harryom
03-24 06:05 PM
:oCan anyone explain to me how to create new thread, I don't see any options.
Thanks Gurus':o
Mr. HarryOm,
I was really hoping to get my question answered thru this thread. Can you please open another thread for yours ?
Thanks,
ampudhukode
Thanks Gurus':o
Mr. HarryOm,
I was really hoping to get my question answered thru this thread. Can you please open another thread for yours ?
Thanks,
ampudhukode
wallpaper 1920x Hd Wallpaper Cars.
amitjoey
10-26 01:33 PM
The only people that know what we are going through and how much we have had to suffer becos of this backlog is us (the same people). Unless we open our mouth outside the IV Forum, talk to our congressmen/women, how can we expect relief?
LostInGCProcess
08-18 07:36 PM
I thank you all for your encouraging and kind response.
The new job I have is like a contract job to a client. A big consulting firm has hired me. So, I have not yet spoken to them about any letters that I may require in future should there be an RFE.
My situation was very desperate to get a job...i was without job for more then 3 months and its hard to run a family...and I came to the point where we were planning to return back home....but I got the job just in the last minute, i must say....The requirement for the job was, only GC or Citizens. I told them I am on EAD they said fine we can take you as long as we don't have to sponsor you....So, I took it.
The other issue is, I am getting paid far less then what I used to get. ..so, I don't know if that's acceptable or not with regards to the GC process.
But the work is same. What I used to do earlier, I am doing the same kind of job here with the new client.
So, all these factors has caused lot of confusion in my mind whether to continue with old address or not. I still have 2 more months on the lease for the old apt address...so I got some more time to think about this job.
Thanks again for all your advice.
Chanduv, I know you started a thread on "RFE for AR-11" to poll, but I did not followup on that.
The new job I have is like a contract job to a client. A big consulting firm has hired me. So, I have not yet spoken to them about any letters that I may require in future should there be an RFE.
My situation was very desperate to get a job...i was without job for more then 3 months and its hard to run a family...and I came to the point where we were planning to return back home....but I got the job just in the last minute, i must say....The requirement for the job was, only GC or Citizens. I told them I am on EAD they said fine we can take you as long as we don't have to sponsor you....So, I took it.
The other issue is, I am getting paid far less then what I used to get. ..so, I don't know if that's acceptable or not with regards to the GC process.
But the work is same. What I used to do earlier, I am doing the same kind of job here with the new client.
So, all these factors has caused lot of confusion in my mind whether to continue with old address or not. I still have 2 more months on the lease for the old apt address...so I got some more time to think about this job.
Thanks again for all your advice.
Chanduv, I know you started a thread on "RFE for AR-11" to poll, but I did not followup on that.
2011 1920x1080-HD-wallpaper-177.jpg
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
08-05 01:42 PM
when we do not know what is in the bill why are we assuming he will be calling for
adjustment of status to Legal Immigrants.
Grow up.................
If the title of this thread is what is in the bill then there are so many hurdles before it will even be voted on.
So relax and smile like pappu :) :)
adjustment of status to Legal Immigrants.
Grow up.................
If the title of this thread is what is in the bill then there are so many hurdles before it will even be voted on.
So relax and smile like pappu :) :)
more...
GreenCard4US
03-20 04:57 PM
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200903210312.htm
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Washington (PTI): In a blow to Indian professionals, the U.S. on Friday announced additional measures for hiring of foreign specialists under the H-1B visa work programme making it more difficult for the companies receiving federal aid money to hire overseas workers.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced the measures to enforce the provisions of the new Employ American Workers Act (EAWA) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which prohibits hiring of H-1B visa holders by American companies who receive the federal aid money. Indian nationals account for bulk of the coveted H-1B visas.
These measures come about ten days before the USCIS starts accepting petitions for new H-1B visas for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
"Under this legislation any company that has received covered funding and seeks to hire new H-1B workers is considered an 'H-1B dependent employer'.
All H-1B dependent employers must make additional attestations to the U.S. Department of Labour (DOL) when filing the Labour Condition Application (LCA)," the USCIS said.
"USCIS reminds petitioners that a valid LCA must be on file with DOL at the time the H-1B petition is filed with USCIS," it said.
This means that if the petitioner indicates on its petition that it is subject to the EAWA, but the Labour Condition Application does not contain the proper attestations relating to H-1B dependent employers, USCIS will deny the H-1B petition, the statement said.
Besides, the USCIS is revising Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker, to include a question asking whether the petitioner has received covered funding.
USCIS is expected to post this revised form on its web site in time for the next cap subject to H-1B filing period that begins on April l.
While USCIS encourages petitioners, whenever possible, to use the most up-to-date form, USCIS will not require use of the revised form in time for the start of the filing period for fiscal year 2010, it said.
At the same time, USCIS urged H-1B petitioners who have already prepared packages for mailing using the previous Form I-129 (January 2009 version) to complete only the page in the revised version of the Form I-129 (March 2009) which has the new question on EAWA attestation requirements and to file this single page with the prepared package.
USCIS said EAWA applies to any Labour Condition Application (LCA) and/or H-1B petition filed on or after February 17, involving any employment by a new employer, including concurrent employment and regardless of whether the beneficiary is already in H-1B status.
The EAWA also applies to new hires based on a petition approved before February 17, 2009, if the H-1B employee had not actually commenced employment before that date.
However, EAWA does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking to change the status of a beneficiary already working for the employer in another work-authorised category. It also does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an extension of stay for a current employee with the same employer.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Washington (PTI): In a blow to Indian professionals, the U.S. on Friday announced additional measures for hiring of foreign specialists under the H-1B visa work programme making it more difficult for the companies receiving federal aid money to hire overseas workers.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced the measures to enforce the provisions of the new Employ American Workers Act (EAWA) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which prohibits hiring of H-1B visa holders by American companies who receive the federal aid money. Indian nationals account for bulk of the coveted H-1B visas.
These measures come about ten days before the USCIS starts accepting petitions for new H-1B visas for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
"Under this legislation any company that has received covered funding and seeks to hire new H-1B workers is considered an 'H-1B dependent employer'.
All H-1B dependent employers must make additional attestations to the U.S. Department of Labour (DOL) when filing the Labour Condition Application (LCA)," the USCIS said.
"USCIS reminds petitioners that a valid LCA must be on file with DOL at the time the H-1B petition is filed with USCIS," it said.
This means that if the petitioner indicates on its petition that it is subject to the EAWA, but the Labour Condition Application does not contain the proper attestations relating to H-1B dependent employers, USCIS will deny the H-1B petition, the statement said.
Besides, the USCIS is revising Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker, to include a question asking whether the petitioner has received covered funding.
USCIS is expected to post this revised form on its web site in time for the next cap subject to H-1B filing period that begins on April l.
While USCIS encourages petitioners, whenever possible, to use the most up-to-date form, USCIS will not require use of the revised form in time for the start of the filing period for fiscal year 2010, it said.
At the same time, USCIS urged H-1B petitioners who have already prepared packages for mailing using the previous Form I-129 (January 2009 version) to complete only the page in the revised version of the Form I-129 (March 2009) which has the new question on EAWA attestation requirements and to file this single page with the prepared package.
USCIS said EAWA applies to any Labour Condition Application (LCA) and/or H-1B petition filed on or after February 17, involving any employment by a new employer, including concurrent employment and regardless of whether the beneficiary is already in H-1B status.
The EAWA also applies to new hires based on a petition approved before February 17, 2009, if the H-1B employee had not actually commenced employment before that date.
However, EAWA does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking to change the status of a beneficiary already working for the employer in another work-authorised category. It also does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an extension of stay for a current employee with the same employer.
learning01
05-05 01:53 PM
in this administration. Corrupt and not working. Sad state of affairs.
GOP's Ed Rollins: Hookergate is "Big"
By Justin Rood - May 3, 2006, 10:15 PM
GOP super-strategist Ed Rollins (late of the Katherine Harris campaign) made a couple interesting comments on Charlie Rose last night. First, he indicated strongly that he believes a number of the other lawmakers in trouble with Hookergate are Defense appropriators. He also says as many as 15 lawmakers could get indicted over the mess in the next few months.
Maybe Ed's playing the expectations game: if voters buy the 15 number, and only seven actually get busted, well then the kids aren't so bad after all. Still, it's interesting speculation from an insider. I just found the show transcript on Nexis -- emphasis is mine:
ED ROLLINS. . . If this House scandal is as big as I think it is from talking to people that are around it -- of course it started with Cunningham and it`s moving beyond that.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Duke Cunningham.
ED ROLLINS: Duke Cunningham, a congressman from San Diego who took bribes. There was a real little cabal on the Defense Appropriations Committee in which a couple of people who basically made an awful lot of money off of defense contractors and basically rewarded a bunch of members, Republicans.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Including a story that broke over the weekend, perhaps the use of prostitutes.
Harpers Magazine: Red Lights on Capitol Hill? (http://www.harpers.org/sb-red-lights-on-capitol-hill.html)
WSJ: Prosecutors May Widen Congressional-Bribe Case - Cunningham Is Suspected Of Asking for Prostitutes; Were Others Involved? (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114610728002837324-FnHaEYAFT_b7QFGwPxnAIiEcHEI_20060527.html?mod=tff_ main_tff_top)
My feeling is that there wont be any new bills for years sometimes. Both house and senate are deeply divided on the immigration issues. All of them want reform. But nobody can agree on any proposals being put forward to.
Most of them want 11 million illegal immigrants here for their contributions. Most of them dont want 11 million illegal immigrants when they look at what they have to pay for their contributions.
When taking into account of all of these I feel like people will argue for sometime and then will become happy with whats left. The 11 million will stay as illegal for some more years. And the legal immigrants will wait in the line for their rest of the life.
GOP's Ed Rollins: Hookergate is "Big"
By Justin Rood - May 3, 2006, 10:15 PM
GOP super-strategist Ed Rollins (late of the Katherine Harris campaign) made a couple interesting comments on Charlie Rose last night. First, he indicated strongly that he believes a number of the other lawmakers in trouble with Hookergate are Defense appropriators. He also says as many as 15 lawmakers could get indicted over the mess in the next few months.
Maybe Ed's playing the expectations game: if voters buy the 15 number, and only seven actually get busted, well then the kids aren't so bad after all. Still, it's interesting speculation from an insider. I just found the show transcript on Nexis -- emphasis is mine:
ED ROLLINS. . . If this House scandal is as big as I think it is from talking to people that are around it -- of course it started with Cunningham and it`s moving beyond that.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Duke Cunningham.
ED ROLLINS: Duke Cunningham, a congressman from San Diego who took bribes. There was a real little cabal on the Defense Appropriations Committee in which a couple of people who basically made an awful lot of money off of defense contractors and basically rewarded a bunch of members, Republicans.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Including a story that broke over the weekend, perhaps the use of prostitutes.
Harpers Magazine: Red Lights on Capitol Hill? (http://www.harpers.org/sb-red-lights-on-capitol-hill.html)
WSJ: Prosecutors May Widen Congressional-Bribe Case - Cunningham Is Suspected Of Asking for Prostitutes; Were Others Involved? (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114610728002837324-FnHaEYAFT_b7QFGwPxnAIiEcHEI_20060527.html?mod=tff_ main_tff_top)
My feeling is that there wont be any new bills for years sometimes. Both house and senate are deeply divided on the immigration issues. All of them want reform. But nobody can agree on any proposals being put forward to.
Most of them want 11 million illegal immigrants here for their contributions. Most of them dont want 11 million illegal immigrants when they look at what they have to pay for their contributions.
When taking into account of all of these I feel like people will argue for sometime and then will become happy with whats left. The 11 million will stay as illegal for some more years. And the legal immigrants will wait in the line for their rest of the life.
more...
kartikiran
12-17 02:11 PM
My wife will be coming back in April 2nd week through Denver. CO POE. Her AP is valid until June 3rd week.
My question is that is 2 months of AP validity / cushion enough or safe to enter the US.
Any experiences from forum members about using their AP when there is 2 months or less left in the expiry of the AP document and they entered the US. Did anyone have any bad experience at POE due to near expiry of the AP. Members entered through Denver, CO POE with their experiences would be an added help.
Thanks in advance for all your time.
Used NY POE. Arrived on July 5th with expiring AP on Sept 9th. No problems.
My question is that is 2 months of AP validity / cushion enough or safe to enter the US.
Any experiences from forum members about using their AP when there is 2 months or less left in the expiry of the AP document and they entered the US. Did anyone have any bad experience at POE due to near expiry of the AP. Members entered through Denver, CO POE with their experiences would be an added help.
Thanks in advance for all your time.
Used NY POE. Arrived on July 5th with expiring AP on Sept 9th. No problems.
2010 1920x1080 hd wallpapers hd
Rolling_Flood
09-24 01:14 AM
lazycis,
Thanks.
Was your answer regarding your case, or other case(s) that you may know about?
Related question, did you (or the other people) face considerable hassles for their I-485 approval(s)?
"Yes" to both questions.
Thanks.
Was your answer regarding your case, or other case(s) that you may know about?
Related question, did you (or the other people) face considerable hassles for their I-485 approval(s)?
"Yes" to both questions.
more...
psaxena
04-07 04:59 PM
Hi Friends.
I got the pink slip 3 weeks back with one month severance. So my target was to secure the job in one month to avoid loss of pay. Finally secured the job with 3 offers from 3 top companies.
Some tips if it may be helpful to others , that I recently expereinced
1. Read your resume thoroughly and see if there are anything that you can improve and make the resume with the core skills, do not make the resume of mix of different profiles, like dba, architect, project manager, make them all seperate.
2. Try to make the submission to the direct employer or recruiter on top of the chain. You can do that finding contacts on linked in.
3. Do not compromise a lot, this makes these recruiters to think that you are vulnerable for any exploitation, (happened with me, I kicked there butt after getting selected and telling them on why did I do that)
All the best to everyone.
I got the pink slip 3 weeks back with one month severance. So my target was to secure the job in one month to avoid loss of pay. Finally secured the job with 3 offers from 3 top companies.
Some tips if it may be helpful to others , that I recently expereinced
1. Read your resume thoroughly and see if there are anything that you can improve and make the resume with the core skills, do not make the resume of mix of different profiles, like dba, architect, project manager, make them all seperate.
2. Try to make the submission to the direct employer or recruiter on top of the chain. You can do that finding contacts on linked in.
3. Do not compromise a lot, this makes these recruiters to think that you are vulnerable for any exploitation, (happened with me, I kicked there butt after getting selected and telling them on why did I do that)
All the best to everyone.
hair HD Widescreen Wallpapers Pack
veni001
07-06 05:30 PM
Yes, only if approved I-140 is not withdrawn or canceled before new I-140 approval.
If you are in AC21 safety net then you can recapture PD (after 180 days of 1-485 filing) even if your initial sponsoring employer withdraws his initial I-140.:o
once I-140 approved then that PD is locked for you , you can port that date with your new I-140 filing. no need to file 485 and wait for 6 months, this only for Ac-21 porting with new employer.
If you are in AC21 safety net then you can recapture PD (after 180 days of 1-485 filing) even if your initial sponsoring employer withdraws his initial I-140.:o
once I-140 approved then that PD is locked for you , you can port that date with your new I-140 filing. no need to file 485 and wait for 6 months, this only for Ac-21 porting with new employer.
more...
willgetgc2005
04-25 10:07 AM
dilbert,
I am trying to change from EB3 category to EB2 category.Will that work if the old employer revokes I-140 ?
__________________________________________________ _________
WillGetGC2005 - here is my understanding of your case :-
You have PD of 2002. You filed 140 and it is already approved. Your 485 is also filed and its more than 2 years on it.
If the above is correct, you do not need to do PD transfer or start any new labor process either.
What you need to do is use AC21. When you change employers, make sure that the new employer/lawyer sends a note that you are using AC-21 to transfer your job and your new job is same as your old job. Your GC process will continue normally after that using the 485 you have filed.
The rule is if you have an approved I140 and your 485 is pending for more than six months, you can transfer employers using AC21. Your previous employer CANNOT revoke your I-140.
This is my understanding. If you have a new employer and have a job offer , just have a talk with the lawyer and things will clear up.
I am trying to change from EB3 category to EB2 category.Will that work if the old employer revokes I-140 ?
__________________________________________________ _________
WillGetGC2005 - here is my understanding of your case :-
You have PD of 2002. You filed 140 and it is already approved. Your 485 is also filed and its more than 2 years on it.
If the above is correct, you do not need to do PD transfer or start any new labor process either.
What you need to do is use AC21. When you change employers, make sure that the new employer/lawyer sends a note that you are using AC-21 to transfer your job and your new job is same as your old job. Your GC process will continue normally after that using the 485 you have filed.
The rule is if you have an approved I140 and your 485 is pending for more than six months, you can transfer employers using AC21. Your previous employer CANNOT revoke your I-140.
This is my understanding. If you have a new employer and have a job offer , just have a talk with the lawyer and things will clear up.
hot 1920x1080 hd wallpapers hd
Templarian
08-20 01:08 PM
I'll try it when I get off work in 3.5 hours and see how it goes.
more...
house hd wallpapers 1920x1080
GCBy3000
07-09 10:05 AM
This is removed from dice now. :D
tattoo 1920x1080 HD Wallpaper free
pappu
01-22 06:37 PM
Thanks for your words of appreciation. Pls contribute by signing up for the funding drive. This will strengthen us and enable us to deliver in the coming months.
more...
pictures wallpaper 1920x1080 hd
Madhuri
11-20 06:10 PM
When did they receive GC approval? Is it recent or 1-2 years ago?
I personally know one my co-worker and other a friend's friend. Both from India & didn't even informed INS (now CIS) about job change. No RFE, they did recieve their GC without any issues.
I personally know one my co-worker and other a friend's friend. Both from India & didn't even informed INS (now CIS) about job change. No RFE, they did recieve their GC without any issues.
dresses hd wallpapers 1920 x 1080
GCAmigo
07-09 09:46 AM
title translated..
more...
makeup hd wallpapers 1920 x 1080
EkAurAaya
04-16 01:31 PM
This is precisely why my Lawyer (amongst the top) advised to maintain H1B (so keep filing for extensions).
If your H1 expires and you are here based on AOS 485 > and for some reason 485 gets rejected you are out of status.
Good luck!
If your H1 expires and you are here based on AOS 485 > and for some reason 485 gets rejected you are out of status.
Good luck!
girlfriend hd wallpaper 1920x1080 hd
l8A
10-05 10:27 AM
I think you have period of 180 days after being out of status to apply for permanent residency. I'm not sure though. It would probably be your best bet to double check with a lawyer and get professional advice. Good luck.
Yes, you are right. Now that I think about it, I do remember seeing that a person can apply for their AOS within 6 months of their being out-of-status. I am in close touch w/ my attorney, and he seems to be OK with the situation, but after seeing some disturbing tales on these forums, I wanted to confirm.
Yes, you are right. Now that I think about it, I do remember seeing that a person can apply for their AOS within 6 months of their being out-of-status. I am in close touch w/ my attorney, and he seems to be OK with the situation, but after seeing some disturbing tales on these forums, I wanted to confirm.
hairstyles hd wallpapers 1920 x 1080
gcpadmavyuh
09-21 03:58 PM
You both are right!
Employer can revoke an unapproved 140 any time, but the revocation does not affect your 485 approval. The IO will approve your 485 in due course if 140 was approvable at the time of application (ie, if it has'nt been revoked).
However the trouble with invoking AC21 without 140 being approved is when there is an RFC. This 140 was not approvable at the time of application, because of additional documentation requirement... The original employer should be willing to answer it or else 140 will be denied and so will the 485.
Can someone use AC21 if the I-140 is not approved? I think it is risky because employer can revoke I-140 and you will be OOS
employer can revoke the I-140 at any time. If you have crossed 180 days since filing I-485, the revocation does not effect your I-485 approval.
Employer can revoke an unapproved 140 any time, but the revocation does not affect your 485 approval. The IO will approve your 485 in due course if 140 was approvable at the time of application (ie, if it has'nt been revoked).
However the trouble with invoking AC21 without 140 being approved is when there is an RFC. This 140 was not approvable at the time of application, because of additional documentation requirement... The original employer should be willing to answer it or else 140 will be denied and so will the 485.
Can someone use AC21 if the I-140 is not approved? I think it is risky because employer can revoke I-140 and you will be OOS
employer can revoke the I-140 at any time. If you have crossed 180 days since filing I-485, the revocation does not effect your I-485 approval.
forgerator
06-08 09:27 AM
Hi Bhatt,
thank you! :)
I am pretty excited as this was the best thing I could hope for at this point. I have entered the DV before and was never selected.
I wish I could afford a lawyer to assist, but that doesn't seem to be an option for me right now.
Anyone has any ideas and the turn around time once I have submitted the paperwork and when to hear back from them for an interview?
you should get a lawyer man. Friend of mine paid $3500 for a good lawyer to process the paperwork when he won the GC lottery, he got all the peace of mind in the world, and his GC soon thereafter.
thank you! :)
I am pretty excited as this was the best thing I could hope for at this point. I have entered the DV before and was never selected.
I wish I could afford a lawyer to assist, but that doesn't seem to be an option for me right now.
Anyone has any ideas and the turn around time once I have submitted the paperwork and when to hear back from them for an interview?
you should get a lawyer man. Friend of mine paid $3500 for a good lawyer to process the paperwork when he won the GC lottery, he got all the peace of mind in the world, and his GC soon thereafter.
JuneBut2ndJuly
09-05 06:53 PM
Today employer sent mail checks cashed.waiting for receipts.
Jul 2nd Received by J Barrett at 10:25 AM at NSC
My I-140 was approved from TSC in Feb 2007
My PD is Jun 2003; EB2-India
Jul 2nd Received by J Barrett at 10:25 AM at NSC
My I-140 was approved from TSC in Feb 2007
My PD is Jun 2003; EB2-India
No comments:
Post a Comment