vghc
02-04 12:36 PM
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students� visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors� visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners� earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
Why not just fight for increase in numbers of GC and benefit everyone?
Taking a benefit from one group and applying to another disadvantage group only causes division of the entire group. Lets be more constructive in coming out with a solution.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students� visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors� visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners� earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
Why not just fight for increase in numbers of GC and benefit everyone?
Taking a benefit from one group and applying to another disadvantage group only causes division of the entire group. Lets be more constructive in coming out with a solution.
wallpaper celebrity hairstyle lately
byeusa
07-13 06:34 PM
you are making very sensible points. lets not trash her work.Agreed her firm sucks with beurocracy and penny pinching ( they asked my friend to send $25 whe he requsted them to send the fex -ex next night service for his LC approval when they had charged him $ 3000 for expedited filing of his H1B case, which they took 3.5 weeks to file). Some of her lawyers do hide behind their paralegals but most of the law firms aren't any different. So please do not blame her for that. She is a good lawyer.
One thing that i noticed though that she was rallying her clients to file 485 after july 2nd so that they can take part in the law suit. Once she was done billing her clients and the client checks cleared, she posted that she does not want to join the lawsuit as it will lead to increased scrutiny of her cleints. Go figure...
One thing that i noticed though that she was rallying her clients to file 485 after july 2nd so that they can take part in the law suit. Once she was done billing her clients and the client checks cleared, she posted that she does not want to join the lawsuit as it will lead to increased scrutiny of her cleints. Go figure...
goel_ar
03-21 12:29 PM
Send me I'm. My prev post was deleted by mod becos they won't allow other websites to be published here
wow -- why mods don't allow other websites to be published here?
wow -- why mods don't allow other websites to be published here?
2011 Brad Pitt\\#39;s Choppy Fight Club
HOPE_GC_SOON
11-20 05:05 PM
Hi LWPD
Thanks for your Posting of this URL.
The URL is no more active and please help me forwarding the specified .pdf file either a PM to me or please attach the same to your reply.
Alternatively, if you can describe the path on USCIS site, that would be of great help.. I doubt they still hold that .pdf file on site. If you had downloaded this .pdf file. Please help the Team.
Thanks
You guys won't believe how glad I am to read a few posts here where some people are standing up for themselves and refusing to take bullshit from certain lousy employers. This will send a message to those kinds of employers that they can't use the immigration system and treat employees like shit while continuing to profit from these hard-working people.
abc, just one suggestion for you. If you can, hold off until your I-140 gets approved. Once that happens, your 2003 priority date will stick and you can take it with you ( USCIS internal I-140 adjudication manual for your reference ... http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I wish you all the best with your life.
lwpd
Thanks for your Posting of this URL.
The URL is no more active and please help me forwarding the specified .pdf file either a PM to me or please attach the same to your reply.
Alternatively, if you can describe the path on USCIS site, that would be of great help.. I doubt they still hold that .pdf file on site. If you had downloaded this .pdf file. Please help the Team.
Thanks
You guys won't believe how glad I am to read a few posts here where some people are standing up for themselves and refusing to take bullshit from certain lousy employers. This will send a message to those kinds of employers that they can't use the immigration system and treat employees like shit while continuing to profit from these hard-working people.
abc, just one suggestion for you. If you can, hold off until your I-140 gets approved. Once that happens, your 2003 priority date will stick and you can take it with you ( USCIS internal I-140 adjudication manual for your reference ... http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrel...h22_091206R.pdf )
I wish you all the best with your life.
lwpd
more...
rustum
08-21 12:03 AM
Hi,
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
My company filed EAD for me and my wife along with 485 recently. I am on L1 and My wife is on L2. Is is possible to file one more EAD on L2 status. Looks like, we can get EAD on L2 faster than EAD with 485. My company attorney is suggesting me not to file one more EAD because one with 485 is pending with USCIS. Is it ok to file one more with L2? how long it will take to get EAD on 485 and EAD on L2.
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-10 12:50 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
What should we do. I am in tell me what I need to do?
more...
PresidentO
02-03 05:07 PM
So naive of you to think that Senator-elect (Is she sworn in yet?) Gillibrand would be the person to do this. She is already labeled a flip flopper for courting hispanic groups.
AFAIK, The 8 year wait time she was referring to was not EB wait times. That was posted here on IV, discussed and proved that she was talking in general. Actions speak louder than talk. Talk is free, action is risk for politicians.
Good luck!
AFAIK, The 8 year wait time she was referring to was not EB wait times. That was posted here on IV, discussed and proved that she was talking in general. Actions speak louder than talk. Talk is free, action is risk for politicians.
Good luck!
2010 Choppy Hairstyle
ingegarcia
02-15 04:40 PM
How is ROW getting screwed?. Look at the situation as individuals applying irrespective of country of birth. Last Year, there were 120,000(approx) applicants and only 60,000(approx) H1-b1 visas. NOW: It just happens that a lot or 60%were natives of one country. But that does not mean anything... There could be more ROW applicants who could apply, no body is stopping them. There are just not enough ROW applicants that employers can find.
Also remember countries like India, China do not qualify for diversity visas. So an ROW applicant also has that advantage. Most people from small african countries and others qualify to apply there. China, India, Phillipines, Mexico are also backlogged in the family category. ROW has that advantage too.
This is not true otherwise EB3 ROW would not be in 2005.
Also remember countries like India, China do not qualify for diversity visas. So an ROW applicant also has that advantage. Most people from small african countries and others qualify to apply there. China, India, Phillipines, Mexico are also backlogged in the family category. ROW has that advantage too.
This is not true otherwise EB3 ROW would not be in 2005.
more...
jcmenon
07-24 02:08 PM
We can not file for 485 that is the reason we need to let our voices heard to USCIS, it may be waste of time for some one but at least it would be worth a try.
We did try a lot with S1932, outcome zero.
We did try a lot with CIR, outcome zero.
When so potentially yielding means(S 1932 and CIR) can fail in a same way USCIS option may also fail, but at least we know that we tried this option.
If stuck labor says it is a waste of time (No offence taken), I am not going to buy his arguement, just because he is a super moderator. maximun he can ban me from the site, but I donot worry of voicing my openion for an issue that I think might work out.
Lets do an openion poll and decide how many are in favor of this.
We did try a lot with S1932, outcome zero.
We did try a lot with CIR, outcome zero.
When so potentially yielding means(S 1932 and CIR) can fail in a same way USCIS option may also fail, but at least we know that we tried this option.
If stuck labor says it is a waste of time (No offence taken), I am not going to buy his arguement, just because he is a super moderator. maximun he can ban me from the site, but I donot worry of voicing my openion for an issue that I think might work out.
Lets do an openion poll and decide how many are in favor of this.
hair First, the Emo hairstyle is
desi3933
03-17 07:36 AM
Hello Desi,
.....
......
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 6672 10124 2306
China 4999 3046 1027
S Korea 2311 4991 4001
Philippines 524 1853 5540
Mexico 2010 922 3745
All visa numbers allocated to South Korea are against EB visa numbers.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
.....
......
This is from April Visa Bulletin , according to this S korea got 14,211 visas from FB ( spill over from FB - EB) then dont you think the total EB visas issued in 2009 should be around 150000 instead of 141000....
I am little confused...
your comment will be greatly appreciated ;)
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/FY09AnnualReport_TableV.pdf
Country EB1 EB2 EB3
India 6672 10124 2306
China 4999 3046 1027
S Korea 2311 4991 4001
Philippines 524 1853 5540
Mexico 2010 922 3745
All visa numbers allocated to South Korea are against EB visa numbers.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
paskal
03-16 11:19 AM
to see you get defensive and try to make a case etc...........it amuses me........thats why i am doing it!!! :)
Dear friend,
We are not here to denigrate others. Neither are we interested in the kind of stereotyping that Lou Dobbs engages in.
I see you have not even bothered to complete your profile. So much for your bravery, railing at people anonymously.
Real good company and really god job huh?
I work for a REAL good company too, and I'm willing to bet my GC I make more money than you. Get it?
I have been here 12 years, I have education from the best schools in India and in the US (yes #1 ranked schools). The system still sticks me in EB2 with morons like YOU. So stop whining. The system is broken and we are trying to get it reformed. Isn't that the whole point? Hopefully you are lifting your little finger to help occasionally.
Consider this a warning. This needs to stop.
Dear friend,
We are not here to denigrate others. Neither are we interested in the kind of stereotyping that Lou Dobbs engages in.
I see you have not even bothered to complete your profile. So much for your bravery, railing at people anonymously.
Real good company and really god job huh?
I work for a REAL good company too, and I'm willing to bet my GC I make more money than you. Get it?
I have been here 12 years, I have education from the best schools in India and in the US (yes #1 ranked schools). The system still sticks me in EB2 with morons like YOU. So stop whining. The system is broken and we are trying to get it reformed. Isn't that the whole point? Hopefully you are lifting your little finger to help occasionally.
Consider this a warning. This needs to stop.
hot short emo hairstyles for hair
rpulipati
09-26 11:06 AM
I'm sorry if I sounded like a hypocrite. My interpretation was not to participate in FSB debate for PR visas as the debate was concentrated on H1-B visas.
I support H1-B's and please continue in the debate for H1-B's.
Actually, I think participating in the debate to present the other point of view (as in 'foreign workers are good for the US economy') is a good thing to do. Giving the forum out to the antis is a good way to make sure Durbin gets his message reaffirmed. Well, that's all true, unless you are one of those people who likes to yell 'Close the door!' right after they get in.
I support H1-B's and please continue in the debate for H1-B's.
Actually, I think participating in the debate to present the other point of view (as in 'foreign workers are good for the US economy') is a good thing to do. Giving the forum out to the antis is a good way to make sure Durbin gets his message reaffirmed. Well, that's all true, unless you are one of those people who likes to yell 'Close the door!' right after they get in.
more...
house hot emo haircuts for girls
natrajs
09-18 11:04 PM
It was amazing
tattoo Short Emo Hairstyles Trends
msgrewal81
02-18 04:16 PM
1 - It will grant GC to people with > 5 years in US
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
2 - For EB skilled immigration for people with <5 years in US, it makes LC process more difficult.
Please add your views about this bill, how it might be improved and its chances of becoming a law.
P.S. I previously misread the text somewhere. This bill just eliminate H1B classification for fashion models.
more...
pictures Short choppy hairstyles is
HOPE_GC_SOON
08-02 03:13 PM
Folks,
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
This is a good beginning for a cause which gives us some relief in these retrogressed life.
We can atleast propose to USCIS, to accept 485 (if not approval), for those case, where I140 is approved, and the approval can be given in the normal PD schema.
This would lessen the burden on USCIS and facilitate the GC applicant to avail of AC21 PROVISION.
Also, we can highlight here that EAD renewal could be a great source of revenue for USCIS.
Please start this movement.
best wishes and thanks for all the great Volunteers.
No doubt if, IV wish, it can achieve... No Wonders
thanks
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
dresses emo haircuts for girls with
SunnySurya
07-28 11:24 AM
I am a hindu but I also want to present anothere extrem point of view..
PS: I DON'T like the tone of his blog..
http://www.thoughts.com/truth/blog/oh-you-hindu-awake-16869/
PS: I DON'T like the tone of his blog..
http://www.thoughts.com/truth/blog/oh-you-hindu-awake-16869/
more...
makeup Length Choppy Hairstyles
signifer123
02-15 08:44 AM
Glad i already have an idea of how i'm gonna do it maybe later i'll start on it and give you guys a quick pic if grinch doesn't
girlfriend i+like%3B+choppy%2C+more+
EndlessWait
07-25 10:50 AM
Yes, I have this feeling already. Now, what happens if someone switches jobs using AC-21 and then this RFE is received? You have to submit the NEW employment / offer letter right? So how does this help the current employer to stop you from switching jobs?
I think its arguable. The 6 months clock is defined by law. After that even if they issue an RFE on the old employer, assumption is ofcourse that your with a new employer, you can send the new employer's offer letter / AC21 invoked. so it shouldn't be an issue. USCIS can ask about the offer letter from the old employer as intial evidence, so have it available and send it later + new employment letter.
I think its arguable. The 6 months clock is defined by law. After that even if they issue an RFE on the old employer, assumption is ofcourse that your with a new employer, you can send the new employer's offer letter / AC21 invoked. so it shouldn't be an issue. USCIS can ask about the offer letter from the old employer as intial evidence, so have it available and send it later + new employment letter.
hairstyles Related emo hairstyles ：emo
dummgelauft
04-07 11:50 AM
After reading this rumor mongering for a few weeks now, I have drawn a common between these cases (if we believe for a second that these stories ARE true). All these friend of a friend of a friend who were "sent back", seem to be working fro "desi" software "consultants". If that is indeed the case, then great work CIS. These shysters have no place in the EB queue anyways.
(2) I doubt if CIS will risk having a lawsuit thrown at them by a Genuine American or mutlinational company if they "send bacK" their genuine H1B employee ( Do you think A place like Microsoft, Intel, GE or Boeing etc will take such treatment of their employee? No, they will sue CIS.
(3) I work with H1B holders from OTHER countries too (lots of Russians and Chinese). None of them have ever "heard" any "friend of a friend" sent back.
So, Cut the crap and do your work.
(2) I doubt if CIS will risk having a lawsuit thrown at them by a Genuine American or mutlinational company if they "send bacK" their genuine H1B employee ( Do you think A place like Microsoft, Intel, GE or Boeing etc will take such treatment of their employee? No, they will sue CIS.
(3) I work with H1B holders from OTHER countries too (lots of Russians and Chinese). None of them have ever "heard" any "friend of a friend" sent back.
So, Cut the crap and do your work.
ashkam
07-24 12:31 PM
employment letter is not part of initial evidnece per the FAQ issue by USCIS on 07/23/2007. Only signatures and exact fee amounts are part of initial evidence. Sit back and relax now.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
It doesn't say that anywhere in the link. The 485 filing instructions clearly state what the initial evidence is.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
It doesn't say that anywhere in the link. The 485 filing instructions clearly state what the initial evidence is.
coolmanasip
03-07 09:41 AM
see the responses......
What if my employer is definitely going to revoke my approved I-140 upon my resignation (past 180 days)? Do I need to file "Notice of I-140 Portability"?
---------->>COLOR="Blue"]In this case, you should definitely send the AC21 letter to USCIS. If you send the letter, you employer revoking your I-140 has no effect and the USCIS will keep the AC21 stuff in your file and process/examine it when your date becomes current. If you do not send the AC21 letter and your employer revokes I140, then USCIS will send you a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and you will have to respond to that in stipulated time of one month. If you are absolutely sure that employer is going to revoke I140, please go ahead and send the AC21 letter rightaway.....[/COLOR][/I][/I][/I]
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
-------->>does not matter either ways for AC21.....H1 transfer or EAD....
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
----->>> If you fear of being out of job immediately after leaving job...DO NOT Do This........because as per your say, if your employer revokes 140, then you will get a NOID and you have to respond within a month with another job offer and AC21
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
What if my employer is definitely going to revoke my approved I-140 upon my resignation (past 180 days)? Do I need to file "Notice of I-140 Portability"?
---------->>COLOR="Blue"]In this case, you should definitely send the AC21 letter to USCIS. If you send the letter, you employer revoking your I-140 has no effect and the USCIS will keep the AC21 stuff in your file and process/examine it when your date becomes current. If you do not send the AC21 letter and your employer revokes I140, then USCIS will send you a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and you will have to respond to that in stipulated time of one month. If you are absolutely sure that employer is going to revoke I140, please go ahead and send the AC21 letter rightaway.....[/COLOR][/I][/I][/I]
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
-------->>does not matter either ways for AC21.....H1 transfer or EAD....
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
----->>> If you fear of being out of job immediately after leaving job...DO NOT Do This........because as per your say, if your employer revokes 140, then you will get a NOID and you have to respond within a month with another job offer and AC21
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar