amitjoey
07-13 05:24 PM
That means you have no reputation at all :D :D :D .. kidding.
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
I think all that means is that no one has given you any reputation point yet.
Man, this is so funny, Somebody give me some good or atleast some bad reputation :D :D :D :D
wallpaper Keywords: kate beckinsale
akr_roy
07-16 07:09 PM
Lets not count the chickens before they are hatched. Its entirely plausible that if anything favourable comes up, its due to combined efforts. Lets not fight out yet, as if we havent seen anything concrete yet.
cheers
cheers
govind440
08-29 10:28 PM
Hi frnds,
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
2011 Kate Beckinsale#39;s loose updo
seahawks
01-31 11:48 PM
Stay focussed, support IV goals, help raise funds, volunteer, spread the word on retrogression and believe in you and for the same cause! Remember, immigration law is complicated, no matter who provides information or posts reply, always consult a qualified attorney for your own case.
more...
Libra
08-10 03:03 PM
Signed up for 50$ monthly
LostInGCProcess
03-03 12:02 PM
Yes, the wording is very important. When I sent the AC21 documentation, it was just a letter explaining employment details and particulars, but when I replied to NOID, they specifically requested "prospects of employment" - and we responded as "this is a full time permanent job and the prospects are good" - which means they see it as future employment.
As long as you have worked for original employer for a good period of time, stick to your skills, have good w2 history, you don't have to worry - you can always show that your prospects are good.
Though Green card if for future employment - the entire process revolves around how best you fit the future employment category - AC21 is one such rule that gives you room and flexibility.
Thanks for your quick response. I might as well ask one more question that's in my mind. Did you go thru the company's attorney or you hired yourself? I really don't trust my company's attorney as they work for the best interest of the company rather then the employees...may not be the norm but mostly its that way.
Could you PM me if you know good attorney's other then Ms Murthy (cause they are expensive)
Thanks.
As long as you have worked for original employer for a good period of time, stick to your skills, have good w2 history, you don't have to worry - you can always show that your prospects are good.
Though Green card if for future employment - the entire process revolves around how best you fit the future employment category - AC21 is one such rule that gives you room and flexibility.
Thanks for your quick response. I might as well ask one more question that's in my mind. Did you go thru the company's attorney or you hired yourself? I really don't trust my company's attorney as they work for the best interest of the company rather then the employees...may not be the norm but mostly its that way.
Could you PM me if you know good attorney's other then Ms Murthy (cause they are expensive)
Thanks.
more...
eyeongc
05-21 11:23 PM
Slightly unrelated but is there anyway to bookmark a thread under my profile? I would like to comeback to this discussion in future if needed (I hope not).
2010 Image of Kate Beckinsale
ilikekilo
06-11 06:13 PM
Please refrain from saying such a thing for President.
He might have made mistakes but he has been a tough one for terrorists.Since Sep11,2001,he has kept the ppl safe.
6 years is a big time.
If he is trying something beneficial for Immigrants,lets support him and ask him to support our cause.
I think we should send faxes/emails to him to show our support and I am sure he will get our amendment passed.
Lets give this a try.I am sure he will make no more mistakes as these are some last things which can give a lot of credibility back to his Presidentship.
alright MR junior bush
He might have made mistakes but he has been a tough one for terrorists.Since Sep11,2001,he has kept the ppl safe.
6 years is a big time.
If he is trying something beneficial for Immigrants,lets support him and ask him to support our cause.
I think we should send faxes/emails to him to show our support and I am sure he will get our amendment passed.
Lets give this a try.I am sure he will make no more mistakes as these are some last things which can give a lot of credibility back to his Presidentship.
alright MR junior bush
more...
immigrationvoice1
04-04 02:28 PM
I agree, if you have applied for I-485, F1 is not a good idea. I wasn't aware of the OP's GC situation.
Editing post: It seems that the OP applied for I-140 late last year, and the country of chargeability is India (public profile). So, in this case, F1 is probably a better bet.
BTW, what does OP stand for?
Editing post: It seems that the OP applied for I-140 late last year, and the country of chargeability is India (public profile). So, in this case, F1 is probably a better bet.
BTW, what does OP stand for?
hair kate beckinsale hairstyles
mmandal
06-08 12:18 PM
Chanduv23 wrong on both counts:
"For those who do not care about families - tearing families is the worst thing that can ever happen and if you are on that side, you will understand the pain."
No one is "tearing families." Restricts family immigration to just spouses and children under 21. No more uncles, aunts, nephews and nieces. If people want to come they need to on their merits. Think about LPRs who have to wait years on end to even get their spouses in.
"And for those who think CIR failed which is good for us - just think about the 12 million illegals and walk in their shoes - what goes through them - CIR is their only hope."
No one said CIR failing was good for us because it provided relief for illegals. No jealousy here sir. We wanted CIR to fail because in 'saving' illegals it screwed us. If the illegals took a risk in breaking the law its their burden to bear. Moreover, asking the basic question of why illegals and why not legals should be a part of debate. I believe, our interest is best served by strongly differentiating ourselves from the illegals. Lets do without the socialism.
"For those who do not care about families - tearing families is the worst thing that can ever happen and if you are on that side, you will understand the pain."
No one is "tearing families." Restricts family immigration to just spouses and children under 21. No more uncles, aunts, nephews and nieces. If people want to come they need to on their merits. Think about LPRs who have to wait years on end to even get their spouses in.
"And for those who think CIR failed which is good for us - just think about the 12 million illegals and walk in their shoes - what goes through them - CIR is their only hope."
No one said CIR failing was good for us because it provided relief for illegals. No jealousy here sir. We wanted CIR to fail because in 'saving' illegals it screwed us. If the illegals took a risk in breaking the law its their burden to bear. Moreover, asking the basic question of why illegals and why not legals should be a part of debate. I believe, our interest is best served by strongly differentiating ourselves from the illegals. Lets do without the socialism.
more...
sanju
04-08 05:37 PM
Trying to reach you guys for a while now.
1. How many active users are there as of today.
2. What are the media we have connection with.
Thanks.
I saw your questions earlier and knew the answers as they are available online. I ignored your questions earlier in the day, now I am glad that I did because you deserve answers to anything.
Get lost.
.
1. How many active users are there as of today.
2. What are the media we have connection with.
Thanks.
I saw your questions earlier and knew the answers as they are available online. I ignored your questions earlier in the day, now I am glad that I did because you deserve answers to anything.
Get lost.
.
hot kate beckinsale hairstyle. Kate Beckinsale#39;s Bun Updo
sunny1000
11-27 03:27 PM
Usually I get my Visa stamped in Chennai. I have enough info to survive in Chennai.
This time it is not going to help much as I am going to Mumbai. It is a pain from the first step. I finally got the appointment for 10th Dec. I have to have some body hand deliver documents there in India..Oh well..
I have the appointment at 9:30 AM and was planning to fly out of Mumbai Airport same day at 1:30 PM. Now it looks very ambitious! What do you think? :confused:
I have no idea about lodging near consulate. I tried my luck near the airport many times. It wasn't pretty.
Any recommendation on Hotels and area near consulate ? I am not going near Five star / Rs 10,000 per day.
I am looking at ~ Rs 2,000 for 7 hours..
Any help is appreciated..:)
Waiting Game,
I don't know about Mumbai but, as you know in Chennai, they don't give back the passport until the next day atleast. I got mine 2 days later at Chennai last month, that too by going personally to the VFS office to pick it up. So, you may want to give yourself at least a day for your flight back.
Good luck with your stamping.
This time it is not going to help much as I am going to Mumbai. It is a pain from the first step. I finally got the appointment for 10th Dec. I have to have some body hand deliver documents there in India..Oh well..
I have the appointment at 9:30 AM and was planning to fly out of Mumbai Airport same day at 1:30 PM. Now it looks very ambitious! What do you think? :confused:
I have no idea about lodging near consulate. I tried my luck near the airport many times. It wasn't pretty.
Any recommendation on Hotels and area near consulate ? I am not going near Five star / Rs 10,000 per day.
I am looking at ~ Rs 2,000 for 7 hours..
Any help is appreciated..:)
Waiting Game,
I don't know about Mumbai but, as you know in Chennai, they don't give back the passport until the next day atleast. I got mine 2 days later at Chennai last month, that too by going personally to the VFS office to pick it up. So, you may want to give yourself at least a day for your flight back.
Good luck with your stamping.
more...
house Kate Beckinsale hairstyle?
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
tattoo Beckinsale#39;s hairstyle dilemma
gc_bulgaria
02-12 02:40 PM
http://www..com/discussion-forums/i485-1/28005017/
Its not easy but can be done. The cover letter in my case didn't work - no way of knowing because my application was filed in July when EVERYONE was current. Lawyer screwed up and didnt file in February 07 with the I 140. Below is what I got back from TSC re: cross charge- I had to jump through the hoops for them to consider it. There are some good and informative posts on .
"Today I received an email from my lawyers office who had requested a congressional inquiry with TSC. Good news is that my congresswoman's office is really efficient - they followed up till they got the confirmation. Now atleast I know they will consider it as CC.
Below is what TSC wrote back. Now the wait for visa bulletins and processing dates resumes!
"The message was sent to management. Yes they can be charge cross chargeability. However, at this time the files can not be request due to the large volume of work the unit has. Cases are process accordingly and chronological.
Will sent another message to management, but this request in expediting these cases does not meet the service criteria.
Thank you for your inquiry and please do not hesitate to contact us again if you have further questions regarding this case.
Texas Service Center
Congressional Relations " "
Its not easy but can be done. The cover letter in my case didn't work - no way of knowing because my application was filed in July when EVERYONE was current. Lawyer screwed up and didnt file in February 07 with the I 140. Below is what I got back from TSC re: cross charge- I had to jump through the hoops for them to consider it. There are some good and informative posts on .
"Today I received an email from my lawyers office who had requested a congressional inquiry with TSC. Good news is that my congresswoman's office is really efficient - they followed up till they got the confirmation. Now atleast I know they will consider it as CC.
Below is what TSC wrote back. Now the wait for visa bulletins and processing dates resumes!
"The message was sent to management. Yes they can be charge cross chargeability. However, at this time the files can not be request due to the large volume of work the unit has. Cases are process accordingly and chronological.
Will sent another message to management, but this request in expediting these cases does not meet the service criteria.
Thank you for your inquiry and please do not hesitate to contact us again if you have further questions regarding this case.
Texas Service Center
Congressional Relations " "
more...
pictures Kate Beckinsale Brown Wavy
saimrathi
07-17 02:58 PM
This is from Logiclife.. all hope isnt lost yet
The latest update we received is the the annoucement to be made soon will be as follows:
1. DHS will withdraw it decision and act according to original bulletin released in July which had EB dates current for everyone except EB-other worker category.
2. The July bulletin (original one released on June 12th) will remain effective for 30 days more and will be effective all the way thru August 17th.
This is good news. It will be announced soon. We got this information from very reliable source. You have 30 more days to file your I-485.
Thank you for your patience.
The latest update we received is the the annoucement to be made soon will be as follows:
1. DHS will withdraw it decision and act according to original bulletin released in July which had EB dates current for everyone except EB-other worker category.
2. The July bulletin (original one released on June 12th) will remain effective for 30 days more and will be effective all the way thru August 17th.
This is good news. It will be announced soon. We got this information from very reliable source. You have 30 more days to file your I-485.
Thank you for your patience.
dresses Kate Beckinsale is wearing a
obviously
08-04 11:45 AM
Thanks for the 2 quick responses... albeit, opposite in recommendation :)
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
1. No need to file new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Any risks that we should think about?
2. File new I-485
- Has anyone done this?
- Apart from the additional cost and document preparation time, is there any other downside?
Funny thing is before this happened, I ran into a lot of threads suggesting interfiling was easy. Now that it is at the doorstep, there are quite a few questions and some confusion. I am thinking of getting a 20 min appt with the M law firm.
Appreciate any responses or assistance!!!!
Cheers!
I found the following info from Ron G's website, not sure that most of it applies in this case... since both I-140 have been approved and the later one under EB2 does reference the EB3 priority date.
When an I-140 is approved, your priority date is perfected. If the labor substitution I-140 has been approved, then you own that priority date forever. If you have to file the new I-140 before the old one is approved, you can later show the CIS the two priority dates (from the petition approval notices) and pick the better preference category and earlier priority date - even though they may be from different petitions. In this case, "later" means after the I-140 with the earlier priority date is approved. All you need to do is write to the CIS and enclose copies of the relevant approval notices and the I-485 receipt notice. What you should do is make sure that they consolidate both I-140 petitions into the same file. You don't need to file a new I-485, all you need to do in interfile your second I-140.
You should make a copy of the approval notice for the first I-140, a copy of the receipt notice for the second I-140, and the write a letter to the CIS, asking them to give your second I-140 the priority date established by the first. You can cite the regulatory authority found HERE. (Refer text below) Send it to the correspondence address shown in the lower left portion of the receipt notice.
You can upgrade your preference classification while staying with the same employer, but you will need a new job. Attempting to use the same job with different minimum qualifications will call into question the legitimacy of the original labor certification. If the second I-140 is denied, it will have no effect on the first. There shouldn't be any difficulty porting in an LC substitution situation.
The CIS regulations at 8 CFR 204.5(e) provides for the retention of a previously established priority date under the circumstances described below:
(e) Retention of section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) priority date. --
A petition approved on behalf of an alien under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act accords the alien the priority date of the approved petition for any subsequently filed petition for any classification under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act for which the alien may qualify. In the event that the alien is the beneficiary of multiple petitions under sections 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Act, the alien shall be entitled to the earliest priority date. A petition revoked under sections 204(e) or 205 of the Act will not confer a priority date, nor will any priority date be established as a result of a denied petition. A priority date is not transferable to another alien.
more...
makeup Kate Beckinsale#39;s hairstyle
pd052009
08-20 02:40 PM
Ron says, The USCIS teleconference concerning implementation of PL 111-230 provided the following information:
* The new tax DOES NOT apply to extensions or amendments
This will help the people like me who are stuck in GC process...
* The new tax DOES NOT apply to extensions or amendments
This will help the people like me who are stuck in GC process...
girlfriend kate beckinsale click. kate
lp2007
01-19 07:40 PM
We are all proud of our accomplishments, EB2 or EB3 or EB1 , the degrees we have earned, the jobs we do and the achievements we have in our career. The relationships we have made and the list goes on.
I don't think being in a category of EB GC queue should define if you can be proud of an EB3 immigrant.
You almost make it sound like did a EB3 applicant become a "slumdog millionaire" ? :)
I don't think being in a category of EB GC queue should define if you can be proud of an EB3 immigrant.
You almost make it sound like did a EB3 applicant become a "slumdog millionaire" ? :)
hairstyles Kate Beckinsale Hairstyle
hebron
08-16 01:47 PM
If the employer did not pay you salary that he agreed to pay then you could complain to DOL. You stand a sure chance to get paid if you bring this to DOL's notice. You can do this anonymously. DOL would also slap your employer with a fine and he would be banned from hiring H1-B workers for few years.
meridiani.planum
02-27 06:04 PM
It is worse than your estimates below because when green card is issued spouse and children are also counted in the quota unlike the h1 where spouse and children are not counted in the quota. Even if we assume each green card applicat has only one child, there would be 3 visa numbers used for each GC applicant. Going by that India has a demand for 150K GC as per the perm statistics but it gets only about 10000 per year. At this rate people from India who applied for GC in 06 and 07 would have to wait about 15 years and 30 years respectively to get the GC!!!!!!!!
he took that into account (thats the 2.5:1 ratio of GCs filed:LC). Stats have shown the ratio is typically 2.1, but thats close (& scary) enough.
he took that into account (thats the 2.5:1 ratio of GCs filed:LC). Stats have shown the ratio is typically 2.1, but thats close (& scary) enough.
hopefulgc
05-12 02:45 PM
We need to raise a million $. Anything less is seeming to just not cut it.
Look where we are now with our half-hearted efforts.
DOS says that EB3 would be retrogressed for the remaining part of the year. There was a time I used to believe that come year 2008, there is no way EB3 would be at 2001. I was wrong.
Today I think, there is no way the dates would be at 2002 come 2011.... but guess what.. its a definite possibility.
We need to do something substantial. We must equip IV with huge funds .. funds that will get us in bed with the right people.
--- here is what follows from an earlier post
Even though we have a very honest agenda at heart which at its very core aims to help America be more competitive in the global scene, apparently, we need to have the financial clout to be able to turn heads and thus have our voices heard.
Here is an idea: say we have roughly 500 members out of this vast array of 35000+ members who have the heart and the will to contribute. we get $2000 from each and place it in an escrow trust account that does not release money for expenditure unless we reach $1 mln
why? because the first 10 or 50 contributers are the most elemental in getting such a campaign off the ground and we need to give them a guarantee that its an ALL or NOTHING DEAL. If for some reason we stop at $10k because only 5 members contributed and no more are ready to contribute (unlikely), those 5 members can get their money back.
now is $2000 a huge amount?.. absolutely... but maybe we could tweak this amount or do some payback if we have more people stepping forward in excess of 500. and the amount of payback depends on how early your contributed to the campaign. The first 50 guys could even get a substantial part of their contribution back.
People, we gotta swing for the fences, the next time we go to play.
It has taken us some time to understand how the lobbying game is played.. but this time "Lets play to win"
We need to be a big fish.. a million $+ whale to be taken seriously.
Lastly, i'm just presenting an idea .. its not endorsed by IV core.. and I maybe overlooking some finer points of non-profit corporate taxation and finance.
funding drive is here: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18790
Brethren.... rise!
Look where we are now with our half-hearted efforts.
DOS says that EB3 would be retrogressed for the remaining part of the year. There was a time I used to believe that come year 2008, there is no way EB3 would be at 2001. I was wrong.
Today I think, there is no way the dates would be at 2002 come 2011.... but guess what.. its a definite possibility.
We need to do something substantial. We must equip IV with huge funds .. funds that will get us in bed with the right people.
--- here is what follows from an earlier post
Even though we have a very honest agenda at heart which at its very core aims to help America be more competitive in the global scene, apparently, we need to have the financial clout to be able to turn heads and thus have our voices heard.
Here is an idea: say we have roughly 500 members out of this vast array of 35000+ members who have the heart and the will to contribute. we get $2000 from each and place it in an escrow trust account that does not release money for expenditure unless we reach $1 mln
why? because the first 10 or 50 contributers are the most elemental in getting such a campaign off the ground and we need to give them a guarantee that its an ALL or NOTHING DEAL. If for some reason we stop at $10k because only 5 members contributed and no more are ready to contribute (unlikely), those 5 members can get their money back.
now is $2000 a huge amount?.. absolutely... but maybe we could tweak this amount or do some payback if we have more people stepping forward in excess of 500. and the amount of payback depends on how early your contributed to the campaign. The first 50 guys could even get a substantial part of their contribution back.
People, we gotta swing for the fences, the next time we go to play.
It has taken us some time to understand how the lobbying game is played.. but this time "Lets play to win"
We need to be a big fish.. a million $+ whale to be taken seriously.
Lastly, i'm just presenting an idea .. its not endorsed by IV core.. and I maybe overlooking some finer points of non-profit corporate taxation and finance.
funding drive is here: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=18790
Brethren.... rise!
No comments:
Post a Comment