mhathi
09-23 07:55 AM
I suggest you talk to a good lawyer! This kind of question is too sensitive to rely on people's opinion.
immi2006
05-24 10:30 AM
Recently in a IIT meet and IISC meet we came across a huge number of folks in EB2 on GC wait., I was told their numbers exceed 1000 plus through the internal IIT network.. so if they consume X number just in Bay area, what about rest of US. Live happily while you are here, enjoy the weather and do not pin hopes on US. Think that you were fortunate to come here in prime of youth and learnt a thing or two..
Honestly how many points we score really does not matter if the visa country cap is too low. Most of us, coming from India, China etc. score almost the same points and getting TOEFL is a piece of cake if you need to improve your points.
It's pointless to break our heads calculating these points, everything is in limbo right now and the only best advise for new GC aspirants especially those coming from retrogressed countries is locking the priority date by applying LC under the old system.
Honestly how many points we score really does not matter if the visa country cap is too low. Most of us, coming from India, China etc. score almost the same points and getting TOEFL is a piece of cake if you need to improve your points.
It's pointless to break our heads calculating these points, everything is in limbo right now and the only best advise for new GC aspirants especially those coming from retrogressed countries is locking the priority date by applying LC under the old system.
bijualex29
05-05 03:33 PM
I would like to know, can I get my H-1B at 6.0 year of my H-4 with my spouse�s approved I-140 (affected by EB-3 retrogression)?
md_jul_03
08-06 03:55 PM
I took some time to compile the list of INDIA only EB3 and EB2 categories for past 2 years and from the trend, it is very easy to predict the Oct bulletin.
It does not need a attorney or spies. You just need to work up the numbers.
I did this only for INDIA. Any chinese can complile it for China.
MONTH EB2 EB3
Aug 05 C 01APR01
Sep 05 C U
Oct 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Nov 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Dec 05 01JUL00 1-Jan-99
Jan 06 01JAN01 01JUN99
Feb 06 01AUG01 01JAN00
Mar 06 01JAN02 01JAN01
Apr 06 01JUL02 01FEB01
May 06 01JAN03 01MAR01
Jun 06 01JAN03 08APR01
Jul 06 01JAN03 15APR01
Aug 06 U 01APR01
Sep 06 U 15APR01
Oct 06 15JUN02 22-Apr-01
Nov 06 01JAN03 APRIL01
Dec 06 08JAN03
Jan 07 Jan03 May01
Feb 07 Jan03 May01
Mar 07 Jan03 May01
Apr 07 Jan03 May01
May 07 Jan03 May01
Jun 07 Apr04 Jun03
Jul 07 C C
Aug 07 U U
Sep 07 Jan03 May01
Oct 07 Jan03 May01
Nov 07 Jul03 June02
Dec 07 Jul03 Jun02
Jan 08 Jan04 Jun02
Feb 08 Jan04 Jun02
Here is my analysis.
Bulletin dates moves by six months as max jump for EB2 and 1 month for EB3.
Begining of New year in Oct, they conservatively pull back the numbers so as to flush out pending apps.
Now since they have already flushed apps in June/July, in Nov they will move EB2 by six months and possibly either stop there or make it one full year by moving it by another six months.
For EB3, they like to get it stuck at mid year so Jun02.
Guys, give a thought to this trend and see if you can guess more accurately.
Interesting analysis.
I found an additional prediction on this link http://www.murthy.com/news/n_oct07vb.html
It does not need a attorney or spies. You just need to work up the numbers.
I did this only for INDIA. Any chinese can complile it for China.
MONTH EB2 EB3
Aug 05 C 01APR01
Sep 05 C U
Oct 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Nov 05 01NOV99 01JAN98
Dec 05 01JUL00 1-Jan-99
Jan 06 01JAN01 01JUN99
Feb 06 01AUG01 01JAN00
Mar 06 01JAN02 01JAN01
Apr 06 01JUL02 01FEB01
May 06 01JAN03 01MAR01
Jun 06 01JAN03 08APR01
Jul 06 01JAN03 15APR01
Aug 06 U 01APR01
Sep 06 U 15APR01
Oct 06 15JUN02 22-Apr-01
Nov 06 01JAN03 APRIL01
Dec 06 08JAN03
Jan 07 Jan03 May01
Feb 07 Jan03 May01
Mar 07 Jan03 May01
Apr 07 Jan03 May01
May 07 Jan03 May01
Jun 07 Apr04 Jun03
Jul 07 C C
Aug 07 U U
Sep 07 Jan03 May01
Oct 07 Jan03 May01
Nov 07 Jul03 June02
Dec 07 Jul03 Jun02
Jan 08 Jan04 Jun02
Feb 08 Jan04 Jun02
Here is my analysis.
Bulletin dates moves by six months as max jump for EB2 and 1 month for EB3.
Begining of New year in Oct, they conservatively pull back the numbers so as to flush out pending apps.
Now since they have already flushed apps in June/July, in Nov they will move EB2 by six months and possibly either stop there or make it one full year by moving it by another six months.
For EB3, they like to get it stuck at mid year so Jun02.
Guys, give a thought to this trend and see if you can guess more accurately.
Interesting analysis.
I found an additional prediction on this link http://www.murthy.com/news/n_oct07vb.html
more...
hpandey
03-22 02:50 PM
Did your new H1 come with an I-94 attached at the bottom or not ? If not then it means that you have to go out of US and get the H1 visa stamped. Also it means that you are still out of status since you do not have a valid I-94.
Yes potentially as per law you could be barred entry to US for 3 years but sometimes if you do everything legally the CBP officers overlook that. It all depends at the officer at the consulate for stamping and then at the port of entry.
You can hope to be lucky but what your lawyer says is correct.
Best of luck.
I am not a lawyer so your lawyer's advise would be best.
Yes potentially as per law you could be barred entry to US for 3 years but sometimes if you do everything legally the CBP officers overlook that. It all depends at the officer at the consulate for stamping and then at the port of entry.
You can hope to be lucky but what your lawyer says is correct.
Best of luck.
I am not a lawyer so your lawyer's advise would be best.
raysaikat
05-25 03:43 PM
Apply for AP - 350 bucks. If you application is valid - you will get it.
Do this before trying to figure out using more money if your application is active. That may result in raising alarms and ultimately may be bad for your application. No one can penalize you for applying for EAD AP.
Once your husband is back here ask him to reapply for EAD and you send in your application too. If that comes you are all set no need to refile H1B but keep it just in case because of your special case.
All the best!
This is not a good advice. Whether or not the GC application is active (not abandoned) depends on the action taken by the primary applicant. USCIS may have the file as active, and may approve EAD --- that does not mean that the legally the application is not abandoned. If and when USCIS starts working on the application and issues RFE, etc., to clarify status of the applicant at various times, they may decide that the application was abandoned. If the poster worked on the EAD based on the abandoned GC application, then it is likely that USCIS will consider her to be out-of-status from the time she had no basis for EAD, which may mean a long illegal presence, triggering 10 years or permanent ban, etc.
The right thing for the OP to do is to consult an immigration attorney who will be able to determine whether the application may have been abandoned or not.
Do this before trying to figure out using more money if your application is active. That may result in raising alarms and ultimately may be bad for your application. No one can penalize you for applying for EAD AP.
Once your husband is back here ask him to reapply for EAD and you send in your application too. If that comes you are all set no need to refile H1B but keep it just in case because of your special case.
All the best!
This is not a good advice. Whether or not the GC application is active (not abandoned) depends on the action taken by the primary applicant. USCIS may have the file as active, and may approve EAD --- that does not mean that the legally the application is not abandoned. If and when USCIS starts working on the application and issues RFE, etc., to clarify status of the applicant at various times, they may decide that the application was abandoned. If the poster worked on the EAD based on the abandoned GC application, then it is likely that USCIS will consider her to be out-of-status from the time she had no basis for EAD, which may mean a long illegal presence, triggering 10 years or permanent ban, etc.
The right thing for the OP to do is to consult an immigration attorney who will be able to determine whether the application may have been abandoned or not.
more...
nixstor
02-24 09:57 AM
That was just what I knew. For example NV does the same because they dont have state tax. They don't see a reason why they should give instate for people on temporary visas and do not pay taxes to the state. They consider us as people who are here on Non Immigrant visas who will leave any time. As you said ,TX might be more considerate.
swede
04-03 09:45 AM
The numbers for the DOL contacts seems to be voice numbers and not fax numbers. Can someone please provide me with their fax numbers?
Thanks...
Thanks...
more...
miguy
06-25 10:22 AM
I though such contracts are illegal in US?....It is employment at will.....that means they can kick you out anytime or you can leave anytime....maybe someone can clarify
RiaonH4
01-18 11:13 AM
Cool. Thanks for your replies. One more question. Are you guys currently in US and have applied 485. How do i use Canadian citizenship and 485 pending to maximize my opportunities in us and also have Canadian citizenship as a backup?
Ria
:D
King37 sent you a PM
Ria
:D
King37 sent you a PM
more...
thomachan72
11-12 06:11 AM
Hi was an educational evaluation submitted along with the application?? Usually for degrees from non-US universities while filing the H1b application they require us to submit an educational evaluation along with copies of the certificates/transcripts. If you had not got your wife's degree evaluated and submitted that report then that might have triggered this rfe??
akhilmahajan
04-11 03:05 PM
We are working on fixing the bugs and will be trying our best to get them fixed as soon as we can.
So, please keep on letting us know about the bugs.
Patience and support is really appreciated.
GO IV GO.
So, please keep on letting us know about the bugs.
Patience and support is really appreciated.
GO IV GO.
more...
michael_trs
05-14 04:48 PM
Ok. I understand that if I state Master's + 3 or 5 years experience for Software Engineer position I need to answer NO to H14 "requirements normal for the occupation?" because it exceeds SVP. Agree?
Now the question is does it automatically lead to audit?
Now the question is does it automatically lead to audit?
webm
01-26 10:34 AM
If I check my case online I see following
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
Received Date : June 25, 2007 --- this is mail room received data
"On July 24, 2007, we received -- this is the day when your 485 app entered into their crazy system (by a lazy IO)
Gurus,share your ideas also..
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
Received Date : June 25, 2007 --- this is mail room received data
"On July 24, 2007, we received -- this is the day when your 485 app entered into their crazy system (by a lazy IO)
Gurus,share your ideas also..
more...
blackberry
07-30 01:59 PM
Many of us are in this situation.
Can someone throw some light based on prior experience,
who gets the receipt notice when using G-28.
#1. Lawyer Alone
#2. Applicant Alone
#3. Both lawyer & the applicant.
--BB
Can someone throw some light based on prior experience,
who gets the receipt notice when using G-28.
#1. Lawyer Alone
#2. Applicant Alone
#3. Both lawyer & the applicant.
--BB
shirish
10-08 11:47 AM
Received an email on friday, Card production rdered for the EADs for both of us.
Received RN for EAD and AP for all three of us. (NO EAD for son :) as did not apply) yesterday
PD - sept 05 EB2 India-
I140 - Approved Apr 2006
I-485,AP,EAD - reached NSC on July 27th 07
485- RN - Not received
EAD - RN - received - ND - sept 27th 07 - EAC XXXXXXX
AP - RN - received - ND - sept 27th 07 - EAC XXXXXXX
Hope every will get it soon.
Received RN for EAD and AP for all three of us. (NO EAD for son :) as did not apply) yesterday
PD - sept 05 EB2 India-
I140 - Approved Apr 2006
I-485,AP,EAD - reached NSC on July 27th 07
485- RN - Not received
EAD - RN - received - ND - sept 27th 07 - EAC XXXXXXX
AP - RN - received - ND - sept 27th 07 - EAC XXXXXXX
Hope every will get it soon.
more...
raju6855
02-02 09:33 AM
Thx for your reply.
But this wasn't told to me (us) by my company's hr, I guess I got to check that advise for second opinion.
But this wasn't told to me (us) by my company's hr, I guess I got to check that advise for second opinion.
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
When Green?
07-30 09:05 AM
Dear Experts and Attorneys:
Here is my situation:
My employment was terminated by my Manager (no reasons given on paper, and the reasons he gave me were not valid when I discussed with my previous manager even per the company policy)
I am in the process of finalizing between a couple of offers (Hopefully would be able to make a decision by sometime next week). My previous manager is trying to get me into his project after I explained my I-485 application status. My PD is Aug-06 (EB-3), I-140 pending.
My spouse is on H-4. My initial plan before all this drama (Initial withdrawal of July visa bulletin and employment termination), I got all my documents signed and ready to be sent out from my attorney's office.
After this sequence of events, the attorney refuses to submit my I-485 application (because it could be considered Fraud).
Now I need your expert advice on the following situations:
1. Would it be ideal to join the same company in a different department and ask the lawyer to file my I-485? Use the AC21 portability after 180 days of pending application?
2. I read somewhere that for me to use the AC21 portability, I need to be in the same profile and also same pay range that was approved on my initial labor application. Is it true? I am currently being offered 15K more than what I have been making till now.
3. I have 3 more years of H-1B left, so what are the chances of getting a new green card process started under EB-2, and port the Aug-06 priority date after the I-140 is approved? How long would you anticipate it would take for me to get to the I-485 stage? Just a ball park from the experience on the forum would be great!
I have been out of the job for the past 2 weeks. would it be a problem for me while applying for a new labor certification?
I greatly appreciate your responses.
Thank you.
Here is my situation:
My employment was terminated by my Manager (no reasons given on paper, and the reasons he gave me were not valid when I discussed with my previous manager even per the company policy)
I am in the process of finalizing between a couple of offers (Hopefully would be able to make a decision by sometime next week). My previous manager is trying to get me into his project after I explained my I-485 application status. My PD is Aug-06 (EB-3), I-140 pending.
My spouse is on H-4. My initial plan before all this drama (Initial withdrawal of July visa bulletin and employment termination), I got all my documents signed and ready to be sent out from my attorney's office.
After this sequence of events, the attorney refuses to submit my I-485 application (because it could be considered Fraud).
Now I need your expert advice on the following situations:
1. Would it be ideal to join the same company in a different department and ask the lawyer to file my I-485? Use the AC21 portability after 180 days of pending application?
2. I read somewhere that for me to use the AC21 portability, I need to be in the same profile and also same pay range that was approved on my initial labor application. Is it true? I am currently being offered 15K more than what I have been making till now.
3. I have 3 more years of H-1B left, so what are the chances of getting a new green card process started under EB-2, and port the Aug-06 priority date after the I-140 is approved? How long would you anticipate it would take for me to get to the I-485 stage? Just a ball park from the experience on the forum would be great!
I have been out of the job for the past 2 weeks. would it be a problem for me while applying for a new labor certification?
I greatly appreciate your responses.
Thank you.
navyug
10-13 10:22 PM
Hi,
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
Yes. It happened in my case as well. My I-140 was denied from NSC after having filed I-485. It was refiled (yes refiled in TSC, not MTR and got a different case number). After the I-140 denial my I-485 was also denied. Upon approval on my new I-140 the I-485 was reopened automatically. The online status had not changed from 'Denied". I was surprised when I got my second round of FP notices in August 09. Now the status says "Case has resumed processing". I would however suggest that you ask your attorney to send a letter to USCIS.
My first NIW/I140 was concurrent filed with I485 for both my wife and me. When they denied I140, the USCIS also denied I485s for both of us. I have a pending MTR for that I140.
While the MTR was pending, I filed another NIW/I140, which was approved. I noticed that the approval notice has the A# that was on the I485 of the first petition.
So, should I assume that my the USCIS has interfiled my I485 automatically and my old PD is active?
Thanks.
Yes. It happened in my case as well. My I-140 was denied from NSC after having filed I-485. It was refiled (yes refiled in TSC, not MTR and got a different case number). After the I-140 denial my I-485 was also denied. Upon approval on my new I-140 the I-485 was reopened automatically. The online status had not changed from 'Denied". I was surprised when I got my second round of FP notices in August 09. Now the status says "Case has resumed processing". I would however suggest that you ask your attorney to send a letter to USCIS.
GotGC??
03-09 03:03 PM
Some EB3 for India/China/Row would be in IT, but I bet a vast majority of EB3 from other countries, especially Mehico, is not IT related.
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
No comments:
Post a Comment