amitjoey
05-31 12:19 PM
Recently joined.
Contributed $200.
Thanks Jitamitra
Contributed $200.
Thanks Jitamitra
swamy
01-02 02:18 PM
presuming 3500 visas for EB3 from india per year, given about 350,000 were filed recently and presuming about half of that were EB3 india, that means 175,000 are in front of you from India on EB3. so my pd of jan 2006 would become current in about 48 years and yours in about 50. now, others may speculate and extrapolate and say that it's likely to be within a decade based on past experience - i.e RoW not using up its quota and hence spilling over to India, but India EB2 itself is backed up pretty badly & it gets a first shot at it so after these geniuses go green, we get to use that. But again, thats just speculation - so nothing is certain except that it wont be no longer than 50 years based on current law, that too presuming the current law stays as is. lets hope iv succeeds in the backlog efforts in which case the wait would probably be around 3/4 years.
sunnysharma
10-10 04:06 PM
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_ombloc.html
Is it possible to keep working Even u don't have EAD renewed ,but u have Reciept notice with u.. I mean eventually approval will come.
Is it possible to keep working Even u don't have EAD renewed ,but u have Reciept notice with u.. I mean eventually approval will come.
aadimanav
06-22 12:25 AM
Source:
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
06/21/2009: CIR and What's Ahead
On Friday, Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs officially announced that the President was scheduled to call a small group of Congressional leaders and political leaders to the White House to open a dialogue on CIR next Thursday, 06/25/2009. Troublesome was another statement that recognizes the facts by the Press Secretary at the same press conference that the Congress did not have enough numbers to pass a CIR legislation. As we reported earlier, for a CIR to pass the Congress, it should pass both the Senate and the House. However, it is the House that lacks enough numbers at this time to pass a CIR legislation this year. There are a plenty of House legislators who represent districts that are politically not affected by the Hispanic population and their political pressures. These legislators usually form a group of Democratic represenstives who are either conservative and middle of the road in the political ideology. The situation tends to be different when it comes to the Senate that is consisted of legislators based on their statewide consistuencies as opposed to the House representatives that represent small neighborhood and district constituencies. The Senators' decisions are thus derived more from broader national political or statewide political issues and interests of the whole party. For this reasons, for the past several years, the Senate initiated and was able to pass CIR bills which have ended up in the ditch when it moved to the House floor. The background behind the Press Secretary's announcement downplaying the potential success of CIR within this year is their motivation to control unrealistic rise of expectation in the CIR supporting community on the President's initiatives that can also end up in another ditch with potential negative political fall-outs to his political leadership. The current politcal landscape and environment then raise two questions. The first question is whether the President and the Democratic Congress will have enough energy and zeal to successfuly change the existing political landscape, particularly in the House of Representatives, within such a limited time within this year. The Congress will soon go into the Summer recess and the remaining legislative days in the Congressional calendar for 2009 are very limited. The second question is why then Senate Majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, has been spinning in media on his agenda to take up a CIR bill this fall with the full realization of political reality that can be ditched again in the House. It appears that part of such spinning is related to his own political future. His seat in the Senate will be up for reelection in the national mid-term election in 2010 and he needs a strong support from the Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada. The Hispanic population has been rapidly growing durng the past several years in the State of Nevada. His push for a CIR will achieve his political calculation, no matter whether the bill will pass or fail in the Senate. Again, the chance for a CIR passing the Senate in 2009 is indeed very good as the chance for Senate Democrats pulling together 60 votes may turn realistic, particularly as affected by the final result of the current Senate election dispute in the State of Minnesota. In the very near future, the Minnesota Supreme Court is likely to hand down a decision sustaining the election of Mr. Al Franken, a progressive Democrat, as the next Senator, over the conservative former(?) Senator Norm Coleman. For the discussion per se, let's assume that the CIR fails to pass either in the Senate or in the House. The Senator Harry Reid will still get all the credits in his Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada for his initiatives in the Senate to legislate a CIR!
All in all, year 2009 will turn out to be the only year that can pass a CIR because this is a so-called leap-year when there is no national reelection and the House members will be less affected by their activities this year. The key is whether the President Obama will have enough energy, steam, and polical motive to make a full-court pressing and arm-twisting of the conservative Democratic members in the House within a "very" short period of time, within this Summer or early fall at the latest. Currently, his and Democrats' top two reform agenda stay with the nation's health care and energy reforms. Until we see such full dedication and commitment of the President to the CIR within a given time, one should not raise the level of his/her hope or expectation too high as it will indeed bring out really devastating frustration and hopelessness in 2010 in that considering the November 2010 mid-year election, the chance for CIR next year will turn out to be very slim because of the rerunnng Democrats in the election from small districts that are not affected by the Hispanic political pressures. Until we see such solid momentum and heat of passion on the part of the President leading to quick actions in the near future, all the media campaign and spinning of news by the White House and the Senator Reid may have to be taken with caution and discount.
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
06/21/2009: CIR and What's Ahead
On Friday, Obama Press Secretary Robert Gibbs officially announced that the President was scheduled to call a small group of Congressional leaders and political leaders to the White House to open a dialogue on CIR next Thursday, 06/25/2009. Troublesome was another statement that recognizes the facts by the Press Secretary at the same press conference that the Congress did not have enough numbers to pass a CIR legislation. As we reported earlier, for a CIR to pass the Congress, it should pass both the Senate and the House. However, it is the House that lacks enough numbers at this time to pass a CIR legislation this year. There are a plenty of House legislators who represent districts that are politically not affected by the Hispanic population and their political pressures. These legislators usually form a group of Democratic represenstives who are either conservative and middle of the road in the political ideology. The situation tends to be different when it comes to the Senate that is consisted of legislators based on their statewide consistuencies as opposed to the House representatives that represent small neighborhood and district constituencies. The Senators' decisions are thus derived more from broader national political or statewide political issues and interests of the whole party. For this reasons, for the past several years, the Senate initiated and was able to pass CIR bills which have ended up in the ditch when it moved to the House floor. The background behind the Press Secretary's announcement downplaying the potential success of CIR within this year is their motivation to control unrealistic rise of expectation in the CIR supporting community on the President's initiatives that can also end up in another ditch with potential negative political fall-outs to his political leadership. The current politcal landscape and environment then raise two questions. The first question is whether the President and the Democratic Congress will have enough energy and zeal to successfuly change the existing political landscape, particularly in the House of Representatives, within such a limited time within this year. The Congress will soon go into the Summer recess and the remaining legislative days in the Congressional calendar for 2009 are very limited. The second question is why then Senate Majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid, has been spinning in media on his agenda to take up a CIR bill this fall with the full realization of political reality that can be ditched again in the House. It appears that part of such spinning is related to his own political future. His seat in the Senate will be up for reelection in the national mid-term election in 2010 and he needs a strong support from the Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada. The Hispanic population has been rapidly growing durng the past several years in the State of Nevada. His push for a CIR will achieve his political calculation, no matter whether the bill will pass or fail in the Senate. Again, the chance for a CIR passing the Senate in 2009 is indeed very good as the chance for Senate Democrats pulling together 60 votes may turn realistic, particularly as affected by the final result of the current Senate election dispute in the State of Minnesota. In the very near future, the Minnesota Supreme Court is likely to hand down a decision sustaining the election of Mr. Al Franken, a progressive Democrat, as the next Senator, over the conservative former(?) Senator Norm Coleman. For the discussion per se, let's assume that the CIR fails to pass either in the Senate or in the House. The Senator Harry Reid will still get all the credits in his Hispanic constituency in the State of Nevada for his initiatives in the Senate to legislate a CIR!
All in all, year 2009 will turn out to be the only year that can pass a CIR because this is a so-called leap-year when there is no national reelection and the House members will be less affected by their activities this year. The key is whether the President Obama will have enough energy, steam, and polical motive to make a full-court pressing and arm-twisting of the conservative Democratic members in the House within a "very" short period of time, within this Summer or early fall at the latest. Currently, his and Democrats' top two reform agenda stay with the nation's health care and energy reforms. Until we see such full dedication and commitment of the President to the CIR within a given time, one should not raise the level of his/her hope or expectation too high as it will indeed bring out really devastating frustration and hopelessness in 2010 in that considering the November 2010 mid-year election, the chance for CIR next year will turn out to be very slim because of the rerunnng Democrats in the election from small districts that are not affected by the Hispanic political pressures. Until we see such solid momentum and heat of passion on the part of the President leading to quick actions in the near future, all the media campaign and spinning of news by the White House and the Senator Reid may have to be taken with caution and discount.
more...
gc_maine2
05-24 08:36 AM
Good job Salil. Keep up the good work.
nousername
09-04 12:39 PM
Nice.. Now that's what I call as out of box thinking lol ;) not sure where you got the idea from but it was a fun light read. Have a good weekend.
OK, now that we all are agonizing over what's gonna happen, I think the following could be a possibility. USCIS has pre-adj almost 150,000 apps and has got nothing more to do now and the new Q1 for 2010 has around 35,000 visa numbers available to be processed.
Would DOS let CIS sit on their bums with not much to do other than process any new 485s that could be filed by ROW or would DOS move the dates to 2008 or 2007 so that any more people that still need to file 485 can do so and CIS stays busy. I think they would want to keep CIS busy. this would of course not mean every one of us will get approved since EB2/3 India and china only have around ~3000 visa numbers available in Q1 2010.
who votes for this russian roulette option? :D
OK, now that we all are agonizing over what's gonna happen, I think the following could be a possibility. USCIS has pre-adj almost 150,000 apps and has got nothing more to do now and the new Q1 for 2010 has around 35,000 visa numbers available to be processed.
Would DOS let CIS sit on their bums with not much to do other than process any new 485s that could be filed by ROW or would DOS move the dates to 2008 or 2007 so that any more people that still need to file 485 can do so and CIS stays busy. I think they would want to keep CIS busy. this would of course not mean every one of us will get approved since EB2/3 India and china only have around ~3000 visa numbers available in Q1 2010.
who votes for this russian roulette option? :D
more...
hariswaminathan
01-10 04:46 PM
I prefer your theory to Infopass officer. Sincerely hope you are right because Name check is not where i want to be stuck in.
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
anu_t
06-16 01:11 AM
http://grassley.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.View&PressRelease_id=5428
GRASSLEY CONTINUES WORK TO CLOSE H-1B AND L VISA LOOPHOLES
WASHINGTON -- Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin today continued their quest to ensure that American workers are protected, and that companies who bring in foreign workers are complying with the law.
The Senators today sent a letter to Emilio Gonzalez, the director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, asking more questions about how the agency is addressing fraud and abuse in the H-1B visa program.
Earlier this month, the Senators sent letters to the top 9 foreign-owned companies to determine the companies' usage of H-1B visas. Today's letter comes on the heels of responses received from several of the foreign companies.
"From the responses we've received thus far, it�s evident that American workers are in the minority at these companies. I expect Citizenship and Immigration Services to take a hard look at their recruiting methods to make sure they are complying with the law," Grassley said. "We cannot just increase the annual allocation of visas without understanding how companies are using them."
"We've begun to question how many companies are complying with H-1B visa requirements," Durbin said. "I look forward to hearing back from Director Gonzalez on what the government is doing to enforce the law."
At this time, Grassley and Durbin will not be releasing the information received from the companies.
Here is a copy of the letter to Gonzalez.
June 13, 2007
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20529
Dear Director Gonzalez:
Recently, we asked the foreign-based companies who obtain the most H-1B visas to answer questions regarding their workforce, wages, recruitment efforts, and usage of H-1B visas in the United States. Our letters were intended to learn more about how some companies are using the H-1B visa program. We remain concerned that the H-1B and L visa programs are facilitating the displacement of Americans by cheaper foreign workers. We continue our effort to understand how the H-1B and L visa programs are being used by U.S. and foreign-based companies, and therefore request that you provide details related to these programs.
Under current law, H-1B-dependent employers are required to attest that they have not displaced comparable workers in the United States before hiring a foreign worker. They must also make a good faith effort to recruit Americans first.
The responses to our letters to foreign-based H-1B users have led us to question how many companies are currently defined as H-1B-dependent, and if these employers who depend on H-1B visa holders are being adequately monitored for compliance with H-1B program requirements. While we understand that the Department of Labor has primary jurisdiction over H-1B dependent employers, we would like to understand your agency�s role in ensuring compliance with laws regarding displacement and recruitment.
We have also become concerned about the use of L visas by companies who also use large numbers of H-1B visas. Many companies are allowed to bring in L visa workers through a Ablanket petition,@ which is approved by USCIS. While the blanket petition is meant to simplify the process, we fear that some foreign workers may be approved for visas by the Department of State without proper oversight by USCIS, which has primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with L visa program requirements.
In order to better understand the nature of the L visa program, we need to have access to better statistics. We would like to know how many L visas are approved each year, and what companies use the program. We would also like to know more about the use of the blanket petition for L visa holders, and USCIS=s ability to monitor individual visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on a blanket petition.
Finally, we are concerned about the level of fraud monitoring of the H-1B and L visa programs. While we understand that the Fraud Detection and National Security unit is analyzing and writing an assessment of the H-1B program, we are concerned that abuse of both programs is not being addressed adequately. Given that the immigration bill before the Senate includes a provision to allow USCIS to divert special funds to other operations, we would like to know how many dollars have been used specifically for H-1B and L fraud efforts. We also seek more details about how these investigations are being handled within the Department.
Given these concerns, we respectfully ask that the following answers be provided to us by Wednesday, June 20, 2007.
H-1B Dependent Employers
$ Please explain the process of identifying employers as H-1B dependent employers pursuant to INA Section 212(n)(3).
$ How many companies are defined by USCIS to be AH-1B dependent@ employers?
$ How are these H-1B dependent employers being monitored, if at all, by USCIS?
Blanket L Visa Petitions
$ How many L visas have been approved each year since 2000?
$ Please provide lists of companies that have used the L visa program for each of the two most recently available years, and how many visas each company has obtained in each year.
$ Since USCIS has primary jurisdiction over blanket petitions and visa policies, what role has been delegated to the Department of State and how is your agency ensuring that aliens under the blanket petition are being properly screened before entering the U.S.?
$ What role, if any, does USCIS play in monitoring the approval of L visas covered by blanket petitions?
$ Please provide an explanation of USCIS=s ability to track individual L visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on visas covered by a blanket petition.
Investigations of Fraud and Abuse
$ Annually, what has been the total amount of funds deposited into the Fraud Prevention and Detection Account under INA Section 286(v) since it was established? Of this amount, what amount has been provided to the Department of Homeland Security under 286(v)(2)(B)?
$ How have the funds provided pursuant to 286(v)(2)(B) been used in FY2005, FY2006, and thus far in FY2007? How many funds have not been expended in a given year?
$ How does USCIS plan to spend the remaining funds left in FY2007?
$ How many total fraud and abuse referrals have been sent to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the last two years? How many of these referrals, to your knowledge, have been pursued? How many referrals, to your knowledge, are pending? Please provide any further details about specific cases or referrals to ICE that may be helpful to understanding the process within the Department.
$ Please provide examples of recent investigative referrals to ICE dealing with H-1B or L visas. Please explain any referrals in the last two years that have not been pursued or that have been closed, and provide information on how many are currently pending.
While we anticipate your concerns about providing such information to us by Wednesday, June 20th, we must stress the fact that the U.S. Senate is considering comprehensive legislation that would change immigration policies for years to come. The H-1B and L visa programs must be better understood before further action is taken on this bill. We appreciate your cooperation in providing us with input in the next week.
Please contact XXXXXXXX if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator United States Senator
GRASSLEY CONTINUES WORK TO CLOSE H-1B AND L VISA LOOPHOLES
WASHINGTON -- Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin today continued their quest to ensure that American workers are protected, and that companies who bring in foreign workers are complying with the law.
The Senators today sent a letter to Emilio Gonzalez, the director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, asking more questions about how the agency is addressing fraud and abuse in the H-1B visa program.
Earlier this month, the Senators sent letters to the top 9 foreign-owned companies to determine the companies' usage of H-1B visas. Today's letter comes on the heels of responses received from several of the foreign companies.
"From the responses we've received thus far, it�s evident that American workers are in the minority at these companies. I expect Citizenship and Immigration Services to take a hard look at their recruiting methods to make sure they are complying with the law," Grassley said. "We cannot just increase the annual allocation of visas without understanding how companies are using them."
"We've begun to question how many companies are complying with H-1B visa requirements," Durbin said. "I look forward to hearing back from Director Gonzalez on what the government is doing to enforce the law."
At this time, Grassley and Durbin will not be releasing the information received from the companies.
Here is a copy of the letter to Gonzalez.
June 13, 2007
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20529
Dear Director Gonzalez:
Recently, we asked the foreign-based companies who obtain the most H-1B visas to answer questions regarding their workforce, wages, recruitment efforts, and usage of H-1B visas in the United States. Our letters were intended to learn more about how some companies are using the H-1B visa program. We remain concerned that the H-1B and L visa programs are facilitating the displacement of Americans by cheaper foreign workers. We continue our effort to understand how the H-1B and L visa programs are being used by U.S. and foreign-based companies, and therefore request that you provide details related to these programs.
Under current law, H-1B-dependent employers are required to attest that they have not displaced comparable workers in the United States before hiring a foreign worker. They must also make a good faith effort to recruit Americans first.
The responses to our letters to foreign-based H-1B users have led us to question how many companies are currently defined as H-1B-dependent, and if these employers who depend on H-1B visa holders are being adequately monitored for compliance with H-1B program requirements. While we understand that the Department of Labor has primary jurisdiction over H-1B dependent employers, we would like to understand your agency�s role in ensuring compliance with laws regarding displacement and recruitment.
We have also become concerned about the use of L visas by companies who also use large numbers of H-1B visas. Many companies are allowed to bring in L visa workers through a Ablanket petition,@ which is approved by USCIS. While the blanket petition is meant to simplify the process, we fear that some foreign workers may be approved for visas by the Department of State without proper oversight by USCIS, which has primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with L visa program requirements.
In order to better understand the nature of the L visa program, we need to have access to better statistics. We would like to know how many L visas are approved each year, and what companies use the program. We would also like to know more about the use of the blanket petition for L visa holders, and USCIS=s ability to monitor individual visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on a blanket petition.
Finally, we are concerned about the level of fraud monitoring of the H-1B and L visa programs. While we understand that the Fraud Detection and National Security unit is analyzing and writing an assessment of the H-1B program, we are concerned that abuse of both programs is not being addressed adequately. Given that the immigration bill before the Senate includes a provision to allow USCIS to divert special funds to other operations, we would like to know how many dollars have been used specifically for H-1B and L fraud efforts. We also seek more details about how these investigations are being handled within the Department.
Given these concerns, we respectfully ask that the following answers be provided to us by Wednesday, June 20, 2007.
H-1B Dependent Employers
$ Please explain the process of identifying employers as H-1B dependent employers pursuant to INA Section 212(n)(3).
$ How many companies are defined by USCIS to be AH-1B dependent@ employers?
$ How are these H-1B dependent employers being monitored, if at all, by USCIS?
Blanket L Visa Petitions
$ How many L visas have been approved each year since 2000?
$ Please provide lists of companies that have used the L visa program for each of the two most recently available years, and how many visas each company has obtained in each year.
$ Since USCIS has primary jurisdiction over blanket petitions and visa policies, what role has been delegated to the Department of State and how is your agency ensuring that aliens under the blanket petition are being properly screened before entering the U.S.?
$ What role, if any, does USCIS play in monitoring the approval of L visas covered by blanket petitions?
$ Please provide an explanation of USCIS=s ability to track individual L visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on visas covered by a blanket petition.
Investigations of Fraud and Abuse
$ Annually, what has been the total amount of funds deposited into the Fraud Prevention and Detection Account under INA Section 286(v) since it was established? Of this amount, what amount has been provided to the Department of Homeland Security under 286(v)(2)(B)?
$ How have the funds provided pursuant to 286(v)(2)(B) been used in FY2005, FY2006, and thus far in FY2007? How many funds have not been expended in a given year?
$ How does USCIS plan to spend the remaining funds left in FY2007?
$ How many total fraud and abuse referrals have been sent to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the last two years? How many of these referrals, to your knowledge, have been pursued? How many referrals, to your knowledge, are pending? Please provide any further details about specific cases or referrals to ICE that may be helpful to understanding the process within the Department.
$ Please provide examples of recent investigative referrals to ICE dealing with H-1B or L visas. Please explain any referrals in the last two years that have not been pursued or that have been closed, and provide information on how many are currently pending.
While we anticipate your concerns about providing such information to us by Wednesday, June 20th, we must stress the fact that the U.S. Senate is considering comprehensive legislation that would change immigration policies for years to come. The H-1B and L visa programs must be better understood before further action is taken on this bill. We appreciate your cooperation in providing us with input in the next week.
Please contact XXXXXXXX if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator United States Senator
more...
optimist
03-14 09:08 AM
H1-B folks are permitted to have sources of passive income from entities other than their H1 sponsor. This includes bank interests, stock dividends, profits from stock transactions etc. Most of these incomes are taxable and reported to the IRS on 1099-INT or 1099-DIV forms. When you open a bank account and get a bonus of, say $200, it is considered as interest earned.
The vital point to remember, I guess, is that H1s are NOT allowed to generate an income from any source (other that H1 sponsor) that needs any tangible work to be done- investments do not count as tangible work.
The vital point to remember, I guess, is that H1s are NOT allowed to generate an income from any source (other that H1 sponsor) that needs any tangible work to be done- investments do not count as tangible work.
amits
02-04 04:58 PM
I am in Phoenix/Tempe area.
more...
onemoredesi
06-21 10:53 AM
In case the I-485 is filed concurrently with I-140 or on the basis of a I-140 "pending approval", if the "I-140" is rejected (say because it was incorrectly classified as EB-2 when it should have been EB-3), then is the I-485 also automatically rejected? (My guess: YES)
If this happens to you, does this mean you may not be able to resubmit I-485 if your "priority date" is not current at the time you came to know it got rejected? (My guess: YES... and this is a scary scenario.)
Finally, if the I-140 (EB2) is mentions the requirement to be "BS + 5 years of post BS experience", but the the reviewing officer thinks that the 140 application is not supported by "proper" evidence of 5 years of progressive post BS experience.... then would it generate an RFE or would it straightaway cause a rejection of the I-140?
Experts, please comment. I may have to face this scenario.
Thanks!
Abhijit
Contribution so far: $100
Abhijit,
This happened to a very close friend of mine a couple of years ago when he was in hi 6th year. He luckily found a labor substitution at that time and was able to immediately file.
I-140 is probably most important of the entire green card process.. it is what proves the employer's capability to pay the prospective employee.
To your question, if I-140 is rejected, your entire application is denied.. I-485 is immediately nullified.
You might want to talk to your attorney if you have the slightest of the doubts..
If this happens to you, does this mean you may not be able to resubmit I-485 if your "priority date" is not current at the time you came to know it got rejected? (My guess: YES... and this is a scary scenario.)
Finally, if the I-140 (EB2) is mentions the requirement to be "BS + 5 years of post BS experience", but the the reviewing officer thinks that the 140 application is not supported by "proper" evidence of 5 years of progressive post BS experience.... then would it generate an RFE or would it straightaway cause a rejection of the I-140?
Experts, please comment. I may have to face this scenario.
Thanks!
Abhijit
Contribution so far: $100
Abhijit,
This happened to a very close friend of mine a couple of years ago when he was in hi 6th year. He luckily found a labor substitution at that time and was able to immediately file.
I-140 is probably most important of the entire green card process.. it is what proves the employer's capability to pay the prospective employee.
To your question, if I-140 is rejected, your entire application is denied.. I-485 is immediately nullified.
You might want to talk to your attorney if you have the slightest of the doubts..
jfredr
08-10 03:29 PM
Reforms To Visa Programs For Highly Skilled Workers.
IMPROVING EXISTING IMMIGRATION
22. The Administration Will Reform And Expedite Background Checks For Immigration. Current mechanisms for conducting immigration background checks are backed up, slowing processing times and endangering national security. The Administration is investing substantial new funds to address the backlog, and the FBI and USCIS are working together on a variety of projects designed to streamline existing processes so as to reduce waiting times without sacrificing security.
23. The President Is Directing The Department Of Homeland Security And The Social Security Administration To Study The Technical And Recordkeeping Reforms Necessary To Guarantee That Illegal Aliens Do Not Earn Credit In Our Social Security System For Illegal Work. Currently, aliens who make Social Security payments while working here legally can continue to accrue credits even if they overstay their visa. Improved data-sharing can lay the foundation for eventual Congressional action to eliminate this practice (which proved an obstacle to comprehensive reform). The relevant agencies are ordered to report to the President with a detailed plan for eliminating the problem.
IMPROVING EXISTING IMMIGRATION
22. The Administration Will Reform And Expedite Background Checks For Immigration. Current mechanisms for conducting immigration background checks are backed up, slowing processing times and endangering national security. The Administration is investing substantial new funds to address the backlog, and the FBI and USCIS are working together on a variety of projects designed to streamline existing processes so as to reduce waiting times without sacrificing security.
23. The President Is Directing The Department Of Homeland Security And The Social Security Administration To Study The Technical And Recordkeeping Reforms Necessary To Guarantee That Illegal Aliens Do Not Earn Credit In Our Social Security System For Illegal Work. Currently, aliens who make Social Security payments while working here legally can continue to accrue credits even if they overstay their visa. Improved data-sharing can lay the foundation for eventual Congressional action to eliminate this practice (which proved an obstacle to comprehensive reform). The relevant agencies are ordered to report to the President with a detailed plan for eliminating the problem.
more...
GCBy3000
05-03 09:17 PM
This looks pretty high. The total count for 2004 & 2005 is 140K for India. Already the backlog center is having 300K applications out of which some 40%(guess) would be for India.
glus
05-31 10:38 AM
thanx
This is my first time $100 contribution.
Paypal Id: 31T703381K4953443
This is my first time $100 contribution.
Paypal Id: 31T703381K4953443
more...
japs19
01-07 02:57 PM
thanks for the reply but I agree my h1 stamp is expired but h1 is valid till 2009
As long as you work for the same employer with same title and job location, you don't need H-1 stamped. If you have a valid approval (I-797) you can enter the country on H-1 and not worry about AP or EAD. But just to answer your question, if you use AP to enter...you won't need to use EAD. If you do use EAD then you are out of H-1 status. AP will let you keep H-1 status.
I am not a lawyer so it would be best to consult one.
As long as you work for the same employer with same title and job location, you don't need H-1 stamped. If you have a valid approval (I-797) you can enter the country on H-1 and not worry about AP or EAD. But just to answer your question, if you use AP to enter...you won't need to use EAD. If you do use EAD then you are out of H-1 status. AP will let you keep H-1 status.
I am not a lawyer so it would be best to consult one.
usdreams
05-28 11:05 PM
Hi kzinzuwadia,
My infopass went well, in fact, it was good that I took it, the IO told me that due to some error on their part, my file is no longer with them, it was sent back to the main office, she requested my file back from the other office & they will process once it comes back, which takes approx. 2-3 weeks.
Due to that we didn't get my Wife's GC in the court, the IJ told us that since the primary don't have GC, she can't get it. Now we will have to wait another 5 months for her GC.
Does anyone know if the court date can be moved forward if I get my GC ?
Thank you kzinzuwadia.
My infopass went well, in fact, it was good that I took it, the IO told me that due to some error on their part, my file is no longer with them, it was sent back to the main office, she requested my file back from the other office & they will process once it comes back, which takes approx. 2-3 weeks.
Due to that we didn't get my Wife's GC in the court, the IJ told us that since the primary don't have GC, she can't get it. Now we will have to wait another 5 months for her GC.
Does anyone know if the court date can be moved forward if I get my GC ?
Thank you kzinzuwadia.
more...
eagerr2i
11-05 01:46 PM
Thanks very much for helping with your air miles. I have complied a list of all who have pledged till now.
IV core could use the airmiles in the coming months when there would be a need to make the trip to the national capital.
IV core could use the airmiles in the coming months when there would be a need to make the trip to the national capital.
vinoddas
07-29 08:57 PM
I have a unique problem with possibly getting a green card too early. Please let me know how I can make this situation better. My priority date in EB2 India is in Jan 2006, which means potentially I could get my green card in 2-3 months.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
I plan to get engaged in December 2008 and married in December 2009 to an Indian born Australian citizen. As far as I can see, her chargeability would be from India.
What are my options to make my life easier and to be able to successfully bring my future wife to the US the easiest possible way. So far, I have 2 options:
1. Use the special E3 work visa for Australian citizens.
2. If I dont get my GC within the next few months, do an early court marriage and invoke the following-to-join spouse when she is ready to come to the US.
surabhi
06-19 10:52 AM
I-485 reciepts are not part of required supporting documentation.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
see page 6:
This is for paper filing.
Need front and back of EAD card
2 photos
$340 check or None as applicable
i-485 receipt notices are required only for first time filers not filing along with I485.
Sorry to have jumped the gun. I-485 receipt is needed.
"All applications must be filed with the documents required
below, in addition to the particular evidence required for the
category listed in "Who May File This Form I-765" with fee,
if required."
On Page 4 in the Instructions doucment refers to the particular evidence
A. Adjustment Applicant--(c)(9). File your EAD
application with a copy of the receipt notice or other
evidence that your Form I-485, Application for
Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, is pending.
You may file Form I-765 together with your Form
I-485.
Since it talks about other evidence, you can use FP notices.
The other requirements are photos, check for $340 if applicable, front and back of EAD card.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
see page 6:
This is for paper filing.
Need front and back of EAD card
2 photos
$340 check or None as applicable
i-485 receipt notices are required only for first time filers not filing along with I485.
Sorry to have jumped the gun. I-485 receipt is needed.
"All applications must be filed with the documents required
below, in addition to the particular evidence required for the
category listed in "Who May File This Form I-765" with fee,
if required."
On Page 4 in the Instructions doucment refers to the particular evidence
A. Adjustment Applicant--(c)(9). File your EAD
application with a copy of the receipt notice or other
evidence that your Form I-485, Application for
Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, is pending.
You may file Form I-765 together with your Form
I-485.
Since it talks about other evidence, you can use FP notices.
The other requirements are photos, check for $340 if applicable, front and back of EAD card.
jonty_11
03-02 02:27 PM
Exception 4 - have a question around this statement: For German transit VISA
- are holding a valid visa or other residence permit for the USA (this includes advance paroles, but not approval notices), Canada or Switzerland and travel to the country which issued that visa or residence permit
do not need transit VISA.
Does that mean if you are travelling from India to US (with valid US Visitor VISA) u need a transit VISA.
Above exception seem to appy only if u are travelling to country that issued u the VISA (india), but in this case we are travelling from that Country to US.
never mind - Exception #3 covers it..
- are holding a valid visa or other residence permit for the USA (this includes advance paroles, but not approval notices), Canada or Switzerland and travel to the country which issued that visa or residence permit
do not need transit VISA.
Does that mean if you are travelling from India to US (with valid US Visitor VISA) u need a transit VISA.
Above exception seem to appy only if u are travelling to country that issued u the VISA (india), but in this case we are travelling from that Country to US.
never mind - Exception #3 covers it..
dixie
09-05 05:47 PM
Not sure what happens technically to the old CIR, but most likely both the senate and house will throw away their respective bills and start from scratch.
I have a hypethetical situation
1. Say in the election Dems get both house and Senate AND
2. No compromise happens in CIR at Lame Duck Session too. Also
no SKILL passes too AND
3. New winners Sworn in and its congress controlled by Dems.
Now what is the status of the CIR that was passed in the senate and
that house bill passed? Does it expire or go annul? Or can these
new members come a compromise on that? What could be the attittude of the congress member towards it? It would be really interesting to know the
legal sides and political attittude of lawmakers to it.
thanks
I have a hypethetical situation
1. Say in the election Dems get both house and Senate AND
2. No compromise happens in CIR at Lame Duck Session too. Also
no SKILL passes too AND
3. New winners Sworn in and its congress controlled by Dems.
Now what is the status of the CIR that was passed in the senate and
that house bill passed? Does it expire or go annul? Or can these
new members come a compromise on that? What could be the attittude of the congress member towards it? It would be really interesting to know the
legal sides and political attittude of lawmakers to it.
thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment