sharadara
09-01 01:17 AM
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I am moving to Spain because my husband got a job offer there.
FredG
May 1st, 2005, 01:58 PM
I'd say you captured the action just fine. All that bird tracking was probably good practice for this.
Legal
07-16 08:39 AM
I am not sure how important the processing dates update, If you look in , there are many approvals whose processing dates are well beyond Jul 17 (for TSC). This makes me question what is the processing date updates mean?
It means ALL the cases filed before 7/17/07 have been processed, doesn't mean they are not working on cases beyond july 17th.
It means ALL the cases filed before 7/17/07 have been processed, doesn't mean they are not working on cases beyond july 17th.
grupak
03-14 04:41 PM
Infact I know one Texas member who has contributed a percentage of his tax return last year, and will be doing it again.
BTW.. please explain what is this $600 rebate? I already filed my taxes myself, and maybe I missed this.
Its part of Bush's stimulus package... I don't don't think anything is required on your part besides filing taxes. The rebates should be coming in around May according to NPR, if I am not mistaken. $600 per individual filing. In a joint filing $600 each for husband and wife, $300 for each kid (ceiling?)
BTW.. please explain what is this $600 rebate? I already filed my taxes myself, and maybe I missed this.
Its part of Bush's stimulus package... I don't don't think anything is required on your part besides filing taxes. The rebates should be coming in around May according to NPR, if I am not mistaken. $600 per individual filing. In a joint filing $600 each for husband and wife, $300 for each kid (ceiling?)
more...
gman
07-29 05:47 PM
what was job description before becoming Director? Did you apply AC21 by default? Seems like you do not have to notify INS unless you get an RFE
atlfp
04-08 03:22 PM
Legal immigration IS all about competitiveness. Why there is an EB based immigration category at all? It's primary because they want to be able retain talent. As such, one of the strong argument for the current EB situation will be that if they do not do it, this country's competitiveness edge will diminish. This is the truth and I think most law maker is able to understand that.
remember that PACE bill is not primarily about legal immigration .. it is about US S&T competitiveness .. what is to say that the anti-immigration guys wont make the pitch that immigration issues should be kept out of such a bill, as they did with S1932 ? Agreed PACE act in its current form is favorable to us, but there is no gaurantee all our provisions will go through unopposed ... rest assured the likes of numbersUSA are as busy as we are.
remember that PACE bill is not primarily about legal immigration .. it is about US S&T competitiveness .. what is to say that the anti-immigration guys wont make the pitch that immigration issues should be kept out of such a bill, as they did with S1932 ? Agreed PACE act in its current form is favorable to us, but there is no gaurantee all our provisions will go through unopposed ... rest assured the likes of numbersUSA are as busy as we are.
more...
snathan
05-23 03:44 PM
I am on H1 since 2005 and renewed last year and it is valid till april 2010.
Last year i joined directly to the client and they are processing my GC.
When they hired me they gave me list of projects and future plans for more then 5 years but this work is not IT driven and manufacutring in having late back attitude so my fear is if there are not projects in the future i may loose the job then at that point i will have very little time to get my labour approves abd re start the process...
So as back up i want to have a labour approve based on future employment and if possible have 140 processed.
guide me if this is not the correct thing to do...
regards
I guess you can have two GC process. but only at the time of 485, you need to decide which one to go. But I am not very sure about this.
Last year i joined directly to the client and they are processing my GC.
When they hired me they gave me list of projects and future plans for more then 5 years but this work is not IT driven and manufacutring in having late back attitude so my fear is if there are not projects in the future i may loose the job then at that point i will have very little time to get my labour approves abd re start the process...
So as back up i want to have a labour approve based on future employment and if possible have 140 processed.
guide me if this is not the correct thing to do...
regards
I guess you can have two GC process. but only at the time of 485, you need to decide which one to go. But I am not very sure about this.
RDB
09-02 11:09 PM
That's the only logical thing to do right now, sending original EAD might be a bit risky.....i will update after my info pass appointment.
more...
whitecollarslave
08-31 11:34 AM
I filed AOS during July 07 fiasco. It has been more than 15 months since the first fingerprint but I have not yet received 2nd fingerprint notice. I noticed a SLUD in May/09 but no notice. Anybody else out there who filed in July but don't have second fingerprint notice yet?
augustus
05-12 03:13 PM
His position requires Masters Degree
more...
raamskl
07-22 01:17 AM
Hi,
What happens if a EAD is obtained for a person on a h4 visa and the person does not work or works partially? Is that an issue, like bench period being an issue while on H1.
I am thinking that, that should not be an issue as one doesn't need a visa to get back to the country while on EAD, as AP would be available. And potentially bench period turns out to be an issue in H1 becoz consulates tend to look at ur W2's from previous years while u go for stamping, which wouldn't be the case while on EAD. Am I right?
What happens if a EAD is obtained for a person on a h4 visa and the person does not work or works partially? Is that an issue, like bench period being an issue while on H1.
I am thinking that, that should not be an issue as one doesn't need a visa to get back to the country while on EAD, as AP would be available. And potentially bench period turns out to be an issue in H1 becoz consulates tend to look at ur W2's from previous years while u go for stamping, which wouldn't be the case while on EAD. Am I right?
royus77
05-28 11:19 PM
Heard this from our company lawyer .... uscis will issue RFE for all I-485 applications that are pending for a while to make sure the applicant still has the job offer. He got this from a very reliable source. I dont know how true it is...just sharing what I have heard.
Can you share your company lawyer's name before when you are spreading these kind of speculative rumors ....use commonsense before posting
Can you share your company lawyer's name before when you are spreading these kind of speculative rumors ....use commonsense before posting
more...
Dakshini R. Sen
06-25 11:12 PM
My H1 filed & approved thorugh company A from October 2004.
H1 then transferred to company B & approved from Nov 2005.
My GC process (EB3 Category) started & labor filed through company C for future job in Feb 2006. Labor approved & I-140 filed in June 2006. RFE received in April 2007 & documents received by INS in May 2007. SINCE THEN I-140 is pending... I-485 & EAD filed in July fiasco. EAD approved and renewed once. Valid until september 2010.
My H1 extension through company B denied in Jan 2009 (H1 expired in september 2008). MTR filed in Feb 2009, still pending. This made my EAD active as I have continued working for company B.
Another H1 filed through company C (GC sponsoring company) in April 2009 and RFE notice dated 23rd June, 2009 yet to be received.
In the process of filing 2nd labor through Comapny C ( same company), but this time under EB2 category.
At this point, my questions are:
1) Since my new H1 is through my GC sponsoring company, will RFE for H1 impact old GC process & new GC process?
2) Is my old pending I-140 eligible for premium processing since it is stuck for almost 3 years now? If yes, is it worth doing it?
The reason I want to get my old I-140 to be approved so that I can retain my old priority date.
Experts please share some knwoledge and suggest the steps best for my situation....Am really stressed out...
Thank You in advance...
The RFE on the H1 will not have a negative effect on the GC as long as the employer and the job offer are legitimate. Yes, you can premium process your I-140. Effective June 29, 2009, USCIS will resume Premium Processing Service for I-140 forms.
Dakshini R. Sen,
Attorney at Law
212-242-1677
713-278-1677
H1 then transferred to company B & approved from Nov 2005.
My GC process (EB3 Category) started & labor filed through company C for future job in Feb 2006. Labor approved & I-140 filed in June 2006. RFE received in April 2007 & documents received by INS in May 2007. SINCE THEN I-140 is pending... I-485 & EAD filed in July fiasco. EAD approved and renewed once. Valid until september 2010.
My H1 extension through company B denied in Jan 2009 (H1 expired in september 2008). MTR filed in Feb 2009, still pending. This made my EAD active as I have continued working for company B.
Another H1 filed through company C (GC sponsoring company) in April 2009 and RFE notice dated 23rd June, 2009 yet to be received.
In the process of filing 2nd labor through Comapny C ( same company), but this time under EB2 category.
At this point, my questions are:
1) Since my new H1 is through my GC sponsoring company, will RFE for H1 impact old GC process & new GC process?
2) Is my old pending I-140 eligible for premium processing since it is stuck for almost 3 years now? If yes, is it worth doing it?
The reason I want to get my old I-140 to be approved so that I can retain my old priority date.
Experts please share some knwoledge and suggest the steps best for my situation....Am really stressed out...
Thank You in advance...
The RFE on the H1 will not have a negative effect on the GC as long as the employer and the job offer are legitimate. Yes, you can premium process your I-140. Effective June 29, 2009, USCIS will resume Premium Processing Service for I-140 forms.
Dakshini R. Sen,
Attorney at Law
212-242-1677
713-278-1677
seekerofpeace
04-23 04:54 PM
Hmmm you may be right.....
Well then I'd have to inform them....But still the attorney always gets a copy of an RFE right since I had it through the company attorney....
As far as getting GC is concerned I am still far from that stage.....so there is no chance of missing that....I am not counting on it....
But since I have signed that G28 form ....attorney always gets a copy of the correspondence from USCIS....
All this is to avoid getting an RFE (for extraneous reason like address change) while I am unemployed ...
Correct me if i am wrong.
SoP
Well then I'd have to inform them....But still the attorney always gets a copy of an RFE right since I had it through the company attorney....
As far as getting GC is concerned I am still far from that stage.....so there is no chance of missing that....I am not counting on it....
But since I have signed that G28 form ....attorney always gets a copy of the correspondence from USCIS....
All this is to avoid getting an RFE (for extraneous reason like address change) while I am unemployed ...
Correct me if i am wrong.
SoP
more...
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
pappu
03-29 02:37 PM
My friend's PERM got approved in 5 days in Dec '09. His I-140 got approved in 3 weeks in March '10. This could be an exceptional case as I have not seen any other such approvals..
If he is ROW EB2 he will get his greencard soon. I485 processing times are reduced to 4 months average per USCIS Director.
If he is ROW EB2 he will get his greencard soon. I485 processing times are reduced to 4 months average per USCIS Director.
more...
kevinkris
04-17 08:22 PM
Even if you transferred you can still work for old company and keep on working there without joining new company.
That's what i believe. Please consult attorney for confirmation
guys have a question for u..
i'm invoking Ac21 and joining new employer.. but new employer is telling me that they dont want me to take any steps untill the H1 transfer is approved and in hand, and I have to give 2 weeks notice to my current employer after the approval..
now the question is that, after the approval will I be eligible to work for my older company for those 2 weeks since the H1 is already approved/transfered to the new employer?? has anyone faced such situation??...
That's what i believe. Please consult attorney for confirmation
guys have a question for u..
i'm invoking Ac21 and joining new employer.. but new employer is telling me that they dont want me to take any steps untill the H1 transfer is approved and in hand, and I have to give 2 weeks notice to my current employer after the approval..
now the question is that, after the approval will I be eligible to work for my older company for those 2 weeks since the H1 is already approved/transfered to the new employer?? has anyone faced such situation??...
GEEVER
January 30th, 2008, 11:06 AM
I've Just Started Photo Classes A Couple Of Months Ago...i Just Wanna Buy Something That I Can Afford Now Just To Get Used To The Idea...i Was Looking For Those Sony Cybershot... I Really Don't Know How They Work..but They're Cheap I Think, Then I Went To Nikon's And Saw More Powerful Cameras At 3times The Price Of A Cybershot..!!!! Would U Recommend A Sony? I'll Obviuosly Buy A Better One On Time, When I Get More Professional =)
rogerdepena
07-18 01:25 PM
It's a free country and everyone, including Lou Dobbs have a right to voice their opinion - boycotts will not serve any purpose.
If you feel so passionately about it, here's what I suggest. Create a blog/website and every single day after his program, post an article pointing out factual inaccuracies in Lou's reports and views. If you don't want to watch the program, then CNN publishes a transcript a couple of hours later - follow that.
It's hard work but believe me - do it consistently and do it well and you will see that it will work.
Best of luck and post the address of your site/blog here should you decide to do it.
blogging is not a problem. i'll try to make one at eblog. ill post the link when im ready. i would also like to ask others to pm me Lou Dobbs-related issues so that i can look at it and write an article about it.
If you feel so passionately about it, here's what I suggest. Create a blog/website and every single day after his program, post an article pointing out factual inaccuracies in Lou's reports and views. If you don't want to watch the program, then CNN publishes a transcript a couple of hours later - follow that.
It's hard work but believe me - do it consistently and do it well and you will see that it will work.
Best of luck and post the address of your site/blog here should you decide to do it.
blogging is not a problem. i'll try to make one at eblog. ill post the link when im ready. i would also like to ask others to pm me Lou Dobbs-related issues so that i can look at it and write an article about it.
serg
10-31 11:21 AM
...If USCIS takes more than 3 months to renew your EAD, you could visit the nearest USCIS field office and request for an interim EAD after you have accrued 90 days of filing EAD renewal....
Didn't they stopped issuing interim EADs half an year ago?
Didn't they stopped issuing interim EADs half an year ago?
ras
04-02 09:05 PM
My employer recd an RFE on Jan 8. The Requested Evidence is supposed to be provided in 12 weeks from the date of the RFE letter(Jan 8).
I am told that my attorny didn't respond to this RFE. Is it 84 days which means till April 2nd is the deadline when it is supposed to be answered. If that is the case I crossed the deadline by a day or two.
Can you experienced folks let me know if I crossed the deadline. Is there still a room to answer the ability to pay RFE?
my employer said he would answer RFE (ability to pay) if some financial adjustments are made. Is it ok and make this financial adjustment so that he can responde to the RFE inspite of the 12 week deadline just passed.
Will a delayed response for RFE for couple of days at USCIS does matter? Will they reject the evidence if they dont recieve in time?
Is it better to wait till the I140 is denied and then open an MTR? How easy and practical is it to open an MTR and successfully plead for the I140 approval?
Your early response helps me take a decision.
I have already filed 485 based on this RFE pending I140. that will go waste if I140 is denied.
I am told that my attorny didn't respond to this RFE. Is it 84 days which means till April 2nd is the deadline when it is supposed to be answered. If that is the case I crossed the deadline by a day or two.
Can you experienced folks let me know if I crossed the deadline. Is there still a room to answer the ability to pay RFE?
my employer said he would answer RFE (ability to pay) if some financial adjustments are made. Is it ok and make this financial adjustment so that he can responde to the RFE inspite of the 12 week deadline just passed.
Will a delayed response for RFE for couple of days at USCIS does matter? Will they reject the evidence if they dont recieve in time?
Is it better to wait till the I140 is denied and then open an MTR? How easy and practical is it to open an MTR and successfully plead for the I140 approval?
Your early response helps me take a decision.
I have already filed 485 based on this RFE pending I140. that will go waste if I140 is denied.
No comments:
Post a Comment