qualified_trash
11-30 12:11 PM
I have Labor (PERM) and I140 approved from my current employer.
can I apply trasfer and extension with new employer.
Advice is highly appreciated.
you can!!
BUT, your new employer has to do your PERM and I140 all over again. you can retain your old PD though!!
can I apply trasfer and extension with new employer.
Advice is highly appreciated.
you can!!
BUT, your new employer has to do your PERM and I140 all over again. you can retain your old PD though!!
wallpaper more.
shsk
07-16 11:36 PM
Hi,
My attorney is requesting that I need to submit Tax return for filing AOS.
I had sent W2 forms
Is tax return separate from W2 , I am confused..:confused:
Pls help
My attorney is requesting that I need to submit Tax return for filing AOS.
I had sent W2 forms
Is tax return separate from W2 , I am confused..:confused:
Pls help
sobers
06-07 06:13 PM
About a week back (see my first post in this thread), I said if FAIR lobbyist Brian Bilbray wins the special election in Calif. it will galvanize the anti-immigration sources. This really was a bellweather election and the folks in the 50th district made their choice: a restrictionist lobbyist over a liberal non-lobbyist who favored the Senate immig plan. Whatever the dynamics of the race or the constituency, this is what it boils down to.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/07/midterm.california/index.html
Plus, now Tancredo adds another House member to his immigration "reform" (read Restrictionist) caucus, making the Comprhensive Reform even more difficult to achieve this year.
http://tancredo.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1200
Well, sure enough, you saw Dobbs touting Bilbray today. All the Restrictionist media also made a big deal out of this (Fox, Wash Times, etc). Rep Duncan Hunter, another house restrictionist, also hardened his position on a compromise, saying it reflected the position of the House Leadership. Soemtimes I think this is a deliberate attempt on part of the Republican Party to mobilize their core voters- Repub House candidates who show they can oppose their President on Immigration will be rewarded with votes from the republican base. This is how Repubs will use immigration as a wedge issue this year, mobilize their base, and try to retain control of the house when almost every other issue (Iraq war, ethics, deficits) is against them. Bush will probably continue to promote immig compromise till the July 2 election in Mexico, and let it go after a Calderon win. Meanwhile, the conference committtee will be appointed, but there will be no compromise this year as House Repubs use this as a wedge issue to get their voters out.
What this means for us is that IV should now start looking for an alternative legislative vehicle for Immigration Relief (which they probably are already). I know nothing can be moved until CIR officially dies, but we should do the groundwork on future efforts so no time is wasted when CIR does die in late july. I wish I am proven wrong, but I suspect there is a less than 5% chance of passing an Immigration Bll similar to the Senate version this year. I'm not usually downbeat, but frankly this is what I see happening.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/07/midterm.california/index.html
Plus, now Tancredo adds another House member to his immigration "reform" (read Restrictionist) caucus, making the Comprhensive Reform even more difficult to achieve this year.
http://tancredo.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1200
Well, sure enough, you saw Dobbs touting Bilbray today. All the Restrictionist media also made a big deal out of this (Fox, Wash Times, etc). Rep Duncan Hunter, another house restrictionist, also hardened his position on a compromise, saying it reflected the position of the House Leadership. Soemtimes I think this is a deliberate attempt on part of the Republican Party to mobilize their core voters- Repub House candidates who show they can oppose their President on Immigration will be rewarded with votes from the republican base. This is how Repubs will use immigration as a wedge issue this year, mobilize their base, and try to retain control of the house when almost every other issue (Iraq war, ethics, deficits) is against them. Bush will probably continue to promote immig compromise till the July 2 election in Mexico, and let it go after a Calderon win. Meanwhile, the conference committtee will be appointed, but there will be no compromise this year as House Repubs use this as a wedge issue to get their voters out.
What this means for us is that IV should now start looking for an alternative legislative vehicle for Immigration Relief (which they probably are already). I know nothing can be moved until CIR officially dies, but we should do the groundwork on future efforts so no time is wasted when CIR does die in late july. I wish I am proven wrong, but I suspect there is a less than 5% chance of passing an Immigration Bll similar to the Senate version this year. I'm not usually downbeat, but frankly this is what I see happening.
2011 2010 Swanepoel hosts quot;The
flexi
04-04 01:55 PM
... for your help! Now, what do you guys think about getting paid until the end of June by the 1st employer (but at the same time starting to work inofficially i.e. observing only for the 2nd employer) and then going back to work for a couple of weeks for the 1st employer but staring to get paid by the 2nd so that it's fair for both? Would that be legal? If not, there really isn't a good way to deal with this since the new H1Bs are valid not before Oct (if i'd apply for 2 H1Bs), right? I obviously don't want to jeopardize my visa to make my old employer happy so don't want to do anything that's not completely OK in that regard....
In regards to the timing of a petition for a transfer (leaving all the other stuff above aside for a moment), let's say i'd like to start at the new employer 1st of July - to be on the safe side I should get a lawyer, plan a week for them to get the petition ready and then i'd have to wait a couple weeks for the receipt notice (which then allows me to work for the new employer, correct?) - so that would make it 3 weeks?
Thanks again!
PS: more complicated now???
PPS: germany.... not india.... but would love to go there on the way back :cool:
In regards to the timing of a petition for a transfer (leaving all the other stuff above aside for a moment), let's say i'd like to start at the new employer 1st of July - to be on the safe side I should get a lawyer, plan a week for them to get the petition ready and then i'd have to wait a couple weeks for the receipt notice (which then allows me to work for the new employer, correct?) - so that would make it 3 weeks?
Thanks again!
PS: more complicated now???
PPS: germany.... not india.... but would love to go there on the way back :cool:
more...
JazzByTheBay
07-11 10:03 PM
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
brit89
07-07 02:02 PM
How many years of years of W-2 form copies do we need to attach, when we file I-485 applications?
more...
GotFreedom?
07-22 05:38 PM
Hi guys,
I bet this question must have been asked before but I couldn't find the relevant thread so I'm asking again. Apologies if its a repeat.
I am maintaining my H1-B while my AOS is pending. Last year my wife went to India while she had valid H4 (not stamped in passport) and AP documents. She did not get her visa stamped and reentered the country using the AP with no issues. He I-94 said Parolled till Some date, March 2009. I totally forgot about it and never renewed her AP or mine. Does it pose any kind of threat to her legal status in the US and AOS?
I am still working on H1 and she is a parolee.
Thanks in advance fopr the responses.
I bet this question must have been asked before but I couldn't find the relevant thread so I'm asking again. Apologies if its a repeat.
I am maintaining my H1-B while my AOS is pending. Last year my wife went to India while she had valid H4 (not stamped in passport) and AP documents. She did not get her visa stamped and reentered the country using the AP with no issues. He I-94 said Parolled till Some date, March 2009. I totally forgot about it and never renewed her AP or mine. Does it pose any kind of threat to her legal status in the US and AOS?
I am still working on H1 and she is a parolee.
Thanks in advance fopr the responses.
2010 images Angel Candice Swanepoel
buddhaas
02-02 03:57 PM
Why Is H-1B A Dirty Word?
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
more...
kondur_007
10-30 12:17 PM
Thanks for your reply it was helpful.
BUt can any one tell me do we have to be on payroll for at least 6 months after you get Gc or can we on and off payroll and still be with the same employer for what ever length of time we stick to the same employer who filed GC..
Srh1: Please read my comments in the above two threads (thread links posted by bluez). I tried to summarize everything there.
As far as your above question is concerned: You will be just fine even if you are on and off the payroll (especially if the empolyer does not have the project for some time...meaning that on and off was triggerred by the employer); because it still shows YOUR intention to stay with the employer.
Feel free to ask any further questions (after going through above two threads) if you need any further info...I am not a lawyer but I will be happy to share what I know.
Good Luck.
BUt can any one tell me do we have to be on payroll for at least 6 months after you get Gc or can we on and off payroll and still be with the same employer for what ever length of time we stick to the same employer who filed GC..
Srh1: Please read my comments in the above two threads (thread links posted by bluez). I tried to summarize everything there.
As far as your above question is concerned: You will be just fine even if you are on and off the payroll (especially if the empolyer does not have the project for some time...meaning that on and off was triggerred by the employer); because it still shows YOUR intention to stay with the employer.
Feel free to ask any further questions (after going through above two threads) if you need any further info...I am not a lawyer but I will be happy to share what I know.
Good Luck.
hair more.
xela
06-10 12:51 PM
It s been a while since i have said anything here, and mostly because it seems this has become a "everyones racist against indians" and everyone else isnt important kind of talk.
while I understand most here are from India, please refrain from putting the ROW people down and make it sound like we have no wait at all. i ve been here since 2000 and started my green card process in 2003. I m just as frustrated, but I refrain from coming here and telling everyone how ROW should get all the good stuff and the rest can go to ....
:(:confused:
we should fax/email letters to lawmakers/senators from every angle. One way of doing this would be drafting a letter with the calculation and a quote " Just for Indians, and chinese nationality for rest of the world = 1year"
We should be attacking in each and every angle so they get used to reading our issues and would come with a solution.
MAKE A NOISE
while I understand most here are from India, please refrain from putting the ROW people down and make it sound like we have no wait at all. i ve been here since 2000 and started my green card process in 2003. I m just as frustrated, but I refrain from coming here and telling everyone how ROW should get all the good stuff and the rest can go to ....
:(:confused:
we should fax/email letters to lawmakers/senators from every angle. One way of doing this would be drafting a letter with the calculation and a quote " Just for Indians, and chinese nationality for rest of the world = 1year"
We should be attacking in each and every angle so they get used to reading our issues and would come with a solution.
MAKE A NOISE
more...
illinois_alum
06-06 04:58 AM
See responses in red below. Guys...I don't understand why there's so much of confusion. How is it that you can't figure out what the manner of your last entry was??? If you used H1 then it has to be H1, if you used AP then has to be PAROLEE! In any case, this is stamped on your I-94...just check there.
Hi illinois_alum and sanjayc,
I have very similar questions except for our situation. Both me and wife have valid H-1B and H-4 and need to apply for our EAD extension (we are maintaining them in parallel). Can you suggest what should be our response to these in such case:
1. Manner of Last Entry : Should it be H-1B?Check your I-94. I-94 stamp tells you your manner of last entry and current immigration status
2. Current Immigration Status : H-1B? We never used EAD/AP to work or travelI don't know when this would be different from the Manner of Last Entry. This field entry should be same as previous one
6. Eligibility status: Should we just menton (c)(9) or have to add "FILED I-485" too?I think there is a Drop Down...you can't just enter your own text (don't remember 100% though. But if this is text then just enter (c)(9) - this already means that you have EAD eligibility because you have filed for AOS/I-485
Thanks for your help.
Hi illinois_alum and sanjayc,
I have very similar questions except for our situation. Both me and wife have valid H-1B and H-4 and need to apply for our EAD extension (we are maintaining them in parallel). Can you suggest what should be our response to these in such case:
1. Manner of Last Entry : Should it be H-1B?Check your I-94. I-94 stamp tells you your manner of last entry and current immigration status
2. Current Immigration Status : H-1B? We never used EAD/AP to work or travelI don't know when this would be different from the Manner of Last Entry. This field entry should be same as previous one
6. Eligibility status: Should we just menton (c)(9) or have to add "FILED I-485" too?I think there is a Drop Down...you can't just enter your own text (don't remember 100% though. But if this is text then just enter (c)(9) - this already means that you have EAD eligibility because you have filed for AOS/I-485
Thanks for your help.
hot more.
Templarian
11-24 10:02 AM
No members have written a tutorial for Flex as of yet. Kirupa has said it a thousand times there has to be valid tutorials for there to be a forum (a simple search would have shown this).
My suggestion write a few well written tutorials on flex specific topics and submit them to Kirupa.
Also Kirupa is a MS developer so its only inherent that he writes what he knows best... I don't think he really even uses Flash very much anymore, except when he wrote that tutorial about some of the new features.
Search Results:
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=289365
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=276516
My suggestion write a few well written tutorials on flex specific topics and submit them to Kirupa.
Also Kirupa is a MS developer so its only inherent that he writes what he knows best... I don't think he really even uses Flash very much anymore, except when he wrote that tutorial about some of the new features.
Search Results:
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=289365
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=276516
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
vamsi_poondla
04-22 03:00 PM
Good reply. I agree with you
Though your intention is to help OP, there are certain things that need to be observed especially in this climate where there is lot of backlash against legal immigrants. We have to ensure that we do not provide any ammu to anti's with our comments.
For an employer to sponsor a foreign worker on H1B,
First of all, there needs to be a skilled worker position open and available in US and
2nd that there are no "qualified" US citizens are available to fill that position.
OP's post goes against both these conditions, Forget about the rest such as bad economy, survival etc.. as per law, Employer has to pack the H1B home if the position is knocked off with a flight ticket and a reasonable relocation.
No offense to any one but just calling for more caution as we have seen increased number of posts like these.
Though your intention is to help OP, there are certain things that need to be observed especially in this climate where there is lot of backlash against legal immigrants. We have to ensure that we do not provide any ammu to anti's with our comments.
For an employer to sponsor a foreign worker on H1B,
First of all, there needs to be a skilled worker position open and available in US and
2nd that there are no "qualified" US citizens are available to fill that position.
OP's post goes against both these conditions, Forget about the rest such as bad economy, survival etc.. as per law, Employer has to pack the H1B home if the position is knocked off with a flight ticket and a reasonable relocation.
No offense to any one but just calling for more caution as we have seen increased number of posts like these.
tattoo more.
Ann Ruben
02-04 09:16 PM
Hi Prem,
As long as your sister is complying with the terms of her B-1 admission, she is entitled to begin work for the new employer as soon as that employer files an H-1 petition requesting a change of status on her behalf. Pay stubs from her original H employer should not be required. The language quoted below is from a Nov. 2000 USCIS Q&A:
"Q10: Who is eligible to use the H1B "portability" provisions?
A10: The portability provisions allow a nonimmigrant alien previously issued an H-1B visa or otherwise accorded H-1B status to begin working for a new H-1B employer as soon as the new employer files an H-1B petition for the alien. Previously, aliens in this situation had to await INS approval before commencing the new H-1B employment. These provisions apply to H-1B petitions filed "before, on, or after" the date of enactment, so all aliens who meet this definition can begin using the portability provisions.
Q11: Are there any other limitations on the portability provisions?
A11: An alien must have been lawfully admitted into the United States. The new employer must have filed a "non-frivolous" petition while the alien was in a period of stay authorized by the Attorney General. A non-frivolous petition is one that has some basis in law or fact. INS plans to further define this in its implementing regulations. Subsequent to such lawful admission, the alien must not have been employed without authorization."
However, if the request for a change of status is made too soon after her arrival USCIS could find that she committed fraud at entry. For that reason, I strongly advise that nothing be filed (including the LCA)until your sister has been here at least 30 days, and preferably 60 days.
Also, if your sister was out of the US for a year or more, there is a possibility that she might be subject to the H-1 cap.
Hope this information is helpful.
Ann
As long as your sister is complying with the terms of her B-1 admission, she is entitled to begin work for the new employer as soon as that employer files an H-1 petition requesting a change of status on her behalf. Pay stubs from her original H employer should not be required. The language quoted below is from a Nov. 2000 USCIS Q&A:
"Q10: Who is eligible to use the H1B "portability" provisions?
A10: The portability provisions allow a nonimmigrant alien previously issued an H-1B visa or otherwise accorded H-1B status to begin working for a new H-1B employer as soon as the new employer files an H-1B petition for the alien. Previously, aliens in this situation had to await INS approval before commencing the new H-1B employment. These provisions apply to H-1B petitions filed "before, on, or after" the date of enactment, so all aliens who meet this definition can begin using the portability provisions.
Q11: Are there any other limitations on the portability provisions?
A11: An alien must have been lawfully admitted into the United States. The new employer must have filed a "non-frivolous" petition while the alien was in a period of stay authorized by the Attorney General. A non-frivolous petition is one that has some basis in law or fact. INS plans to further define this in its implementing regulations. Subsequent to such lawful admission, the alien must not have been employed without authorization."
However, if the request for a change of status is made too soon after her arrival USCIS could find that she committed fraud at entry. For that reason, I strongly advise that nothing be filed (including the LCA)until your sister has been here at least 30 days, and preferably 60 days.
Also, if your sister was out of the US for a year or more, there is a possibility that she might be subject to the H-1 cap.
Hope this information is helpful.
Ann
more...
pictures hairstyles About Candice
qwert_47
09-27 12:41 PM
^^^^^^^ bump
Appreciate any advice...thanks
Appreciate any advice...thanks
dresses worasa. UID：20821. สมัครเมื่อ2009-10-16; ใช้ล่าสุด2009-10-17; ออนไลน์0ชม.
akilaakka
10-05 12:44 PM
If the information he said to me is true.
He is from India.
EB 2 NIW. Filed concurently in Sep 2005. Got his card and his wife's approved few weeks ago
He is from India.
EB 2 NIW. Filed concurently in Sep 2005. Got his card and his wife's approved few weeks ago
more...
makeup wallpaper a Victoria#39;s
EndlessWait
06-20 12:05 PM
My wife's current H4 is valid till Nov. She got her H1 also approved from Oct'2007. She checked the status this morning only on USCIS.
I'm applying for I-485 and adding her as spouse. Should I file for her advance parole and put her status as H4 in it? What happens to to her H1 approval, if advanced parole gets approved also. Will she loose her H1 status?
any ideas??
I'm applying for I-485 and adding her as spouse. Should I file for her advance parole and put her status as H4 in it? What happens to to her H1 approval, if advanced parole gets approved also. Will she loose her H1 status?
any ideas??
girlfriend Here comes something for
gccovet
09-04 01:42 PM
I beg to disagree on this thought:
I think in the above scenario, they do not invalidate your H1. You can continue till the end-date on the H1, even though it was approved based on pending I-485. I suggest you consult an attorney on this specific scenario.
You can work on h1b - you will get H1b based on existing approved 140 and pending 485.
If 140 is revoked by employer you may get a RFE or NOID or in rare cases erroneous denial but you can continue on h1b while you respond to RFE or NOID oor through MTR to erroneous denial.
Sending AC21 docs does not necessarily mean you may not get NOID - AC21 docs seldom go into your file.
LostInGCProcess, Chanduv23,
Thank you for your replies, I appreciate it.
So, I guess, it is okay to get the H1B "Transferred" and if (god forbid) I-485 gets denied, I can still work till the teneure of H1B and then go home.
Also, if i-140 is revoked , that should trigger NOID or RFE which the lawyer will handle (hopefully successfully).
Once again, Thanks a lot.
Regards.
GCCovet
I think in the above scenario, they do not invalidate your H1. You can continue till the end-date on the H1, even though it was approved based on pending I-485. I suggest you consult an attorney on this specific scenario.
You can work on h1b - you will get H1b based on existing approved 140 and pending 485.
If 140 is revoked by employer you may get a RFE or NOID or in rare cases erroneous denial but you can continue on h1b while you respond to RFE or NOID oor through MTR to erroneous denial.
Sending AC21 docs does not necessarily mean you may not get NOID - AC21 docs seldom go into your file.
LostInGCProcess, Chanduv23,
Thank you for your replies, I appreciate it.
So, I guess, it is okay to get the H1B "Transferred" and if (god forbid) I-485 gets denied, I can still work till the teneure of H1B and then go home.
Also, if i-140 is revoked , that should trigger NOID or RFE which the lawyer will handle (hopefully successfully).
Once again, Thanks a lot.
Regards.
GCCovet
hairstyles girlfriend 09,Candice
sparky_jones
02-03 02:44 PM
Documentation informing the USCIS of your having utilized AC21 benefits isn't necessary, but is a proactive measure usually taken to have a clean slate on the applicant's part.
It is true that in a majority of the cases the AC21 documentation might never reach the applican't 485 file, but in an unforeseen circumstance such as the denial of one's 485 based on 140 revocation (which, as we know isn't very uncommon) and matters reaching an immigration court, proof that one had taken proactive steps and gone out of one's way to inform the USCIS might make one's case stronger and thus make it easier to have the case reopened.
I was fortunate enough to not have to make that decision -whether to send AC21 documentation or not, the attorneys (Fragomen) representing the new employer recommended sending it making it easy for me.
Just my 2 cents,
I agree...sending the AC21 documentation to satisfy the "burden of proof" in extenuating circumstances, should they arise, is justifiable, as long as the applicant does not assume that the AC21 documentation will indeed be attached to their 485 file, and thus they won't get an employment-related RFE. Send the AC21 (and do it on your own, unless you have spare money to spend on a lawyer), but also keep in mind that sending the AC21 is not a legal requirement, and there is no guarantee that it will prevent USCIS from asking you to prove that you have a job that meets the certified labor at some time in the future.
It is true that in a majority of the cases the AC21 documentation might never reach the applican't 485 file, but in an unforeseen circumstance such as the denial of one's 485 based on 140 revocation (which, as we know isn't very uncommon) and matters reaching an immigration court, proof that one had taken proactive steps and gone out of one's way to inform the USCIS might make one's case stronger and thus make it easier to have the case reopened.
I was fortunate enough to not have to make that decision -whether to send AC21 documentation or not, the attorneys (Fragomen) representing the new employer recommended sending it making it easy for me.
Just my 2 cents,
I agree...sending the AC21 documentation to satisfy the "burden of proof" in extenuating circumstances, should they arise, is justifiable, as long as the applicant does not assume that the AC21 documentation will indeed be attached to their 485 file, and thus they won't get an employment-related RFE. Send the AC21 (and do it on your own, unless you have spare money to spend on a lawyer), but also keep in mind that sending the AC21 is not a legal requirement, and there is no guarantee that it will prevent USCIS from asking you to prove that you have a job that meets the certified labor at some time in the future.
gc28262
04-12 12:45 AM
Since his denial was on March 31st, would the overstay clock starts from March 31st or from original I-94 expiry date? My understanding was that one can work legally using H1B receipt notice. Hence, OP was legal atleast till March 31st, 2009, correct?
-GCisaDawg
Yes OP was in legal status till Mar 31st. ( One is in status while H1B is pending)
-GCisaDawg
Yes OP was in legal status till Mar 31st. ( One is in status while H1B is pending)
pappu
06-13 03:56 PM
Just a quick update:
All 3 Lofgren bills will be marked up next week in the subcommittee.
IV is working with the committee members at this time and will give more updates as the bills move forward. Please continue to make calls.
All 3 Lofgren bills will be marked up next week in the subcommittee.
IV is working with the committee members at this time and will give more updates as the bills move forward. Please continue to make calls.
No comments:
Post a Comment