rotucan
12-17 09:43 AM
I have good comments from Zhang Office
http://www.hooyou.com/index.html
I have my case with Tindall & Foster...:( I do not recommend them
good luck
http://www.hooyou.com/index.html
I have my case with Tindall & Foster...:( I do not recommend them
good luck
girishvar
08-15 12:11 PM
There is a USCIS memo on Merger and Acquisition released some time in 2003/2004. I am not able to locate that. I have used that memo to continue my H1b.
hydboy77
07-14 01:59 PM
I dont mean to be greedy or selfish but from a purely technical analysis this is extremely bad news for EB2\Eb3 India and China folks. Eb4 and Eb5 account for 10% of the 140000 EB green cards every year. If EB4 and Eb5 were discontinued these visas would have spilled over into Eb1,2,3 category. With the Eb4 and Eb5 extension in the senate bill we are screwed royally. There is heavy misuse in the Eb4 category, so much so that it Eb4 and EB5 may retrogress for India!!!!, there will never be any spillover from this category.
What amazes me is congress has been consistently backing eb4 and eb5 every year by extending it but nobody cares about eb2 and eb3. Not even provisions like STEM are making it.
To people who say stem will not happen, visa recapture will not happen and only solution is CIR because hispanic caucus or anti immigrants will not allow piece meal immigration legislation, I wonder how EB4 and Eb5 are consistenly being passed every year by the congress.
What amazes me is congress has been consistently backing eb4 and eb5 every year by extending it but nobody cares about eb2 and eb3. Not even provisions like STEM are making it.
To people who say stem will not happen, visa recapture will not happen and only solution is CIR because hispanic caucus or anti immigrants will not allow piece meal immigration legislation, I wonder how EB4 and Eb5 are consistenly being passed every year by the congress.
GCNaseeb
02-06 03:40 PM
Anything like this calls for "accommodating beneficiary" and its illegal when it comes to Immigration. Both sponsoring employer and beneficiary will be in problem. This is well discussed before and at least my Attorney did not recommend.
Ask your company to demote you to developer position once u get ur green card. GC is for a future job position.
Ask your company to demote you to developer position once u get ur green card. GC is for a future job position.
more...
510picker
November 30th, 2008, 06:41 PM
Owen, when did you go over to the dark side? :eek:
ghost
09-21 04:27 PM
Since I did my master's here. I think they filed my case under EB1...I need to re-check. If this is the case then how long does it take. Yes I'm an indian.
EB1, EB2 and EB3 depend NOT on your personal qualifications but on the job requirements, which are:
EB3 - BS or BS+<5 yrs
EB2 - BS+>5 yrs or MS
EB1 - PhD
Find out from your employer or from the job ad that you've been hired for. Good Luck!
EB1, EB2 and EB3 depend NOT on your personal qualifications but on the job requirements, which are:
EB3 - BS or BS+<5 yrs
EB2 - BS+>5 yrs or MS
EB1 - PhD
Find out from your employer or from the job ad that you've been hired for. Good Luck!
more...
saurav_4096
05-07 04:53 PM
I do not see update on online status on the registered cases in my portfolio in TSC.
My wife had applied for AP in first week of Feb, we have received AP in a months time but online status still shows "Application received on Feb xx 2009........"
Saurav
My wife had applied for AP in first week of Feb, we have received AP in a months time but online status still shows "Application received on Feb xx 2009........"
Saurav
shivarajan
06-27 09:25 PM
Not sure if its really big newz.... Atleast in Holland (Amsterdam -- near dam square) u can find pretty much many shops selling "drugs" openly (** kinds of narcotics) openly with many Hindu gods on the cover. The seller only knows the artistic value but are unaware of how they r hurting some religious values.
:confused:
:confused:
more...
desibechara
09-22 07:48 PM
hi:
I am not on I140 now but in my situation ( whenever that comes, if that comes!)..I have been working for my current emplyer for 7 years and if I were to file I140 tomorrow :) ..am I supposed to look & get the job experience from soebody I worked around 7 years ago...they don't even remember me!
my situation- labor filed Oct 2001( after 9/11 happened, I could have applied earlier but for my stupidity!)..(my attorney filed in EB3 ..and I do not know why..)..and I am stuck in the mud now...
please let me know...because I will have to really folow up on them..
Sandeep
I am not on I140 now but in my situation ( whenever that comes, if that comes!)..I have been working for my current emplyer for 7 years and if I were to file I140 tomorrow :) ..am I supposed to look & get the job experience from soebody I worked around 7 years ago...they don't even remember me!
my situation- labor filed Oct 2001( after 9/11 happened, I could have applied earlier but for my stupidity!)..(my attorney filed in EB3 ..and I do not know why..)..and I am stuck in the mud now...
please let me know...because I will have to really folow up on them..
Sandeep
freddy22
04-25 02:34 PM
Then why you live here...pack your bags you Big A Hole.
I live here b4ecause of the country not the PEOPLE who are all mainly A HOLETTES like you
I live here b4ecause of the country not the PEOPLE who are all mainly A HOLETTES like you
more...
immigration_law
08-24 07:08 PM
My greencard application has stuck in name checks for 3 years. I recently filed a Writ of Mandamus. Before going to court, U.S. Attorneys filed to dismiss my case, citing that the adjustment of status is discretionary and the FBI can take as long as they want to do background checks.
I am hesitating whether to go ahead with a court hearing. In addition, I am not happy with my current lawyer.
Can someone recommend a good lawyer to me? Many thanks!
YL
Hi Yingli,
I am sorry you have been stuck in the FBI name check for three long years. The fact that you have a motion to dismiss filed against you is not your lawyers fault. This is the standard operating procedure for all US Attorneys across the country.
The most important thing right now is that your attorney respond to the motion and get it denied. Once this is accomplished, your attorney can shift to offense and win the case for you.
~Justin Fok
I am hesitating whether to go ahead with a court hearing. In addition, I am not happy with my current lawyer.
Can someone recommend a good lawyer to me? Many thanks!
YL
Hi Yingli,
I am sorry you have been stuck in the FBI name check for three long years. The fact that you have a motion to dismiss filed against you is not your lawyers fault. This is the standard operating procedure for all US Attorneys across the country.
The most important thing right now is that your attorney respond to the motion and get it denied. Once this is accomplished, your attorney can shift to offense and win the case for you.
~Justin Fok
krishmunn
02-15 12:53 PM
I am quoting it from the attorney's web site as I am not able to find the guide line from the DHS/USCIS source. You can google for further information.
Finally, the sponsored foreign national cannot be involved in the recruitment process in any manner. S/he cannot participate in reviewing resumes or interviewing candidates.
And when OP INQUIRED you stretched it to INVOLVED ? I mean , I know both starts with IN :) but INQUIRE and INVOLVE has entirely different meaning.
OP Inquired about the process does not mean that he is Involved in the process.
Finally, the sponsored foreign national cannot be involved in the recruitment process in any manner. S/he cannot participate in reviewing resumes or interviewing candidates.
And when OP INQUIRED you stretched it to INVOLVED ? I mean , I know both starts with IN :) but INQUIRE and INVOLVE has entirely different meaning.
OP Inquired about the process does not mean that he is Involved in the process.
more...
WhatheHeck
07-12 01:33 PM
Thank you Dhirajs98 and Pappu.
eb3retro
08-21 05:46 PM
This is great - thank you!
I'll be traveling to/from SFO. Have the new AP Receipt Notice.
jazz
all the best jazz..
I'll be traveling to/from SFO. Have the new AP Receipt Notice.
jazz
all the best jazz..
more...
coolpal
03-20 09:21 AM
Hi,
I am in the same boat... but a little complicated. I am working for one of the big TARP funded firms as a consultant for almost a year now. I applied for h1 extension last june (my first 3 years was ending sep 30th 2008), but that application was pending forever, and I heard there were some queries with my (ex) employer (company A) for excessive use of h1bs... so applied for h1 transfer (while the first one was still pending) to company B in Dec 2008. I received a RFE asking for client letters, contracts etc, for h1b transfer application to company B in Jan 2009, for which we responded in first week of Feb 2009 with all the requested info including W2s from my first year of H1 till now.. my application was still pending as of last week, so we applied for premium processing on friday, and yesterday, I got an update saying they sent another RFE :(
I guess the contract that we sent for the first RFE probably had the contract end date as Feb 28th 2009.. not sure, but that might be the reason for the second RFE. Problem is my client usually approves contracts 4 - 6 months at a time, and I currently have a valid contract till June 30th 2009, and I know it is being extended beyond that, but I can't get the proof until June... hope I get it approved this time :mad:
I was always paid more than the prevailing wage and was never put on bench... just had some unpaid vacation a couple of times (for 3 weeks each) for visiting India... I even worked on CPT and OPT back in 2004 and have the W2s for them as well... in fact, I even sent them paystubs for all of 2008... man what else do they want? my life?? :mad:
pal :)
I am in the same boat... but a little complicated. I am working for one of the big TARP funded firms as a consultant for almost a year now. I applied for h1 extension last june (my first 3 years was ending sep 30th 2008), but that application was pending forever, and I heard there were some queries with my (ex) employer (company A) for excessive use of h1bs... so applied for h1 transfer (while the first one was still pending) to company B in Dec 2008. I received a RFE asking for client letters, contracts etc, for h1b transfer application to company B in Jan 2009, for which we responded in first week of Feb 2009 with all the requested info including W2s from my first year of H1 till now.. my application was still pending as of last week, so we applied for premium processing on friday, and yesterday, I got an update saying they sent another RFE :(
I guess the contract that we sent for the first RFE probably had the contract end date as Feb 28th 2009.. not sure, but that might be the reason for the second RFE. Problem is my client usually approves contracts 4 - 6 months at a time, and I currently have a valid contract till June 30th 2009, and I know it is being extended beyond that, but I can't get the proof until June... hope I get it approved this time :mad:
I was always paid more than the prevailing wage and was never put on bench... just had some unpaid vacation a couple of times (for 3 weeks each) for visiting India... I even worked on CPT and OPT back in 2004 and have the W2s for them as well... in fact, I even sent them paystubs for all of 2008... man what else do they want? my life?? :mad:
pal :)
Munna Bhai
10-18 04:23 PM
Can someone please post all the documents required for filing AC21 ?
You don't need any document to invoke AC21, if you are on H1b, do the H1b transfer based on I-485 receipt and if you are using EAD, just go and join other company.
You will receive RFE, at that time you need to show that you have paystub,experience letter etc and you have used AC21(180 days pending).
You don't need any document to invoke AC21, if you are on H1b, do the H1b transfer based on I-485 receipt and if you are using EAD, just go and join other company.
You will receive RFE, at that time you need to show that you have paystub,experience letter etc and you have used AC21(180 days pending).
more...
sankap
10-28 12:01 PM
Skilled immigration: Green-card blues | The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/17366155)
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
nb_des
09-27 02:31 PM
According to Rajiv Khanna's web site PD can be ported without any other condition (except for fraud). I have seen several postings from other members saying the PD can be ported only when previous employer does not revoke petition which does not seem to be the case as per text below from FAQ in immigration.com
1. Can you please explain if priority dates can be transferred?
2. What If I-140 Is Denied?
A29 1. Sure. Here is the law:
CHANGING EMPLOYER BEFORE I-140 APPROVAL
If a person changes employers before obtaining I-140 approval, they can carry NOTHING forward to the next employer. They have to start their labor certification all over again with the new employer. There are some very limited exceptions to this rule (for example, in general, a change in employers requires a new application for certification by the new employer unless the same job opportunity and the same area of intended employment are preserved. International Contractors, Inc., and Technical Programming Services, Inc., 89-INA-278 (June 13, 1990). A change in employers does not necessitate a reapplication for certification where the alien is working in the exact same position, performing the same duties, and in the same area of intended employment for the same salary or wage). Neverthless, you can discuss your case specifically with your own lawyers. If you wish to get a second opinion from us, we expect a paid consultation.
2. That situation is legally the same as changing employers before I-140 employer.
CHANGING EMPLOYER AFTER I-140 APPROVAL
If a person has received an I-140 approval through an employer, the priority date then permanently belongs to him or her. Under very limited circumstances (such as fraud) INS may revoke the I-140 thus causing a loss of priority date.
If such a person changes employers, their priority date will remain the old one, even though they have to process their labor certification and I-140 again with the new employer. It does not matter where in USA the new job is located, what the new job title is or whether the new job falls under EB-2 or EB-3. The priority date is still transferable.
We recommend that an applicant keep at least a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
1. Can you please explain if priority dates can be transferred?
2. What If I-140 Is Denied?
A29 1. Sure. Here is the law:
CHANGING EMPLOYER BEFORE I-140 APPROVAL
If a person changes employers before obtaining I-140 approval, they can carry NOTHING forward to the next employer. They have to start their labor certification all over again with the new employer. There are some very limited exceptions to this rule (for example, in general, a change in employers requires a new application for certification by the new employer unless the same job opportunity and the same area of intended employment are preserved. International Contractors, Inc., and Technical Programming Services, Inc., 89-INA-278 (June 13, 1990). A change in employers does not necessitate a reapplication for certification where the alien is working in the exact same position, performing the same duties, and in the same area of intended employment for the same salary or wage). Neverthless, you can discuss your case specifically with your own lawyers. If you wish to get a second opinion from us, we expect a paid consultation.
2. That situation is legally the same as changing employers before I-140 employer.
CHANGING EMPLOYER AFTER I-140 APPROVAL
If a person has received an I-140 approval through an employer, the priority date then permanently belongs to him or her. Under very limited circumstances (such as fraud) INS may revoke the I-140 thus causing a loss of priority date.
If such a person changes employers, their priority date will remain the old one, even though they have to process their labor certification and I-140 again with the new employer. It does not matter where in USA the new job is located, what the new job title is or whether the new job falls under EB-2 or EB-3. The priority date is still transferable.
We recommend that an applicant keep at least a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
gconmymind
03-31 05:39 PM
I do not think it is a normal scenario. A lot of my friends work for in the software industry. There are generally no delays in getting a paystub if salary is deposited regularly.
Please ask your employer to be more prompt at providing pay stubs as you need those for everything that requires income proof.
Please ask your employer to be more prompt at providing pay stubs as you need those for everything that requires income proof.
bkarnik
04-14 08:24 PM
Call is on April 14th (Sat) at 2.00 pm EDT.
Please check your emails. If you have not received an email, please email shrey@immigrationvoice.org with your phone number/your id on IV and I will call back.
Ragz:
OOPS!! April 15th, Saturday:D See you then.
Please check your emails. If you have not received an email, please email shrey@immigrationvoice.org with your phone number/your id on IV and I will call back.
Ragz:
OOPS!! April 15th, Saturday:D See you then.
xlxoel
05-20 09:16 PM
Hi everybody!
I applied to renew my travel permit on May 20th 2009, I just got the following email from immigration:
Receipt Number: XXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I131 , APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD
On May 20, 2009, we mailed a notice requesting initial evidence in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence requested. Meanwhile, processing of this case is on hold until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the evidence requested and a decision is made, you will be notified by mail. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your mailing address.
I applied ONLINE this time.
My last year parole expired on May 3rd 2009.
What type of evidence can they ask for a travel permit?
Someone on the same boat?
I also got an email about my I-140 five days before saying:
Receipt Number: XXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I140 , IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On May 15, 2009 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
I haven't received any of the letters!
I applied to renew my travel permit on May 20th 2009, I just got the following email from immigration:
Receipt Number: XXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I131 , APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: REQUEST FOR INITIAL EVIDENCE SENT, CASE PLACED ON HOLD
On May 20, 2009, we mailed a notice requesting initial evidence in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence requested. Meanwhile, processing of this case is on hold until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the evidence requested and a decision is made, you will be notified by mail. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your mailing address.
I applied ONLINE this time.
My last year parole expired on May 3rd 2009.
What type of evidence can they ask for a travel permit?
Someone on the same boat?
I also got an email about my I-140 five days before saying:
Receipt Number: XXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I140 , IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
On May 15, 2009 we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
I haven't received any of the letters!
No comments:
Post a Comment