h1bmajdoor
03-04 07:52 PM
this is obviously great news for those affected.
however the speed at which the authorities have acted, and the almost total lack of support from the Congress could imply that politics here is (like desh) is quickly heading down the "what's in it for me" path.
however the speed at which the authorities have acted, and the almost total lack of support from the Congress could imply that politics here is (like desh) is quickly heading down the "what's in it for me" path.
wallpaper jessica alba meet fockers
anishNewbie
09-10 04:07 PM
MS + Zero exp = I doubt if any one out there
Hmm.. I though many people are there.. bumerr...
Anyways.. I am shooting for EB2 category as I have my MS.. Few of my freinds here in office have applied for GC , but all of them have applied with MS + 1 atleast... I was kinda worried as my JOb code falls under JOb zone 4, how will i qualify for EB2 even though only having MS does qulaify for applying EB2..
I know.. that a position should require MS or BS +5...rather than one having that degree..
I was just wondering if there are some people who have applied under EB2 category with MS +0 experience....
Thank you every1 for your prompt responses...
Hmm.. I though many people are there.. bumerr...
Anyways.. I am shooting for EB2 category as I have my MS.. Few of my freinds here in office have applied for GC , but all of them have applied with MS + 1 atleast... I was kinda worried as my JOb code falls under JOb zone 4, how will i qualify for EB2 even though only having MS does qulaify for applying EB2..
I know.. that a position should require MS or BS +5...rather than one having that degree..
I was just wondering if there are some people who have applied under EB2 category with MS +0 experience....
Thank you every1 for your prompt responses...
innervoice
03-15 01:35 PM
Donated, S-90D44255UL602673B
2011 Jessica Alba and Honor Marie:
greenguru
04-01 04:11 PM
EB3 Labor
I-140
I-485
Then
EB2 Labor
I-140
Cheers, gG
I-140
I-485
Then
EB2 Labor
I-140
Cheers, gG
more...
nfinity
09-14 03:11 PM
Most of us have been severely impacted in life long decisions like
- getting married
- bringing spouse over
- future of children
- immigration to another country
- opening a business
- getting a raise
- promotions
being seen on tv should be the last thing that should come to mind.
- getting married
- bringing spouse over
- future of children
- immigration to another country
- opening a business
- getting a raise
- promotions
being seen on tv should be the last thing that should come to mind.
gantilk
04-27 11:02 PM
I see the following in the USCIS website:
"Filings made Pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107: As previously announced, all forms I-765 and I-131 applications based on employment-based adjustment of status applications filed pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107 that are submitted on or before August 17, 2007 must be filed under the fee structure in place prior to July 30, 2007. On or after July 30, 2007, those applications may not be electronically filed and must be submitted to a Service Center via regular mail or courier service."
Can somebody clarify this please? I applied 485 during the July 2007 fiasco and want to renew my EAD now? Can i e-file with $340 fee?
"Filings made Pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107: As previously announced, all forms I-765 and I-131 applications based on employment-based adjustment of status applications filed pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107 that are submitted on or before August 17, 2007 must be filed under the fee structure in place prior to July 30, 2007. On or after July 30, 2007, those applications may not be electronically filed and must be submitted to a Service Center via regular mail or courier service."
Can somebody clarify this please? I applied 485 during the July 2007 fiasco and want to renew my EAD now? Can i e-file with $340 fee?
more...
svr_76
06-12 12:50 PM
I agree....but still think that however logical it seems it hard for ppl to follow it. I still think this fearmongering is so deep rooted that a majority of folks will just flood CIS with inquries and senator letters ets.. (the reason being...the other person is doing it and i dont want to be left behind) Same like the "Run to the Bank" ...
that eventually. .the CIS will resort to the best option they have....
They will start issueing RFE for majority of cases... thus pushing processing by 60 days (remember no SR for 60 days after RFE reson received).
that eventually. .the CIS will resort to the best option they have....
They will start issueing RFE for majority of cases... thus pushing processing by 60 days (remember no SR for 60 days after RFE reson received).
2010 jessica alba meet fockers
michael_trs
05-14 04:48 PM
Ok. I understand that if I state Master's + 3 or 5 years experience for Software Engineer position I need to answer NO to H14 "requirements normal for the occupation?" because it exceeds SVP. Agree?
Now the question is does it automatically lead to audit?
Now the question is does it automatically lead to audit?
more...
pkv
04-13 11:34 AM
This is correct. Only your attorney will get the RFE.
I got Medical RFE, it was sent to me as well as to my attorney. In fact I got it a week earlier than attorney got.
I got Medical RFE, it was sent to me as well as to my attorney. In fact I got it a week earlier than attorney got.
hair Jessica Alba expecting second
Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
bsbawa10
08-15 12:11 PM
USCIS does not seem to be corrupt. It seems to be running by proxy with no accountability, no follow ups on what they do, and they always make excuses to show that they follow rules ...(which are breakable).
hot jessica alba meet fockers underwear. In pm jessica little fockers
ngopalak
07-05 12:59 PM
i think you are right. 100 M is a LOT of money to forsake for an agency like USCIS.
That I think is the reason they had to stop people from applyng before Julyy27th
If you like to beleive that the USCIS employees care USCIS revenue, you might like this answer.
200K apps (potential applicants in July) times $500 increase.
100,000,000
That I think is the reason they had to stop people from applyng before Julyy27th
If you like to beleive that the USCIS employees care USCIS revenue, you might like this answer.
200K apps (potential applicants in July) times $500 increase.
100,000,000
more...
house jessica alba meet fockers underwear. Jessica dec a focker or a
lord_labaku
07-06 05:21 PM
longer guns, rifles have less strict carry requirement as they cannot be concealed. Usually handguns need a carry permit to be carried around concealed.
A citizen should follow the constitution & the 2nd amendment is part of the constitution. Just get educated on safety techniques 1st. NRA website has good info. Local gun ranges will allow safe renting too without needing to own one if you just want to use guns as hobby (which is what I do).
Ruger or Browning .22LR guns are good to start. ( I am sure other brands are probably good as well...)
A citizen should follow the constitution & the 2nd amendment is part of the constitution. Just get educated on safety techniques 1st. NRA website has good info. Local gun ranges will allow safe renting too without needing to own one if you just want to use guns as hobby (which is what I do).
Ruger or Browning .22LR guns are good to start. ( I am sure other brands are probably good as well...)
tattoo jessica alba meet fockers underwear. Ahlun- jessica-alba-little-fockers-
vrbest
05-07 02:38 PM
I dont think soft LUD provides any logic.. I had soft LUD on my H1B case last week .. this was approved last year for 3 yr extension and I have not applied for anything recently (last one was for AP in Feb 1st week). No other cases had LUD updates...
They are not random. The do have some logic.
At every center cases are filed in order they are received (at least that is what they claim). "Received" does not mean in order of RD you see on your receipt. It is when physically a center accepted your paper case, and decided to enter in the system. PD plays role only for casesfrom retrogressed countries (EB and FB, both). For majority of cases, it has no relevance. PD of cases is nowhere maintained in the system (at least until a case is looked at the first time, which is sometime referred to as "preadjudication"), except on your paper filing. When your file turns out to be next in que for adjudication, in order or receive date (as defined above), the IO has no idea about your PD. Physical file is processed and checked for docs (birth certificates, photos, etc. etc.), AND the PD. At this time you might see a LUD. If nothing further progresses (due to PD not being current) LUD remains a soft LUD, and your case is put aside. If by luck your file was seen when your PD was current, you get lucky and get a GC (and several hard LUDs). PD sequence and received date sequence have no relationship, that's why the whole process seems random.
They are not random. The do have some logic.
At every center cases are filed in order they are received (at least that is what they claim). "Received" does not mean in order of RD you see on your receipt. It is when physically a center accepted your paper case, and decided to enter in the system. PD plays role only for casesfrom retrogressed countries (EB and FB, both). For majority of cases, it has no relevance. PD of cases is nowhere maintained in the system (at least until a case is looked at the first time, which is sometime referred to as "preadjudication"), except on your paper filing. When your file turns out to be next in que for adjudication, in order or receive date (as defined above), the IO has no idea about your PD. Physical file is processed and checked for docs (birth certificates, photos, etc. etc.), AND the PD. At this time you might see a LUD. If nothing further progresses (due to PD not being current) LUD remains a soft LUD, and your case is put aside. If by luck your file was seen when your PD was current, you get lucky and get a GC (and several hard LUDs). PD sequence and received date sequence have no relationship, that's why the whole process seems random.
more...
pictures jessica alba
wandmaker
08-26 08:39 AM
Hi,
I applied for H1B through a company for year 2010. I am currently on H4. As per this company, my application reached USCIS on April 7th. We have not got any receipt for this so far as per what the company says. My question is, is it possible that USCIS will take this long to issue the receipt number ? Is there a way to find out whether USCIS have received my application indeed. When I call the company who applied the H1, they keep saying we haven't heard back anything from USCIS. Can you help in answering my questions ?
Greatly appreciate your reponse.
Rgds,
Vani
Yes, It is possible - In fact, for one of my H1Bs, I never received the H1B receipt notice but received the approval notice on time.
For the best answer, you need to answer the below-
Did you pay the H1B fee?
To whom you have addressed the check to?
I applied for H1B through a company for year 2010. I am currently on H4. As per this company, my application reached USCIS on April 7th. We have not got any receipt for this so far as per what the company says. My question is, is it possible that USCIS will take this long to issue the receipt number ? Is there a way to find out whether USCIS have received my application indeed. When I call the company who applied the H1, they keep saying we haven't heard back anything from USCIS. Can you help in answering my questions ?
Greatly appreciate your reponse.
Rgds,
Vani
Yes, It is possible - In fact, for one of my H1Bs, I never received the H1B receipt notice but received the approval notice on time.
For the best answer, you need to answer the below-
Did you pay the H1B fee?
To whom you have addressed the check to?
dresses tattoo jessica alba meet
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
more...
makeup jessica alba meet fockers
AB1275
12-12 01:04 PM
What was the REF about?
As a backup you can file new EB3 PERM
I didn't read the RFE but the lawyer said they have requested for Audited Financial Statements which my company does not have.
As a backup you can file new EB3 PERM
I didn't read the RFE but the lawyer said they have requested for Audited Financial Statements which my company does not have.
girlfriend jessica alba meet fockers underwear. sexy clip featuring jessica alba hits
number30
07-23 07:54 PM
I'm in a similar predicament as well. I'm on EAD and 485 is pending, can I claim unemployment benefits?
Only problem is that, it will become a documented proof of your current unemployment. Otherwise it is just insurance. Dependents can go that safely. Primary I am not sure.
Only problem is that, it will become a documented proof of your current unemployment. Otherwise it is just insurance. Dependents can go that safely. Primary I am not sure.
hairstyles jessica alba meet fockers
nk2006
10-16 03:56 PM
Hi
Therefore how much would be the time
from after the application will I be able to change my status from H1B
to permanent resident and recieve my greencard? Does the premium
processing shorten the time?
Kambi
Kambi,
First of all let me congratulate you for planning ahead and preparing for getting green card. It�s always better to know the details ahead. The whole process as it stands now can take several years even for people from Rest-Of-World (for people born in India, China and Mexico its much, much, much worse). In general LC/PERM and I140 can be done in about six months time (give or take a few months which should not bother you much as you will be in early days of H1b). I485 is the step that takes longest and the processing times depend on the job classification. With current laws it can take several years before even you can submit application. But if SKIL bill or something similar is passed in US congress; your whole application process time can come down drastically (well there might still some issues because of load, but at least you can change jobs and still continue the process). Now the question is will that SKIL bill will be passed or not? � it�s beyond anyone�s guess but it is possible if we as a group try harder and do everything that we can. This is once in a long while chance to change our plight. Many analysts/experts feel that contentious issues like immigration will not be taken up near presidential elections which are in �08 so our best chance is next few months. Please spread the word about IV among your friends/peers.
I am directly appealing to you because I have talked to many young friends like you who are in school. Their general attitude is it�s not their problem and that they are far too away from the point to worry about GC. Guess what, I used to think same a few years back and am here stuck in this retrogession. One good thing is now we have an organized effort (thanks to IV core team) and IV team showed us that they know what they are doing and are putting serious effort. Please spread the word about IV and make them members.
IV core/pappu,
You might have already done this but still thought of suggesting: most of universities in US have lots of foreign students in masters and bachelors programs and they have associations like Chinese students association, Indian students association. Can we send them info about IV; specifically explaining them how Greencard/H1B delays can cause issues with their career and explaining how IV is trying to get the SKIL bill passed. That bill is a lot advantageous for people getting degrees in USA and they should be excited to become members. Since these guys/gals are young and energetic their involvement would be really good for us. A group of people can volunteer and collect email addresses of these associations and we can send a general format letter to them. I volunteer to do some work in this effort. Let us know. Thanks.
Therefore how much would be the time
from after the application will I be able to change my status from H1B
to permanent resident and recieve my greencard? Does the premium
processing shorten the time?
Kambi
Kambi,
First of all let me congratulate you for planning ahead and preparing for getting green card. It�s always better to know the details ahead. The whole process as it stands now can take several years even for people from Rest-Of-World (for people born in India, China and Mexico its much, much, much worse). In general LC/PERM and I140 can be done in about six months time (give or take a few months which should not bother you much as you will be in early days of H1b). I485 is the step that takes longest and the processing times depend on the job classification. With current laws it can take several years before even you can submit application. But if SKIL bill or something similar is passed in US congress; your whole application process time can come down drastically (well there might still some issues because of load, but at least you can change jobs and still continue the process). Now the question is will that SKIL bill will be passed or not? � it�s beyond anyone�s guess but it is possible if we as a group try harder and do everything that we can. This is once in a long while chance to change our plight. Many analysts/experts feel that contentious issues like immigration will not be taken up near presidential elections which are in �08 so our best chance is next few months. Please spread the word about IV among your friends/peers.
I am directly appealing to you because I have talked to many young friends like you who are in school. Their general attitude is it�s not their problem and that they are far too away from the point to worry about GC. Guess what, I used to think same a few years back and am here stuck in this retrogession. One good thing is now we have an organized effort (thanks to IV core team) and IV team showed us that they know what they are doing and are putting serious effort. Please spread the word about IV and make them members.
IV core/pappu,
You might have already done this but still thought of suggesting: most of universities in US have lots of foreign students in masters and bachelors programs and they have associations like Chinese students association, Indian students association. Can we send them info about IV; specifically explaining them how Greencard/H1B delays can cause issues with their career and explaining how IV is trying to get the SKIL bill passed. That bill is a lot advantageous for people getting degrees in USA and they should be excited to become members. Since these guys/gals are young and energetic their involvement would be really good for us. A group of people can volunteer and collect email addresses of these associations and we can send a general format letter to them. I volunteer to do some work in this effort. Let us know. Thanks.
rolrblade
10-08 09:57 AM
Hello Friends:
I have a I-485 pending (receipt date 7/19/07) with the USCIS. The situation is my company (Company A) has now officially laid me off and my last date is on November 16, 2007. I have spoken to them about the possibility of extending this date till Mid January 08, but it is NOT GOING TO Happen. Nov 16 will be my last date.
I have an offer from a different employer (Company B) for a SIMILAR job. I have an approved I-140 from the original employer and have assurances that they are NOT going to withdraw the I-140, since this is a company layoff and no fault of mine.
My questions are the following:
1. What is USCIS view when they see the new H1B transfer petition? Will they reject my I-485?
2. If I take a job with Company B, starting Nov 17, can I use AC21 and send in the letter after January 15 (180 days pending).
3. Do I have any other options here (I dont have EAD yet, just applied last week)
Your responses would be greatly appreciated. Please help.
I have a I-485 pending (receipt date 7/19/07) with the USCIS. The situation is my company (Company A) has now officially laid me off and my last date is on November 16, 2007. I have spoken to them about the possibility of extending this date till Mid January 08, but it is NOT GOING TO Happen. Nov 16 will be my last date.
I have an offer from a different employer (Company B) for a SIMILAR job. I have an approved I-140 from the original employer and have assurances that they are NOT going to withdraw the I-140, since this is a company layoff and no fault of mine.
My questions are the following:
1. What is USCIS view when they see the new H1B transfer petition? Will they reject my I-485?
2. If I take a job with Company B, starting Nov 17, can I use AC21 and send in the letter after January 15 (180 days pending).
3. Do I have any other options here (I dont have EAD yet, just applied last week)
Your responses would be greatly appreciated. Please help.
sss2000
10-31 02:25 PM
While that is true I wanted to donate whatever I have. I thought if any IV core team member has delta frequent flyer account, I can transfer my miles to his account. Is that a possibility? If so, Do we have any core team member who has delta frequent flyer account? If we pool all the miles we have then IV core team can use these miles to travel.
No comments:
Post a Comment