Templarian
08-25 09:01 PM
Hmm... pwned person... http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6388/boomheadshotrv3.gif
and by the way Templarian Kalamazoo isn't too far away, I live there.You plan on going to wmu? (depending on your age)
and by the way Templarian Kalamazoo isn't too far away, I live there.You plan on going to wmu? (depending on your age)
franklin
06-27 04:41 PM
This question has been answered multiple times on this forum. Instead of starting a new thread I suggest
1. Doing a forum search
2. Donating money to IV since you will have saved so much of your time getting an immediate answer
1. Doing a forum search
2. Donating money to IV since you will have saved so much of your time getting an immediate answer
wandmaker
07-23 07:44 AM
All,
I feel that those who concurrently filed I-140/485 in July 2007 are very lucky!
Here is my situation -
Previous Employer -
EB3,PD-Jan'04,I-140 cleared. Switched in June 2007 and wasn't able to file I-485 in July 2007
New Employer -
EB2, PD-Dec'-07, I-140 (Feb'08 - pending)
Question -
Based on Jun'08 Visa bulletin the dates for EB2-India were at Apr'04. Filed for I-140/485 based on my old priority date for EB3 labor (Jan'04). Explaining USCIS for PD transfer.
Well, folks at NSC did not understand the PD transfer concept and send my application back. Unclear as to what do now. I guess need to wait until the dates for EB2-India reach Dec'07 such that I can file.
Any "Creative" thoughts on how to approach USCIS moving forward.
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Aamchimumbai
(1) you first will have to apply for 140 with porting request until it is approved the PD is not yours (2) apply for 485, if the PD is current. NSC folks did the right by returning your application because concurrent filing is not possible, if the 140 has porting request.
I feel that those who concurrently filed I-140/485 in July 2007 are very lucky!
Here is my situation -
Previous Employer -
EB3,PD-Jan'04,I-140 cleared. Switched in June 2007 and wasn't able to file I-485 in July 2007
New Employer -
EB2, PD-Dec'-07, I-140 (Feb'08 - pending)
Question -
Based on Jun'08 Visa bulletin the dates for EB2-India were at Apr'04. Filed for I-140/485 based on my old priority date for EB3 labor (Jan'04). Explaining USCIS for PD transfer.
Well, folks at NSC did not understand the PD transfer concept and send my application back. Unclear as to what do now. I guess need to wait until the dates for EB2-India reach Dec'07 such that I can file.
Any "Creative" thoughts on how to approach USCIS moving forward.
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Aamchimumbai
(1) you first will have to apply for 140 with porting request until it is approved the PD is not yours (2) apply for 485, if the PD is current. NSC folks did the right by returning your application because concurrent filing is not possible, if the 140 has porting request.
moe
02-04 11:26 AM
hi everyone..i try to long sotry short.i came here 2001 with b1 then i stay since date.. 2004 my employer apply for gc. so far i got my i 140 approved notice about about 1 year ago..
but law we have to wait.they my lawyer said we have wait mayby long time.. my case date is april 2006 ..
Q1-do i have rigth to work here now?
Q2-do i have to wait realy long time?
Q3- can i do anything for waiting time shorter?
MY lawyer is good man but i can even talk to him when i need
but law we have to wait.they my lawyer said we have wait mayby long time.. my case date is april 2006 ..
Q1-do i have rigth to work here now?
Q2-do i have to wait realy long time?
Q3- can i do anything for waiting time shorter?
MY lawyer is good man but i can even talk to him when i need
more...
BharatPremi
11-01 02:40 PM
When I filed my 485, I gave My company address in all the applications. My company is in Washington State.
But I am actually working in California from past 7 years. The only place that I specified my current california address is in G325 (485 supporting document).
Also I move within california after filing 485.
Because I gave my company address in all the 485 applications, I did not even change my address in any of the applications. I only filed AR11 online for the address change. Advantage with online is, you will get a confirmation number.
That is what my company recomended me.
I got my EAD and all other receipts to the company address.
Waiting for AP and FP mails.
I also heard from my company that, my company will receive the finger print notice but the appointment office will be in california.
Hope this helps you.
What you did is perfectly o.k as you are inviting your documents at your employer's address. With this employer you have a work history. But in case of giving your friend's address or relative's address as your address for USCIS documents purpose may create a problem if in future if you do not mention that address as your past residence address in the "Address History" which generally require for any back ground checks.
But I am actually working in California from past 7 years. The only place that I specified my current california address is in G325 (485 supporting document).
Also I move within california after filing 485.
Because I gave my company address in all the 485 applications, I did not even change my address in any of the applications. I only filed AR11 online for the address change. Advantage with online is, you will get a confirmation number.
That is what my company recomended me.
I got my EAD and all other receipts to the company address.
Waiting for AP and FP mails.
I also heard from my company that, my company will receive the finger print notice but the appointment office will be in california.
Hope this helps you.
What you did is perfectly o.k as you are inviting your documents at your employer's address. With this employer you have a work history. But in case of giving your friend's address or relative's address as your address for USCIS documents purpose may create a problem if in future if you do not mention that address as your past residence address in the "Address History" which generally require for any back ground checks.
jasmin45
08-08 04:57 PM
Yeah!! It was posted on USCIS site also!!
See, I mostly frequent this forum only (and I think that's true for a lot others), and didn't see it posted here. So, went ahead and posted it. The other thread is in members only forum!!
You can see that on Homepage! As you say this is duplicate. Please request admin to delete this thread?
See, I mostly frequent this forum only (and I think that's true for a lot others), and didn't see it posted here. So, went ahead and posted it. The other thread is in members only forum!!
You can see that on Homepage! As you say this is duplicate. Please request admin to delete this thread?
more...
dbevis
November 10th, 2004, 08:40 AM
To me it sounds more like a battery problem. Either making a poor contact or the battery itself is bad. There could be something preventing good contact, either the battery or the contacts inside the camera.
I know with Canon cameras, there is always some sort of hidden switch that shuts off the camera when a door is opened. Maybe Nikon has this too and the switch is messed up?
I know with Canon cameras, there is always some sort of hidden switch that shuts off the camera when a door is opened. Maybe Nikon has this too and the switch is messed up?
softcrowd
04-23 09:35 AM
Yes, that means your I-140 is "filed" under EB2...But note that USCIS can always comeback & say it "can" or "can not" be approved under Eb2 based on the job description in Labor.
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
more...
kaisersose
10-17 11:47 AM
Hi,
My LCA Job title is "Computer and Information Systems Manager" , O-net Job Code 11-3021.00. Can I take a job of "Computer Systems Engineers/Architects" , O-net Job Code 15-1099.02. Is it not considered as similar occupation?
Thanks,
By definition, if they were similar, they would be under the same main code.
Otherwise, we can find something common between any two jobs in this universe and claim similarity. This is open to interpretation and we should not rely on USCIS to be favorable in their interpretations all the time. Hence, I suggest you avoid such risks. But I would also add that you should be consulting attorneys and getting professional counsel in this matter.
My LCA Job title is "Computer and Information Systems Manager" , O-net Job Code 11-3021.00. Can I take a job of "Computer Systems Engineers/Architects" , O-net Job Code 15-1099.02. Is it not considered as similar occupation?
Thanks,
By definition, if they were similar, they would be under the same main code.
Otherwise, we can find something common between any two jobs in this universe and claim similarity. This is open to interpretation and we should not rely on USCIS to be favorable in their interpretations all the time. Hence, I suggest you avoid such risks. But I would also add that you should be consulting attorneys and getting professional counsel in this matter.
whoever
07-19 10:36 AM
guess what i have a question. this is what happened. we are married in india quite sometime back, however, we had no marriage certificate and could not get one from india after trying for a long time. so we got married again here itself some weeks back. we had been filing tax as a couple until now. how to amend that?
more...
hsingh82
02-24 04:14 PM
With all due respect, why don�t you want to update your information? As others said that this info will help us to know where we stand as a group. All of us knows we need this forum to bring new people on board with us and only way is to get them here is help them when they have difficulty but other side of coin is we need ways fund our movement to move forward .If you have better idea or thoughts just toss it here our seniors will look in that.
Please read my posts carefully, there are no dates as I am on H1B, NO PERM Filed, NO I-140 mail date, NO I-485.
Please read my posts carefully, there are no dates as I am on H1B, NO PERM Filed, NO I-140 mail date, NO I-485.
WeShallOvercome
12-13 01:59 AM
It depends on the terms of the contract.
I think Washington is an "At Will" employment state, so no matter what a contract says, its pretty much !#*$. I'd do some research if I were you -google, get some state specific employment law advice, check your employee handbook etc.
At Will means that either side (employer or employee) can end a contract at any point, AFAIK
Employee handbook should spell it out. I guess they "could" force you to use your PTO - don't know of the legality in that.
Just my opinion, not legal advice:o
Quick search online got this:-
At Will
In Washington, employees are presumed to be "at will." At-will employees may be terminated for any reason, so long as it is not illegal. Generally, employees that work under an employment contract can only be terminated for reasons specified in the contract. In Washington, in order to overcome the at-will presumption, an employee must show that the employer made clear and unequivocal statements of job security to the employee.
The most common exception to employment-at will is for public policy. This holds that an employee is wrongfully discharged if the termination is counter to an explicit policy of the government. One example is the discharge of an employee for filing a workers' compensation claim.
Employee Handbooks
While an employer is not required by law to have an employee handbook, in most cases, it is recommended. An employee handbook provides a centralized, complete and certain record of the employer's policies and procedures. It also provides more convenient access by employees and managers. At a minimum, an employee handbook should include:
* A statement regarding the at-will employment relationship
* An equal employment opportunity statement
* A policy regarding sexual and other types of harassment in the workplace
* Internet access, e-mail, and voice mail policies
* The Family Medical Leave Act
In Washington, in limited circumstances, the at-will presumption can be overcome and a just-cause employment relationship can be created by an employee's legitimate expectations that are grounded in an employer's policy statements. The employee has to show that the employer, through the employee manual or otherwise, made representations or promises that termination would be only for just cause.
The laws regarding an employer's duties and responsibilities arising under an employee handbook are complex, and a licensed attorney should be contacted to review individual circumstances.
Thanks franklin,
My concern here is that IF I want to leave my employer without having to pay the 'damages' , Can I do that in case they are not able to find me a project in my state of residence (I have a house here in WA). I don't think they can force me to stay unpaid just so I don't break their agreement.
Also from the USCIS point of view, how safe or risky is it to be in this situation where the employer is not able to find any work for you just 1.5 months after GC approval? I can easily find work here, but if I can use this to get out of the agreement, I don't mind being unpaid for a few days...
I've heard some cases where the employee forced the employer to release him from all contractual obligations because employer wasn't able to pay him when he was willing to work..
btw, it's nice to be able to attach some face to a handle... I remember you from the DC rally day.
I think Washington is an "At Will" employment state, so no matter what a contract says, its pretty much !#*$. I'd do some research if I were you -google, get some state specific employment law advice, check your employee handbook etc.
At Will means that either side (employer or employee) can end a contract at any point, AFAIK
Employee handbook should spell it out. I guess they "could" force you to use your PTO - don't know of the legality in that.
Just my opinion, not legal advice:o
Quick search online got this:-
At Will
In Washington, employees are presumed to be "at will." At-will employees may be terminated for any reason, so long as it is not illegal. Generally, employees that work under an employment contract can only be terminated for reasons specified in the contract. In Washington, in order to overcome the at-will presumption, an employee must show that the employer made clear and unequivocal statements of job security to the employee.
The most common exception to employment-at will is for public policy. This holds that an employee is wrongfully discharged if the termination is counter to an explicit policy of the government. One example is the discharge of an employee for filing a workers' compensation claim.
Employee Handbooks
While an employer is not required by law to have an employee handbook, in most cases, it is recommended. An employee handbook provides a centralized, complete and certain record of the employer's policies and procedures. It also provides more convenient access by employees and managers. At a minimum, an employee handbook should include:
* A statement regarding the at-will employment relationship
* An equal employment opportunity statement
* A policy regarding sexual and other types of harassment in the workplace
* Internet access, e-mail, and voice mail policies
* The Family Medical Leave Act
In Washington, in limited circumstances, the at-will presumption can be overcome and a just-cause employment relationship can be created by an employee's legitimate expectations that are grounded in an employer's policy statements. The employee has to show that the employer, through the employee manual or otherwise, made representations or promises that termination would be only for just cause.
The laws regarding an employer's duties and responsibilities arising under an employee handbook are complex, and a licensed attorney should be contacted to review individual circumstances.
Thanks franklin,
My concern here is that IF I want to leave my employer without having to pay the 'damages' , Can I do that in case they are not able to find me a project in my state of residence (I have a house here in WA). I don't think they can force me to stay unpaid just so I don't break their agreement.
Also from the USCIS point of view, how safe or risky is it to be in this situation where the employer is not able to find any work for you just 1.5 months after GC approval? I can easily find work here, but if I can use this to get out of the agreement, I don't mind being unpaid for a few days...
I've heard some cases where the employee forced the employer to release him from all contractual obligations because employer wasn't able to pay him when he was willing to work..
btw, it's nice to be able to attach some face to a handle... I remember you from the DC rally day.
more...
h1techSlave
01-08 03:05 PM
from an old article: http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/H1BSummary.pdf?popup=false
Here is an outline of my proposal:
� To be eligible to an H-1B, the employer would be required to have not have laid off Americans
in similar jobs within the last 6 months, and not employ H-1Bs in more than 15% of its technical
workforce.
� An employer who wishes to hire an H-1B would be required to advertise the job on a central Dept. of
Labor (DOL) Web page for 30 days. If the employer did not hire an American during this period, the
employer would have automatic permission to hire the H-1B.
� The wage paid to an H-1B would be required to be at least the national median for all workers in the
field, including those with all levels of experience.
� After hiring the H-1B, the employer would update the entry in the database, stating the qualifications
of the H-1B who was hired.33
� The visa would be valid for 3 years. During this time, the worker could move from employer to
employer at will, providing that each new employer goes through the 30-day ad procedure on the
DOL database.
� If the worker were to stay employed in the tech field for all but 60 days during the 3-year period, the
worker would be deemed as having proved his/her value to the economy, and would automatically be
granted permanent-resident (i.e. green card) status.
� If on the other hand, the worker were to become unemployed for more than 60 days, he/she would be
required to leave the country within 15 days.
Here is an outline of my proposal:
� To be eligible to an H-1B, the employer would be required to have not have laid off Americans
in similar jobs within the last 6 months, and not employ H-1Bs in more than 15% of its technical
workforce.
� An employer who wishes to hire an H-1B would be required to advertise the job on a central Dept. of
Labor (DOL) Web page for 30 days. If the employer did not hire an American during this period, the
employer would have automatic permission to hire the H-1B.
� The wage paid to an H-1B would be required to be at least the national median for all workers in the
field, including those with all levels of experience.
� After hiring the H-1B, the employer would update the entry in the database, stating the qualifications
of the H-1B who was hired.33
� The visa would be valid for 3 years. During this time, the worker could move from employer to
employer at will, providing that each new employer goes through the 30-day ad procedure on the
DOL database.
� If the worker were to stay employed in the tech field for all but 60 days during the 3-year period, the
worker would be deemed as having proved his/her value to the economy, and would automatically be
granted permanent-resident (i.e. green card) status.
� If on the other hand, the worker were to become unemployed for more than 60 days, he/she would be
required to leave the country within 15 days.
bzuccaro
11-09 08:40 AM
If the labor certification is approved and the I-140 has been or will be pending for 365 days or more prior to the H-1B worker�s requested H-1B start date, then the H-1B visa worker can file for the one year extension under AC21 106 (a).
more...
logiclife
02-01 06:40 PM
It doesnt matter who the President is, on issues of legal skilled immigration.
Immigration reform, like any other big reform, needs changes in laws, which needs initiations and actions from CONGRESS.
In Congress, we have a presistent problem of a filibustering senate.
What we need in 2008 elections is the kind of senators who oppose us to lose elections and pro-immigration senators to win elections. Not only that, if one party gets over 55-57 senators, then filibuster threat is mitigated severly, because its easy to find 3-4 senators from minority party to break ranks and vote FOR a particular bill or amendment.
So what you need is a heavily tilted senate that has over 55 senators of just one party so that they can overcome filibuster and legislate big fixes for a change rather than naming post-offices and passing budgets.
The senate has 100 seats, with each senator facing election every 6 years. So each election cycle (every 2 years) there are one third of senators facing re-election.
This time, there are 34 senators facing re-election. Out of this 22 are Republicans and 12 are Democrats. Republicans have more seats to defend then Democrats. Plus about 4-5 Republicans are retiring so its easier to pick up those seats for Democrats than to beat a sitting senator.
If a Democratic tide takes place, then senate could tilt heavily Democratic in 2008 and would take care of filibuster issue where each measure needs 60 votes to pass. Nonetheless, you have to remember that Democrats or Republicans are easily divided when legislating immigration and it has a way of dividing parties like no other. Last year, Immigration CIR bill faced opposition from both sides - Republican and Democratic.
THIS IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT OR SUPPORT OF ANY KIND FOR ANY PARTY OR CANDIDATE. IV is NEUTRAL AND IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
Immigration reform, like any other big reform, needs changes in laws, which needs initiations and actions from CONGRESS.
In Congress, we have a presistent problem of a filibustering senate.
What we need in 2008 elections is the kind of senators who oppose us to lose elections and pro-immigration senators to win elections. Not only that, if one party gets over 55-57 senators, then filibuster threat is mitigated severly, because its easy to find 3-4 senators from minority party to break ranks and vote FOR a particular bill or amendment.
So what you need is a heavily tilted senate that has over 55 senators of just one party so that they can overcome filibuster and legislate big fixes for a change rather than naming post-offices and passing budgets.
The senate has 100 seats, with each senator facing election every 6 years. So each election cycle (every 2 years) there are one third of senators facing re-election.
This time, there are 34 senators facing re-election. Out of this 22 are Republicans and 12 are Democrats. Republicans have more seats to defend then Democrats. Plus about 4-5 Republicans are retiring so its easier to pick up those seats for Democrats than to beat a sitting senator.
If a Democratic tide takes place, then senate could tilt heavily Democratic in 2008 and would take care of filibuster issue where each measure needs 60 votes to pass. Nonetheless, you have to remember that Democrats or Republicans are easily divided when legislating immigration and it has a way of dividing parties like no other. Last year, Immigration CIR bill faced opposition from both sides - Republican and Democratic.
THIS IS NOT AN ENDORSEMENT OR SUPPORT OF ANY KIND FOR ANY PARTY OR CANDIDATE. IV is NEUTRAL AND IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
frostrated
09-03 01:59 PM
Spain has two types of resident visas. One that allows you to work, and the other that is purely for residence only. If you have a residence visa that allows you to work, you have to find employment with a Spain company within 30 days of your visa being approved or your entry into Spain, which ever is later.
About you working from Spain on a non-work resident visa, it is possible, as long as the work that you perform is for a company that is outside of Spain, has no offices in Spain and does not file business taxes in Spain. It is equal to you working for yourself without pay or benefits. Whatever you earn, you are earning in a foreign country where Spain does not have jurisdiction.
About you working from Spain on a non-work resident visa, it is possible, as long as the work that you perform is for a company that is outside of Spain, has no offices in Spain and does not file business taxes in Spain. It is equal to you working for yourself without pay or benefits. Whatever you earn, you are earning in a foreign country where Spain does not have jurisdiction.
more...
n_2006
07-16 10:25 AM
As core team migth be knowing the solution, Can you please provide us some information whether we should go ahead and file today.
MSCapBust
07-25 09:54 PM
Thanks you all for replying.
I have 2 clarifications:
1. Am I allowed to begin work only on 1st Oct 2006?
If I'm exempt from the cap, does that mean I can begin work anytime or am I subject to the yearly schedules dates like everyone else? I keep hearing both versions. Please do clarify.
2. I did NOT get my H1-B stamped on my passport (back in 2002).
Since I was quitting and going back to school, I didn�t bother to get it done and got a new F-1 instead. I do however; have my H1-B approval document. Does this affect anything with regards to the cap? In other words, am I exempt only if I get a H1-B stamping?
I do apologize for asking quite so many times, but I really do want to make sure before I let the cap be reached.
Thanks very much once again.
Slightly more relieved.
I have 2 clarifications:
1. Am I allowed to begin work only on 1st Oct 2006?
If I'm exempt from the cap, does that mean I can begin work anytime or am I subject to the yearly schedules dates like everyone else? I keep hearing both versions. Please do clarify.
2. I did NOT get my H1-B stamped on my passport (back in 2002).
Since I was quitting and going back to school, I didn�t bother to get it done and got a new F-1 instead. I do however; have my H1-B approval document. Does this affect anything with regards to the cap? In other words, am I exempt only if I get a H1-B stamping?
I do apologize for asking quite so many times, but I really do want to make sure before I let the cap be reached.
Thanks very much once again.
Slightly more relieved.
gc4me
04-23 02:43 PM
To get a copy of your I-140, you need to apply to USCIS using G-639 form. Please read the instruction of the form and you will know more. You need to mention your employer's info and I-140 receipt # etc.
Now a days it takes time. Almost 3 months.
URL: http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/foiatoc.html
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. � 552, was enacted in 1966 and generally provides that :
-Any person has the right to request access to federal agency records or information.
-All agencies of the U.S. Government are required to disclose records upon receiving a written request for them.
-There are nine exemptions to the FOIA that protect certain records from disclosure.
I agree, the email response is no help.
Can you please elaborate on how to request copy I-140 using G-639 form under FOIA?
Now a days it takes time. Almost 3 months.
URL: http://www.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/foiatoc.html
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. � 552, was enacted in 1966 and generally provides that :
-Any person has the right to request access to federal agency records or information.
-All agencies of the U.S. Government are required to disclose records upon receiving a written request for them.
-There are nine exemptions to the FOIA that protect certain records from disclosure.
I agree, the email response is no help.
Can you please elaborate on how to request copy I-140 using G-639 form under FOIA?
abhi_jais
01-27 08:58 AM
Guys,
Don't loose hope, we have got nothing to loose but in case we win, we will help the entire community to achieve their dreams. I guess we should do our part and leave the rest on the senators. Lets get together again and convince our senators to pass this bill, hopefully we can get it done this time.
--Abhi
Don't loose hope, we have got nothing to loose but in case we win, we will help the entire community to achieve their dreams. I guess we should do our part and leave the rest on the senators. Lets get together again and convince our senators to pass this bill, hopefully we can get it done this time.
--Abhi
bsnf
07-12 02:30 PM
I called my lawyer yesterday and he told me that he did not get a single case send back.
He filed 300 applications.
He filed 300 applications.
No comments:
Post a Comment