amsgc
04-08 08:02 PM
Yes we are working on it and will be enhancing it. Please keep adding your details to it.
The least people could do is put in their country of chargeability, and PD. It is just silly to see country of chargeability as US! Lets get serious people!
The least people could do is put in their country of chargeability, and PD. It is just silly to see country of chargeability as US! Lets get serious people!
mheggade
07-30 11:24 AM
Don't put "difficult" and "spouse" next to each other. WHY? Its because two different words means the same????
Very funny.
Very funny.
shankar_thanu
08-05 12:47 PM
RD: July 2nd
PD: Oct 2005
ND: Aug 24 2008
EB2 I
Someone in another thread posted saying TSC IO said they are processing by ND...
PD: Oct 2005
ND: Aug 24 2008
EB2 I
Someone in another thread posted saying TSC IO said they are processing by ND...
Sunx_2004
10-15 02:26 PM
Which service center your friend (July 16th filer) applied to. I applied on July 17th NSC, still wiating for receipts.
call uscis - as per the listen in conference call (cis ombudsman) if the date displayed is after your mail carrier date
FYI:
I know 2 of my friends Jul2 didnt get anything ... one more july 16 - just got the checks cashed today
call uscis - as per the listen in conference call (cis ombudsman) if the date displayed is after your mail carrier date
FYI:
I know 2 of my friends Jul2 didnt get anything ... one more july 16 - just got the checks cashed today
more...
optimist578
03-18 01:05 PM
Most of the pro-immigrant bills donot seem to have cosponsors, whereas, the anti-immigrant/security-enhancing/american-jobs-protecting bills have a lot of support.
A small list of bills I found somewhat relevant to our issues...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
H.R.133 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to deny citizenship at birth to children born in the United States of parents who are not citizens or permanent resident aliens.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (5)
H.R.938 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make changes related to family-sponsored immigrants and to reduce the number of such immigrants.
Sponsor: Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] (introduced 2/8/2007) Cosponsors (17)
H.R.19 : To require employers to conduct employment eligibility verification.
Sponsor: Rep Calvert, Ken [CA-44] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (24)
H.R.132 : To impose a criminal penalty on an alien who fails voluntarily to depart the United States after securing permission to do so, or who unlawfully returns to the United States after voluntarily departing.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (2)
H.R.98 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to enforce restrictions on employment in the United States of unauthorized aliens through the use of improved Social Security cards and an Employment Eligibility Database, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Dreier, David [CA-26] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (24)
H.R.842 : To provide for enhanced Federal, State, and local assistance in the enforcement of the immigration laws, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, to authorize appropriations to carry out the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Norwood, Charles W. [GA-10] (introduced 2/6/2007) Cosponsors (None)
H.R.131 : To impose a mandatory minimum sentence on a deportable alien who fails to depart or fails to attend a removal proceeding.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (1)
A small list of bills I found somewhat relevant to our issues...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
H.R.133 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to deny citizenship at birth to children born in the United States of parents who are not citizens or permanent resident aliens.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (5)
H.R.938 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make changes related to family-sponsored immigrants and to reduce the number of such immigrants.
Sponsor: Rep Gingrey, Phil [GA-11] (introduced 2/8/2007) Cosponsors (17)
H.R.19 : To require employers to conduct employment eligibility verification.
Sponsor: Rep Calvert, Ken [CA-44] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (24)
H.R.132 : To impose a criminal penalty on an alien who fails voluntarily to depart the United States after securing permission to do so, or who unlawfully returns to the United States after voluntarily departing.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (2)
H.R.98 : To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to enforce restrictions on employment in the United States of unauthorized aliens through the use of improved Social Security cards and an Employment Eligibility Database, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Dreier, David [CA-26] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (24)
H.R.842 : To provide for enhanced Federal, State, and local assistance in the enforcement of the immigration laws, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act, to authorize appropriations to carry out the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, and for other purposes.
Sponsor: Rep Norwood, Charles W. [GA-10] (introduced 2/6/2007) Cosponsors (None)
H.R.131 : To impose a mandatory minimum sentence on a deportable alien who fails to depart or fails to attend a removal proceeding.
Sponsor: Rep Gallegly, Elton [CA-24] (introduced 1/4/2007) Cosponsors (1)
mantagon
07-15 01:01 PM
If your wife has given the EAD info to her employer (may be through W-9 form), then she does not have to report the change of status to USCIS, rather the employer is responsible for the notification.
more...
sachisdis
02-23 07:48 PM
Hi,
Im from India and joined the company 4 years back as Programmer/Analyst. I have an Bachelors in Computer Science (3 Yrs) + MCA (3 Yrs) and experience of 4 years & 8 months before joining the company. The company field for GC under EB3, priority date: November 2008 and I-140 approved date: November 2009.
With nearing 9 years of experience company promoted me to Sr. Programmer/Analyst consultant and is ready to file the case in EB2.
My question:
1. My priority date from EB3 is November 6, 2008. So after approval of fresh labor for EB2, can the new I-140 for EB2 be filed with the old priority date of EB3 ?
2. Can the same company hold two I-140 for the same employee? That is keep the EB3 I-140 active and apply for EB2 I-140 till the EB2 clears/approves ?
3. The designation & job duties can be the same as that of EB3 or need to be changed.
Thanks in advance!
Im from India and joined the company 4 years back as Programmer/Analyst. I have an Bachelors in Computer Science (3 Yrs) + MCA (3 Yrs) and experience of 4 years & 8 months before joining the company. The company field for GC under EB3, priority date: November 2008 and I-140 approved date: November 2009.
With nearing 9 years of experience company promoted me to Sr. Programmer/Analyst consultant and is ready to file the case in EB2.
My question:
1. My priority date from EB3 is November 6, 2008. So after approval of fresh labor for EB2, can the new I-140 for EB2 be filed with the old priority date of EB3 ?
2. Can the same company hold two I-140 for the same employee? That is keep the EB3 I-140 active and apply for EB2 I-140 till the EB2 clears/approves ?
3. The designation & job duties can be the same as that of EB3 or need to be changed.
Thanks in advance!
eb3_nepa
07-20 03:49 PM
Hello Gurus,
I have a question about H1 and L1.
Is it possible for one human being to have a simaltaneous H1 and an L1 visa AT THE SAME TIME. Now before everyone starts thinking i am crazy or laughing hysterically, let me explain my logic.
I have an H1 in a company who has a partner in Canada. I am thinking if i can somehow (IFF possible) without giving up my H1, get a simaltaneous L1 from the Canadian company in a sister concern of my US based company, then my wife could get an L2 and hence get a work permit.
So the plan is:
1) KEEP the original H1B
2) Get the Canadian partner to sponsor A PARALLEL L1 for a job in a sister company of my current company.
3) Apply for an L2 for my wife and get her work permit/SSN.
Now my questions are:
1) Is this possible AT ALL?
2) Can the L1 be extended? and is there any problem/caveat with L1 visas as compared to H1B?
3) My 6 years of H1B are up in 1.5 years so would my wife still be able to keep her L2?
Gurus can you give me some guidance. This tactic can be used by more of you as well, if you are a victim of retrogression and your spouse cant work.
I have a question about H1 and L1.
Is it possible for one human being to have a simaltaneous H1 and an L1 visa AT THE SAME TIME. Now before everyone starts thinking i am crazy or laughing hysterically, let me explain my logic.
I have an H1 in a company who has a partner in Canada. I am thinking if i can somehow (IFF possible) without giving up my H1, get a simaltaneous L1 from the Canadian company in a sister concern of my US based company, then my wife could get an L2 and hence get a work permit.
So the plan is:
1) KEEP the original H1B
2) Get the Canadian partner to sponsor A PARALLEL L1 for a job in a sister company of my current company.
3) Apply for an L2 for my wife and get her work permit/SSN.
Now my questions are:
1) Is this possible AT ALL?
2) Can the L1 be extended? and is there any problem/caveat with L1 visas as compared to H1B?
3) My 6 years of H1B are up in 1.5 years so would my wife still be able to keep her L2?
Gurus can you give me some guidance. This tactic can be used by more of you as well, if you are a victim of retrogression and your spouse cant work.
more...
conundrum
05-25 07:52 AM
Kennedy's immigration council/staffers were there until late last night and currently none of them are in. It seems they would be in only by around 9-9:15
rdehar
11-27 01:40 PM
How does it work? It doesn't work anymore :D
Labor substitution is dead.
Beware of anyone scamming you in name of labor sub...
Labor substitution is dead.
Beware of anyone scamming you in name of labor sub...
more...
Kalidindi
07-26 02:12 PM
Mine was EB2 and am from India
dupedinjuly
07-18 05:00 PM
You Status date needs to be before USCIS receipt date.
USCIS Receipt Date = Date the USCIS mail room assigns on the working day, when package is received.
Status date = I-94 Issue date.
You can come on August 15 at 11 pm, but if your filight is late by an hour then, you I-94 issue date will be Aug 16. ? You are cutting it too close.
I have not heard of them looking at time, they go by date. If you are in at 12:01 am then your date will be 8/16/07
Not clear if the I-94 is issued on Aug 16 and receipt date is Aug 16, then what will happen ?
It would be safe to mail the application on Aug 16 by Fedex with USCIS receipt date of Aug 17, it will take care, if your filight is delayed.
I-485 Courier Mailing address for Nebraska Service Center
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
( Ref: P. O. Box 87485 )
Lincoln, NE - 68508
Find out the right Courier address for your service center if its not Nebraska.
Could somebody explain to me, please, how is it working with the receipt date?
I will be going to my home country on July 21st and coming back on August 15th, 11:00 PM.......
.....my question is: if my lawyer will send the I-485 package on August 15, at 4 PM.....( and I arrive in U.S on August 15 but at 11:00 PM)...the package hits the Uscis on August 16......is it ok? when Uscis sees that I'm physically in U.S?......is it the date when the package hits Uscis or the date when the package was sent by the lawyer......what is the postal mark that Uscis takes into consideration?: the date when Fedex is sending the package( exact date of delivery) OR the date the package arrives at Uscis mailroom?
OR ...Uscis will look at the I-94( when I'm coming back the officer at the port of entry will give me a new I-94) and Uscis will see that I arrived on August 15, at 11:00 PM?
Could someone please clarify this as depending on this I have to change the schedule of my plane flight.
I would really appreciate this.
Thank you in advance!
USCIS Receipt Date = Date the USCIS mail room assigns on the working day, when package is received.
Status date = I-94 Issue date.
You can come on August 15 at 11 pm, but if your filight is late by an hour then, you I-94 issue date will be Aug 16. ? You are cutting it too close.
I have not heard of them looking at time, they go by date. If you are in at 12:01 am then your date will be 8/16/07
Not clear if the I-94 is issued on Aug 16 and receipt date is Aug 16, then what will happen ?
It would be safe to mail the application on Aug 16 by Fedex with USCIS receipt date of Aug 17, it will take care, if your filight is delayed.
I-485 Courier Mailing address for Nebraska Service Center
USCIS Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
( Ref: P. O. Box 87485 )
Lincoln, NE - 68508
Find out the right Courier address for your service center if its not Nebraska.
Could somebody explain to me, please, how is it working with the receipt date?
I will be going to my home country on July 21st and coming back on August 15th, 11:00 PM.......
.....my question is: if my lawyer will send the I-485 package on August 15, at 4 PM.....( and I arrive in U.S on August 15 but at 11:00 PM)...the package hits the Uscis on August 16......is it ok? when Uscis sees that I'm physically in U.S?......is it the date when the package hits Uscis or the date when the package was sent by the lawyer......what is the postal mark that Uscis takes into consideration?: the date when Fedex is sending the package( exact date of delivery) OR the date the package arrives at Uscis mailroom?
OR ...Uscis will look at the I-94( when I'm coming back the officer at the port of entry will give me a new I-94) and Uscis will see that I arrived on August 15, at 11:00 PM?
Could someone please clarify this as depending on this I have to change the schedule of my plane flight.
I would really appreciate this.
Thank you in advance!
more...
Asian
12-07 01:15 PM
When does the H-1 B fiscal year start? Is it April? So for example, people apply in April 2007 for the 2007 fiscal year and start working from April 2007?
In this case of transfer from non profit to for profit, is the priority date portable after I-140 approval?
This is a different question. Is the government job also regarded as cap exempt non profit?
Thank you very much for your help! Our immigration gods bless you!
Best,
Sure enough. You need to have h1b visa #s available to transfer from non-profit to profit org. I am in the same boat and you will have to wait till next year's quota. As said, you may transfer between non-profit orgs as many times you like in 6 years. Sorry.
In this case of transfer from non profit to for profit, is the priority date portable after I-140 approval?
This is a different question. Is the government job also regarded as cap exempt non profit?
Thank you very much for your help! Our immigration gods bless you!
Best,
Sure enough. You need to have h1b visa #s available to transfer from non-profit to profit org. I am in the same boat and you will have to wait till next year's quota. As said, you may transfer between non-profit orgs as many times you like in 6 years. Sorry.
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
more...
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.
raydhan
05-09 04:47 PM
can this event me scheduled to someother day, preferably a weekend ?
Also, May 15th is mine and my daughter's birthday, so I would have to be at home in the evening ?
asdqwe2k,
Actually this event is being held to celebrate your's and your daughter's birthday if you didn't know. :-)
Happy birthday to both of you in advance. Enjoy.
Also, May 15th is mine and my daughter's birthday, so I would have to be at home in the evening ?
asdqwe2k,
Actually this event is being held to celebrate your's and your daughter's birthday if you didn't know. :-)
Happy birthday to both of you in advance. Enjoy.
more...
bostonian28
12-10 12:16 PM
Please look at the below links, it says that one can move jobs after 180 days even without 140 being approved.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
Any comments / suggestions ?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
Any comments / suggestions ?
bingl
04-15 11:47 PM
My Driving license is expiring soon (the day my I94 expires ) ....I have been on H4 till now ....but my husband is on EAD now . When I went to renew my license they asked me to get EAD since my I94 will expire soon . Is that the only way to renew ? Can I file for AP and use that, since I will have to travel to India anyways ?
eb3retro
02-16 09:56 AM
Hi Everyone,
I will be laid off from an american company by the end of Feb 2009. I spoke to my previous desi employee as my H1b with his company is still valid and he din't revoked it until now
But he agrees to let me join his company but at the same time he worried about few things
Q1) I was with him for 6 months of 2008 and moved to an American Company so the total pay in the W2 for year 2008 is less than LCA amount.
Would that be a problem as i din't work with him for an entire year in which case it is bound to be less than LCA amount..
Mind you i'm looking at the Yearly wage if you look at month wise it is much higher than mentioned in LCA.
Would that be of any problem to both me and employeer.
Q2) He also said that when somebody re hires any one , the employeer is liable to pay back wages for the period of time he was out.
It sounds illogical atleast to me because he didn't terminate me from the job it was me who quit the job and transferred my H1b on a good note , but there is no official document saying i quit the job or he terminated me ....
I would appreciate if some could throw some light on this ....
My future is relied on these issues
Thanks
David
take it easy dude. People respond to one thread itself. you dont need to open multiple threads. also update your profile first.
I will be laid off from an american company by the end of Feb 2009. I spoke to my previous desi employee as my H1b with his company is still valid and he din't revoked it until now
But he agrees to let me join his company but at the same time he worried about few things
Q1) I was with him for 6 months of 2008 and moved to an American Company so the total pay in the W2 for year 2008 is less than LCA amount.
Would that be a problem as i din't work with him for an entire year in which case it is bound to be less than LCA amount..
Mind you i'm looking at the Yearly wage if you look at month wise it is much higher than mentioned in LCA.
Would that be of any problem to both me and employeer.
Q2) He also said that when somebody re hires any one , the employeer is liable to pay back wages for the period of time he was out.
It sounds illogical atleast to me because he didn't terminate me from the job it was me who quit the job and transferred my H1b on a good note , but there is no official document saying i quit the job or he terminated me ....
I would appreciate if some could throw some light on this ....
My future is relied on these issues
Thanks
David
take it easy dude. People respond to one thread itself. you dont need to open multiple threads. also update your profile first.
GCEB2
09-20 11:06 PM
Thanks for the info. how about areas like simivalley, santa clarita, do you get houses for 300 to 350 and
And also around bay area- san roman, liver moore are they good neighbourhood. Also which has more jobs in datawarehousing is it LA or bayarea.
And also around bay area- san roman, liver moore are they good neighbourhood. Also which has more jobs in datawarehousing is it LA or bayarea.
vhd999
04-26 06:50 PM
My wife recently travelled to India from Seattle.
At the check-in counter, Lufthansa people insisted that she should pay for the second bag.
Before the day of the trip, we called Lufthansa and confirmed that we are allowed to take two bags (50lbs). There are no other airlines involved.
My wife insisted that she should not pay for the second bag. After some deliberations and confrontations, Lufthansa reluctantly accepted the second bag with no fees.
Sometimes I wonder, where is the end to all this nonsense.
At the check-in counter, Lufthansa people insisted that she should pay for the second bag.
Before the day of the trip, we called Lufthansa and confirmed that we are allowed to take two bags (50lbs). There are no other airlines involved.
My wife insisted that she should not pay for the second bag. After some deliberations and confrontations, Lufthansa reluctantly accepted the second bag with no fees.
Sometimes I wonder, where is the end to all this nonsense.
No comments:
Post a Comment