bhasky25
10-11 12:45 PM
Hello guys,
I need a clarification on the process. Here is my scenario
1. PD : Feb 2004 EB3 India
2. 485 : Filed during july 2007
3. 140 : Approved on jan 2009 --> Revoked by my previous company on 12/23/2009
4. AC21 : Used AC21 to change jobs in Feb 2009. Transferred job using H1B tranfer and got it for 3 years(valid until Jan 2012). Changed jobs after 500 days of applying 485.
5. EAD and Ap is not valid(did not renew it as I chose to maintain H1b). I let it expire in 2008.
6. The new company would not file for EB2 as my current job description does not qualify for EB2. They are willing to refile EB3 petition. I was not interested in doing it.
My question is:
If I want to get my H1b renewed again @ Jan 2012, it is possible to get it renewed for 3 years by using my previous 140 approval even though it is revoked by my previous employer ?? If that is not possible, what are my options to maintain my H1B.
Appreciate your insight.
I need a clarification on the process. Here is my scenario
1. PD : Feb 2004 EB3 India
2. 485 : Filed during july 2007
3. 140 : Approved on jan 2009 --> Revoked by my previous company on 12/23/2009
4. AC21 : Used AC21 to change jobs in Feb 2009. Transferred job using H1B tranfer and got it for 3 years(valid until Jan 2012). Changed jobs after 500 days of applying 485.
5. EAD and Ap is not valid(did not renew it as I chose to maintain H1b). I let it expire in 2008.
6. The new company would not file for EB2 as my current job description does not qualify for EB2. They are willing to refile EB3 petition. I was not interested in doing it.
My question is:
If I want to get my H1b renewed again @ Jan 2012, it is possible to get it renewed for 3 years by using my previous 140 approval even though it is revoked by my previous employer ?? If that is not possible, what are my options to maintain my H1B.
Appreciate your insight.
wallpaper Anime Couple by
pappu
01-24 11:47 AM
If there is going to be any more discussion on if IV should push for 485 or not push, moderators will close the threads. There has been enough discussion and arguements in the past over this and members are more than willing to give hundreds of ideas and opinions for free but only a few actually care to implement them or help IV with a mere $20. If you want to discuss it, go to other forums and discuss it and be an armchair strategist.
If you have ideas and want to implement them, join your local chapter and get active. Contribute in the funding drive so that IV can continue to be a platform for everyone in ths struggle.
If you have ideas and want to implement them, join your local chapter and get active. Contribute in the funding drive so that IV can continue to be a platform for everyone in ths struggle.
pd_recapturing
03-07 08:46 PM
I have a quick question on salary issue with 485. My EB2 I-140 states that my yearly salary 87k per annum. It got approved last year. I realized that my w-2 only reflects 64k for last year. I did not work for 2 months because of some personal reason. Is this less salary going to affect my 485 application? I thougt, GC is for future jobs so its okay. Can somebody please clarify this ?
2011 Anime Couples Background.
nk2006
07-05 12:58 PM
possible reasons
(i)USCIS dont want to see a large number applications - as Ombudsman report indicated their performance is measured based on how much time it took to process an application. If they accept 485 applications only to keep them longer it will skew their performance benchmarks to their disadvantage. (ii)Also they just dont want to work for the rest of this financial year. By making visas unavailable their work load might have come down dramatically.
(iii)Ego clashes between some higher ups between DOS and USCIS; OR the communication gap between these two orgs is just too much.
(iv) Too may anti-immigrant who wants to screw legal-immigrants at any given opportunity. This is possible too...on numbersusa website there are special instructions/appeals to USCIS staff to do a few things and also to get some info on H1b filings, I140 filings etc. Maybe these activist employees have grown in size with tacit support from higher ups.
Of course all of these are just speculations. BUT I still could not understand why USCIS went out of its way (processing 60k applicaitons in one month; 18k in one day is certainly going way toooooooo much out of their way based on their normal efficiency) to process. I am sure they might have approved many cases which they could not have done normally. Finding out this aspect should might yield a very good story for a journalist - we should highlight this aspect in our letters to media.
(i)USCIS dont want to see a large number applications - as Ombudsman report indicated their performance is measured based on how much time it took to process an application. If they accept 485 applications only to keep them longer it will skew their performance benchmarks to their disadvantage. (ii)Also they just dont want to work for the rest of this financial year. By making visas unavailable their work load might have come down dramatically.
(iii)Ego clashes between some higher ups between DOS and USCIS; OR the communication gap between these two orgs is just too much.
(iv) Too may anti-immigrant who wants to screw legal-immigrants at any given opportunity. This is possible too...on numbersusa website there are special instructions/appeals to USCIS staff to do a few things and also to get some info on H1b filings, I140 filings etc. Maybe these activist employees have grown in size with tacit support from higher ups.
Of course all of these are just speculations. BUT I still could not understand why USCIS went out of its way (processing 60k applicaitons in one month; 18k in one day is certainly going way toooooooo much out of their way based on their normal efficiency) to process. I am sure they might have approved many cases which they could not have done normally. Finding out this aspect should might yield a very good story for a journalist - we should highlight this aspect in our letters to media.
more...
indianabacklog
10-27 05:04 PM
I have searched for US 31 and 146st intersection for 1 1/2 hours, it is very confusing. Actually, there is no 146st and US 31 intersection as such. It is actually Greyshound pass and 146 st intersection. Finally i went to one Starbucks at 11:45, but nobody was there. Also there are so many Starbucks in and around that area. Please post the exact location with address next time onwards.
Sorry you had trouble finding the location. The intersection of roads was the nearest I could suggest.
Two of is. infact three including Ulises wife Dana were there. The Starbucks we were at was next to Panera Bread on the corner near a large Kohls store and Walmart.
Once again I am sorry not to have had the chance to meet you today.
Please feel free to send me a PM, give me a telephone number and I will call you.
Sorry you had trouble finding the location. The intersection of roads was the nearest I could suggest.
Two of is. infact three including Ulises wife Dana were there. The Starbucks we were at was next to Panera Bread on the corner near a large Kohls store and Walmart.
Once again I am sorry not to have had the chance to meet you today.
Please feel free to send me a PM, give me a telephone number and I will call you.
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
more...
renupond
10-15 11:38 AM
If 1099 is not accepted by client & need FEIN (for corp-to-corp) then one can get a FEIN as sole priprietor. is there any additional requirements for this viz. liability insurance.. or anything else.
please let me know if anyone did this to do independent contracting & not building a company (LLC,scorp..)
would like to know more about FEIN & based on that independent contracting on EAD. Pros & Cons along with procedure as well..
thanks
please let me know if anyone did this to do independent contracting & not building a company (LLC,scorp..)
would like to know more about FEIN & based on that independent contracting on EAD. Pros & Cons along with procedure as well..
thanks
2010 drawings of anime couples
GotGC??
03-09 03:03 PM
Some EB3 for India/China/Row would be in IT, but I bet a vast majority of EB3 from other countries, especially Mehico, is not IT related.
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
As most EB3 numbers go to IT software and as there are so many issues, until DOS and USCIS fix these issues they wont move these forward
more...
gparr
January 5th, 2005, 06:56 AM
Like this one a lot. I agree with Queen that it would be interesting to see one of the pots colored. Might try rotating the image so the pipe on the right is vertical. 2 deg. CW did it for me. Squares up the image better. Nice shooting.
hair sad anime couples pictures.
jnraajan
04-17 02:12 PM
Hi All,
I am an aspiring US immigrant, and currently work with a desi-like employer who has not been paying me for last 3 months. I have resigned and started working at a new employer, using portability options. I will also contact DOL and report this to get my money back, however, DOL may not be able to recover it if the employer files for bankruptcy. I donot care much about money now, as its not too much and my new job increment covers it.
Here are my questions
1) Is there a way i can report this misdoing to USCIS directly. Is there any phone number/contact info to report frauds on I-140s and I-485s as he is holding some employees hostage (not allowing them to move out because of this situation where your money is stuck and so is your immigration).
2) What else should i do to make this injustice visible? I will work with DOl and get my money back.
3) I am thinking of reporting this directly to the I-140 processing centers. Is this is a good idea?
PK
Who gave you a red dot for the very first post here?
I am an aspiring US immigrant, and currently work with a desi-like employer who has not been paying me for last 3 months. I have resigned and started working at a new employer, using portability options. I will also contact DOL and report this to get my money back, however, DOL may not be able to recover it if the employer files for bankruptcy. I donot care much about money now, as its not too much and my new job increment covers it.
Here are my questions
1) Is there a way i can report this misdoing to USCIS directly. Is there any phone number/contact info to report frauds on I-140s and I-485s as he is holding some employees hostage (not allowing them to move out because of this situation where your money is stuck and so is your immigration).
2) What else should i do to make this injustice visible? I will work with DOl and get my money back.
3) I am thinking of reporting this directly to the I-140 processing centers. Is this is a good idea?
PK
Who gave you a red dot for the very first post here?
more...
harsh
01-02 09:21 PM
My contribution is on way too.
Confirmation no:5YP659022V963134M
Confirmation no:5YP659022V963134M
hot .://With Anime Couple Pics//:.
desi3933
03-04 11:24 AM
....
My question is - how do we tackle the question if work status is EAD or GC because most times it is asked as a casual question before the interview or during the interview or after the interview.
....
The answer could be
"I have unrestricted employment authorization that allows me to work for any US employer just like green card holder" [example]
Employment can ask for valid employment authorization, but not for kind of employment authorization.
U.S. Department of Labor - Find It By Topic - Equal Employment Opportunity - Immigration (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/dol/topic/discrimination/immdisc.htm)
[From the link]
The Immigration and Nationality Act (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/cgi-bin/leave-dol.asp?exiturl=http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm&exitTitle=Immigration_and_Nationality_Act&fedpage=yes) prohibits employers (when hiring, discharging, or recruiting or referring for a fee) from discriminating because of national origin against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and authorized aliens or discriminating because of citizenship status against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and the following classes of a aliens with work authorization: permanent residents, temporary residents (that is, individuals who have gone through the legalization program), refugees, and asylees.
________________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
My question is - how do we tackle the question if work status is EAD or GC because most times it is asked as a casual question before the interview or during the interview or after the interview.
....
The answer could be
"I have unrestricted employment authorization that allows me to work for any US employer just like green card holder" [example]
Employment can ask for valid employment authorization, but not for kind of employment authorization.
U.S. Department of Labor - Find It By Topic - Equal Employment Opportunity - Immigration (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/dol/topic/discrimination/immdisc.htm)
[From the link]
The Immigration and Nationality Act (http://www.savingmatters.dol.gov/cgi-bin/leave-dol.asp?exiturl=http://uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/INA.htm&exitTitle=Immigration_and_Nationality_Act&fedpage=yes) prohibits employers (when hiring, discharging, or recruiting or referring for a fee) from discriminating because of national origin against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and authorized aliens or discriminating because of citizenship status against U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, and the following classes of a aliens with work authorization: permanent residents, temporary residents (that is, individuals who have gone through the legalization program), refugees, and asylees.
________________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
more...
house 7 anime couples, 7 days,
gcnotfiledyet
06-23 03:49 PM
and how do you know that.. did Rush tell ya???
his statments during conference tell mya
his statments during conference tell mya
tattoo anime couples kiss. bugfaceuk
gcformeornot
12-14 10:13 AM
RFEs these days? Especialy for I140s?
more...
pictures chibi anime couples hugging.
eager_immi
07-11 12:32 PM
True but these were not applications that were filed 2 weeks back. Many people had 485 pending for over 2 years due to retrogression. Also a lot of cases that got a visa # still had pending security checks so technically they did not approve 60K 485, they only used up the visa#s.Why not? USCIS already approved 60K 485 applications in 2 weeks time. How come they cannot do the same with some extra money (i.e. premium processing). They can do anything if want to do.
dresses sad anime couples pictures.
GCDelay
11-30 11:22 AM
bump
more...
makeup anime couples in rain. Romantic Anime Couples
GCOP
06-23 02:46 PM
I know that, we had not been successful in earlier years for this bill. But, as CIR chances are very uncertain, we should concentrate at least only on this Visa Recapture Bill this year. Passing of this bill will reduce backlog significantly. Let us focus on this bill .
girlfriend (This review was ased off a
newyorker123
09-02 01:43 PM
you can mention what all you need in your application. go to the link (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-639.pdf) and www.uscis.gov/foia (http://www.uscis.gov/foia)
You can find all detail.
I recently made G-639 request, waiting for the documents, I asked for the complete set of documents tagged to my 485, will it get it me my ETA750 also?
because other guy mentioned other email, foiarequest@dol.gov. Shall I send email to this also?
You can find all detail.
I recently made G-639 request, waiting for the documents, I asked for the complete set of documents tagged to my 485, will it get it me my ETA750 also?
because other guy mentioned other email, foiarequest@dol.gov. Shall I send email to this also?
hairstyles anime couples hugging.
Munna Bhai
01-09 03:42 PM
Hello,
Please share your RFEs!! What was the reason and how you handled it. That will be great input.
-M
Please share your RFEs!! What was the reason and how you handled it. That will be great input.
-M
sanjeev_2004
10-04 02:03 PM
Saeed,
I 140 can processed through premioum process from last week.
Can you tell what was state of filing your GC labor. My company filed from IL in july 2004 in EB2-RIR case. My Labor is still in process. Though I got 45 days latter in March.
sanjeev
I 140 can processed through premioum process from last week.
Can you tell what was state of filing your GC labor. My company filed from IL in july 2004 in EB2-RIR case. My Labor is still in process. Though I got 45 days latter in March.
sanjeev
Munna Bhai
02-08 12:59 PM
If its been more than 180 days since your 140 was approved, can you not use AC21 to move to a new job (similar). even if the old company revokes the 140, you will get RFE/NOID and you can reply back in specified time.
correct me if i am wrong.
180 days rule don't apply to I-140 as far as I know.
correct me if i am wrong.
180 days rule don't apply to I-140 as far as I know.
No comments:
Post a Comment