (For example BS + 5 years) I don�t really need it because I have Master�s. But I don�t want DOL to decide that requirements are too high or restrictive.
What do you think?
Thank you,
more...
boston_gc
01-26 04:07 PM
I think it will be follish for any political party to not pay attention to Latino power. Mr. Obama won election with their support. For some reason, Latino group has not come forward so far to say that no CIR would mean no support to the party. I think if Latinos and all other interest groups come together, we may have a chance. Otherwise, I agree it is going tobe a while....:mad:
The only way to get this CIR is to get full support of Get support of Senator McCain. If we get his support, atleast some republicans will support the bill and it can pass.
The only way to get this CIR is to get full support of Get support of Senator McCain. If we get his support, atleast some republicans will support the bill and it can pass.
hair with sexy tattoo designs.
wei
04-18 01:18 PM
Your lawyer should check with DOL after 90 days(from submission). I requested my lawyer did such thing and got response from DOL for RFE. One month later, I got approval notice.
more...
ski_dude12
12-26 12:21 AM
What is the name of your employer? Atleast that will help other members in making the right choice.
Thank You all for your support by answering my queries. Will keep you posting the progress. Hope things will work out fine.
Sure, would contribute to IV, you are doing great service.
Thank You all for your support by answering my queries. Will keep you posting the progress. Hope things will work out fine.
Sure, would contribute to IV, you are doing great service.
hot sexy tattoo pictures.
pal351
01-05 11:31 AM
Hi Chris,
I expedite my petion by calling to customercare. I recieved a letter from USCIS, saying that, your file assigned to adjudicating office. Can you please share your experience and if you get any update please do share with me.
Thanks in advance
What do you mean by " expedite my petion by calling to customercare." on what basis they did for you? can please elobarate it bit more.
Thanks,
-Pal.
I expedite my petion by calling to customercare. I recieved a letter from USCIS, saying that, your file assigned to adjudicating office. Can you please share your experience and if you get any update please do share with me.
Thanks in advance
What do you mean by " expedite my petion by calling to customercare." on what basis they did for you? can please elobarate it bit more.
Thanks,
-Pal.
more...
house back tattoo designs then I
h1-b forever
10-13 10:23 AM
Thanks for replying... Appreciate it ....
I believe the 180 days starts from the day of 485 notice date and not 140 approval. I had confirmed this with my attorney (both my personal one and the companies )before making the shift and I had and RFE on my 485 in June 09 and nothing after that. I would assume that USCIS was happy with my response and the case might have been pre-adjudicated.
As per Ron, one cannot apply for H1B renewals based on revoked 140's. I wanted to see if anyone here has done it successfully. I will check with my attorney as well as my companies attorney.
Did you get an answer?
I believe the 180 days starts from the day of 485 notice date and not 140 approval. I had confirmed this with my attorney (both my personal one and the companies )before making the shift and I had and RFE on my 485 in June 09 and nothing after that. I would assume that USCIS was happy with my response and the case might have been pre-adjudicated.
As per Ron, one cannot apply for H1B renewals based on revoked 140's. I wanted to see if anyone here has done it successfully. I will check with my attorney as well as my companies attorney.
Did you get an answer?
tattoo Sexy Butterfly Tattoo
bondgoli007
07-14 04:39 PM
I was audited on 6/09 and Fragommenr responded on 6/30...No response so far and I have emailed my Fragommen paralegal the following questions;
1. Typically how long does DOL take to respond to an Audit?
2. What kind of response can I expect? Will it be an approval or a further Audit?
3. What % of cases get a further audit after a response is filed to an initial Audit?
I will send out a response when I hear from him.
Side question: Is my Priority date the date when PERM was applied or the date the PERM will be approved?
Thanks.
1. Typically how long does DOL take to respond to an Audit?
2. What kind of response can I expect? Will it be an approval or a further Audit?
3. What % of cases get a further audit after a response is filed to an initial Audit?
I will send out a response when I hear from him.
Side question: Is my Priority date the date when PERM was applied or the date the PERM will be approved?
Thanks.
more...
pictures appealing tattoo designs
ski_dude12
12-22 12:29 PM
Please contribute to IV.
Thanks for the info, i too got my recpt# by calling...
Thanks for the info, i too got my recpt# by calling...
dresses Sexy Tattoo Designs For
Rb_newsletter
07-15 06:06 PM
When I went to Canada from LA, one of the airlines staff did not even know that he has to take the I-94 out. And when I told him that he must take the I-94 then he called another airlines staff. He seemed to be aware of I-94 stuffs. I wonder if my I-94 card went to correct customs/immigration file.
I wonder why can't US immigration stamp on the passport when we leave the country. How can we trust an airlines staff? How do we know the airlines and it's staff are trained properly on immigration/I-94 process.
I wonder why can't US immigration stamp on the passport when we leave the country. How can we trust an airlines staff? How do we know the airlines and it's staff are trained properly on immigration/I-94 process.
more...
makeup Sexy Star Tattoo Designs for
cram
08-24 01:29 AM
Thanks so much for the info, satishku_2000. That is very good info.
My RFE, which was issued on July 20, 2007, was for my employer's ITR . My lawyer said the deadline is 12 weeks from the RFE date. I think she has not been updated on the new ruling. Now we only have up to next Friday to submit everything. I'm so so worried!!!
My RFE, which was issued on July 20, 2007, was for my employer's ITR . My lawyer said the deadline is 12 weeks from the RFE date. I think she has not been updated on the new ruling. Now we only have up to next Friday to submit everything. I'm so so worried!!!
girlfriend pretty body tattoo design
jagran
07-31 03:11 PM
From where you got this fact? If this is the fact then PD won't be hovering in 2001 since last 5 years. In those days, PD for EB3 was always current so every body applied in EB3.
The Sept bulletin will be
EB2I - Dec 03
EB3I - U
The Sept bulletin will be
EB2I - Dec 03
EB3I - U
hairstyles Sexy Tattoo Designs for Women
sriswam
06-29 11:00 AM
Just found out from USCIS customer servicer rep that the documents should be *POSTMARKED* before july 2nd. So we can still paper-file the I-907 to upgrade I-140 to premium processing as long as we mail in the paperwork before Monday.
Cheers!
-Sriswam
Cheers!
-Sriswam
Hassan11
03-26 10:49 AM
I am in big need for help. I applied for my first LC based on Skilled employee (Category 3) because my first job financial analyst only required a bachelor degree even though I have a masters degree then I filed for the I-140. a year later, I got a promotion to a senior financial analyst which requires a masters degree (which I already had). so I filed a second LC (EB2) for the new position with the same company however, my LC was denied because the DOL thinks that there is no difference between the 1 job (financial analyst) and the second job (senior financial analyst) with the same company. so I checked with my lawyer and he said that I can file for appeal so the DOL will review their decision and realize that it was wrong. I did file for appeal (within the 30 day window) in Sep 2006 and I ve been waiting since then. MY HR manager sent emails and made many phone calls to Atlanta to find out about the status of my appeal but with no results. finally in Jan 2008, she sent another letter to ask for a status. does anybody know or have any idea how long the appeal normally takes so they can make a decision on my case?? please advise. Thank you
coopheal
04-12 03:01 PM
Gurus, I just got an email about RFE on 485 application for both of us (myself and wife). My PD is Sep 2006, EB2, not sure why the application got opened and whats the RFE about. I am still working on h1 (renewed based on approved 140) and still has 1.5 years left. Is someone on the same boat, i mean RFE's on 485 though PD is not current??? If the RFE is about my employment, would my wife also get the RFE ?? I am with the same employer from almost 6 years.Do i get the copy of RFE too or just the attorney?? Thanks Guys, appreciate your help ....
Don't worry much its more than like going to be a medical RFE.
I had an RFE recently with similar status. See thread....
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24601
Don't worry much its more than like going to be a medical RFE.
I had an RFE recently with similar status. See thread....
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=24601
No comments:
Post a Comment