desi3933
07-10 03:37 PM
....
That's where AC21 comes to rescue, and you can become "self-employed" rather than "unemployed." Question is, why can't self-employment in same/similar occupation as your I-140 petition be considered to satisfy I-140 requirement?....
Yes, one can be self-employed for AC-21 job, as long as conditions mentioned in the same memo are fulfilled
"Question 8. Can an alien port to self-employment under INA �204(j)?
Answer: Yes, as long as the requirements are met. First, the key is whether the employment is in a "same or similar" occupational classification as the job for which the original I-140 petition was filed. Second, it may be appropriate to confirm that the new employer and the job offer are legitimate through an RFE to the adjustment applicant for relevant information about these issues. ...... "
That's where AC21 comes to rescue, and you can become "self-employed" rather than "unemployed." Question is, why can't self-employment in same/similar occupation as your I-140 petition be considered to satisfy I-140 requirement?....
Yes, one can be self-employed for AC-21 job, as long as conditions mentioned in the same memo are fulfilled
"Question 8. Can an alien port to self-employment under INA �204(j)?
Answer: Yes, as long as the requirements are met. First, the key is whether the employment is in a "same or similar" occupational classification as the job for which the original I-140 petition was filed. Second, it may be appropriate to confirm that the new employer and the job offer are legitimate through an RFE to the adjustment applicant for relevant information about these issues. ...... "
wallpaper 3d animal cell model labeled.
n2b
08-13 11:18 AM
any LUD?
Nope, No LUD change on my I140
Nope, No LUD change on my I140
amitjoey
07-09 04:50 PM
Excellent idea Naveen! I hope you don't mind but I have improved the English slightly :) and will create links on those Wiki pages to IV and the articles that you have mentioned.
go for it!!. hope Naveen wont mind.
go for it!!. hope Naveen wont mind.
2011 hot Animal cell model Animal
mpkmaster
06-22 11:27 AM
Stop pushing for a comprehensive relief and turning into a kind of Skil solution
(Only for a few, privileged minority, an elite), I.V. will be able to organize meetings in a phone booth!
I back up Harutium on this!
Let's encourage people like Specter, and do not play the game of that band betraying President Bush in the House!:eek:
(Only for a few, privileged minority, an elite), I.V. will be able to organize meetings in a phone booth!
I back up Harutium on this!
Let's encourage people like Specter, and do not play the game of that band betraying President Bush in the House!:eek:
more...
bskrishna
09-15 11:28 AM
This method of collecting funds to get to a target and execute a pre-planned POA is great! I like this method, where we commit to funds and when we know, we have enough, we pull the trigger. But we need to have a plan and estimate the costs of that plan. This is a great way to go about, i think.
caliducas
09-27 05:13 PM
Our EAD has been approved - self and spouse.
more...
mygc2006
11-19 07:35 AM
Emails sent for me and my wife!
2010 animal cell diagram with
gk_2000
11-18 01:25 PM
I also suggest partnering up with Reform Immigration For America as they have large numbers of supporters as well. I urge core IV members to contact them as time is short for us
.. confirming that I have sent the faxes for myself and for whole family
.. confirming that I have sent the faxes for myself and for whole family
more...
knnmbd
05-03 12:39 PM
GreeNever,
The only clarification I would make over Knnmbd's interpretation is that as long as you have a US master's degree or higher, the "3 years work experience in a related field" restriction will not apply. If you read section 201 carefully, you will see that the difference between items 1 and 2 is that item 1 refers to US advanced degree holders while item 2 refers to advanced degree holders (resumably non-US educated). The 3 year restriction only applies to those who fall into item #2.
So, if
a) you have a MS from a US university, you and your immediate family (spouse and minor children) will not be subject to the 3 years restriction and will be exempt from the Visa Cap
b) you have a masters or higher from an acredited non-US university, then the Visa Cap will not apply to you and your family, but you shouldd have worked in the US in a "related" field for 3 years.
My question to everyone:
Will folks in section 201 be required to get a Labor certification? If not, then this will provide relief to a lot of us stuck in the BECs.
Knowledgeable folks, please comment.
REMINDER: Any such bill is still MANY months away from seeing the light of day, if at all. BUT, favorable bills such as these give us hope.
GreeNever,
Thanks for the correction. U.S Master's in STEM means there is no need for the 3 years experience.
With regard to LC, there was some talk in PACE and TALENT of a blanket LC for U.S degree in STEM, but that seems to me missing here. But in the larger context of things, who really cares if with a U.S M.S degree you need to just go through PERM and then you are all set without the hassle( or should I say torture) of the retrogression. This is a �WIN WIN� situation for a lot of people if SKIL goes through.
There is no surprise as to why the Advance degree + 3 years (or no 3 years required in case the advance degree is from a U.S university) clause has found its way into PACE, TALENT, SKIL and was not to mention the failed CIR bill. The bottom line is that there is a sudden urgency to reintroduce the charm of pursuing higher education in the U.S. This benefits the U.S in many ways; universities get more international students paying out of state tuition (good for them specially b�cos the war effort has sucked all resources from educational institutions) and rekindle the brain drain from India and China in the form of researchers and engineers who pursue advance degrees and remain to work in the U.S( it will be surprising if there is no one looking at the booming economies of Asian countries mainly due to number of graduation engineers). So it�s a winning situation for both the U.S to attract smart people, make them spend a �lot� of money in paying tuition in U.S schools and hey what the hell give them a GC to live and work here permanently instead of them heading back home to do great things there.
It works for every one so that�s just great.
The only clarification I would make over Knnmbd's interpretation is that as long as you have a US master's degree or higher, the "3 years work experience in a related field" restriction will not apply. If you read section 201 carefully, you will see that the difference between items 1 and 2 is that item 1 refers to US advanced degree holders while item 2 refers to advanced degree holders (resumably non-US educated). The 3 year restriction only applies to those who fall into item #2.
So, if
a) you have a MS from a US university, you and your immediate family (spouse and minor children) will not be subject to the 3 years restriction and will be exempt from the Visa Cap
b) you have a masters or higher from an acredited non-US university, then the Visa Cap will not apply to you and your family, but you shouldd have worked in the US in a "related" field for 3 years.
My question to everyone:
Will folks in section 201 be required to get a Labor certification? If not, then this will provide relief to a lot of us stuck in the BECs.
Knowledgeable folks, please comment.
REMINDER: Any such bill is still MANY months away from seeing the light of day, if at all. BUT, favorable bills such as these give us hope.
GreeNever,
Thanks for the correction. U.S Master's in STEM means there is no need for the 3 years experience.
With regard to LC, there was some talk in PACE and TALENT of a blanket LC for U.S degree in STEM, but that seems to me missing here. But in the larger context of things, who really cares if with a U.S M.S degree you need to just go through PERM and then you are all set without the hassle( or should I say torture) of the retrogression. This is a �WIN WIN� situation for a lot of people if SKIL goes through.
There is no surprise as to why the Advance degree + 3 years (or no 3 years required in case the advance degree is from a U.S university) clause has found its way into PACE, TALENT, SKIL and was not to mention the failed CIR bill. The bottom line is that there is a sudden urgency to reintroduce the charm of pursuing higher education in the U.S. This benefits the U.S in many ways; universities get more international students paying out of state tuition (good for them specially b�cos the war effort has sucked all resources from educational institutions) and rekindle the brain drain from India and China in the form of researchers and engineers who pursue advance degrees and remain to work in the U.S( it will be surprising if there is no one looking at the booming economies of Asian countries mainly due to number of graduation engineers). So it�s a winning situation for both the U.S to attract smart people, make them spend a �lot� of money in paying tuition in U.S schools and hey what the hell give them a GC to live and work here permanently instead of them heading back home to do great things there.
It works for every one so that�s just great.
hair animal cell 3d model with
SunnySurya
08-18 02:14 PM
So far I have abq_gc, Johnamit , Singhsa3 , SunnySurya and pamposh(5 and counting ) . I need more..
more...
pallavan
09-26 10:29 AM
& who'll change it....pu55ies like u?
Wow... such eloquence from a "highly skilled worker" ! Truly impressive indeed :)
BTW, for that poster who was imagining a single line, open your eyes buddy. There are indeed two lines. Higher qualifications gets you into the shorter one. You can fret and whine all you want but you cant change the fact.
Porting PDs is a silly concept as others have pointed it out here. Its the law for now but wont be for long. Get over it.
Wow... such eloquence from a "highly skilled worker" ! Truly impressive indeed :)
BTW, for that poster who was imagining a single line, open your eyes buddy. There are indeed two lines. Higher qualifications gets you into the shorter one. You can fret and whine all you want but you cant change the fact.
Porting PDs is a silly concept as others have pointed it out here. Its the law for now but wont be for long. Get over it.
hot animal cell 3d model with
kshitijnt
04-24 12:51 AM
Tell me what wrong he did for him to apologize and I will apologize to you. When nothing is permanent he worked with them for 1 and half years, he got them 4 employees. Why in the world should he apologize?.
When you say that you will not need your clients you are wrong. when I was searching for projects I got a chance to apply to a job opening in one of my previous client, guess what, the start to my second stint was smooth just because I had a good rapport with my client and they liked my work. I even got one of my team mates in my client place to give me a referral for my higher studies.
"Your ex boss is not a bad guy, he knows you are leaving for better opportunity".He is not only a bad guy, he is evil IF (note the big IF) he is keeping the money which is not his. Their conscience should prick when they feed and give excellent education to their kids with the ill gotten money.
Unfortunately one might need his ex-employer in future (might not always be the case) and that is the irony of it all.
What wrong he did? Nothing illegal but certainly not the best practise. Atleast he has been insensitive to his former employer.
When you say that you will not need your clients you are wrong. when I was searching for projects I got a chance to apply to a job opening in one of my previous client, guess what, the start to my second stint was smooth just because I had a good rapport with my client and they liked my work. I even got one of my team mates in my client place to give me a referral for my higher studies.
"Your ex boss is not a bad guy, he knows you are leaving for better opportunity".He is not only a bad guy, he is evil IF (note the big IF) he is keeping the money which is not his. Their conscience should prick when they feed and give excellent education to their kids with the ill gotten money.
Unfortunately one might need his ex-employer in future (might not always be the case) and that is the irony of it all.
What wrong he did? Nothing illegal but certainly not the best practise. Atleast he has been insensitive to his former employer.
more...
house Animal Cell Model With Labels.
apahilaj
02-15 11:40 AM
Count me in...
It seems like I've got the oldest Notice date of 8/27 who has not received the biometrics yet. Infopass was pure waste of time as well.
It seems like I've got the oldest Notice date of 8/27 who has not received the biometrics yet. Infopass was pure waste of time as well.
tattoo 2010 3d animal cell model
visli_com
02-18 07:41 PM
Tomorrow will be my FP at santa ana,ca , my case was nsc->csc->nsc. 2nd july filer.
more...
pictures animal cell model with labels.
gjoe
10-09 06:18 AM
Why do you think FIFO is scientifically impossible? If you beleive that weather forecast is reliable like most of the Americans do, making the FIFO system work more effeciently without wasting even a single visa is possible.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
It is not necessary to issue the visa if the case is still pending for some reason, but if it has cleared all it has a visa number ready to complete the case. If all the visa numbers are allocated ( not necessarily issued) each year there will be no waste. There is no need to go back and recapture visa numbers because all visa numbers are already allocated. Obove all these reasons, those people with PD's as old as 1999 coming out from the BEC need not face another nightmare like first waiting for the I485 to become current before even he can file and then wait in the end of the queue for new applicants to move forward before having his case handled.
This GC system broke because the system was revamped without taking into account the whole process.
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
dresses 3d animal cell model
sunnysharma
06-08 03:59 PM
mine file reached there today.
reddymjm , You can see your LIN/WAC # from your cleared check.
reddymjm , You can see your LIN/WAC # from your cleared check.
more...
makeup 3d Animal Cell Model With
wait4ever
08-08 12:19 PM
Congrats...remember folks are waiting for over 10 years...and still not CARD PROD ORDERED e mail...so be happy and enjoy!!!!
Folks
Appreciate the sentiments - I hope & pray that everyone gets approved very quickly - all on this forum are deserving types without any doubts -
BUT
Could I have an answer to my questions please ?:)
Folks
Appreciate the sentiments - I hope & pray that everyone gets approved very quickly - all on this forum are deserving types without any doubts -
BUT
Could I have an answer to my questions please ?:)
girlfriend animal cell model with labels.
crystal
07-05 11:11 AM
You are absolutely right. The thread owner should have explained the concept for the non-indians and made it more acceptable by others.
It is never late , the thread owner can you please update in the first page regarding what this is all about.
Please remember, forum rules mandate posts in English. Thanks for excluding and alienating.
Junior members, please read the posting guidelines. Lasantha, you are not being ignorant at all
It is never late , the thread owner can you please update in the first page regarding what this is all about.
Please remember, forum rules mandate posts in English. Thanks for excluding and alienating.
Junior members, please read the posting guidelines. Lasantha, you are not being ignorant at all
hairstyles 3d model animal cell
gjoe
10-08 05:12 PM
No one is saying people are cutting the line. Most of us are saying USCIS is not processing cases on FIFO. Either you don't know the fact that USCIS approves cases in whatever order they are doing now or you are just pretending to be ignorant of the fact.
I don't know for whatever reason you don't see the fact what people are talking about here, but I don't blame you. If what people want here doesn't suit our case we may not like it. But please, just trying to beat around the bush is not going to help anyone here for that matter not just me alone.
You suggestion of sending flowers seems like that is the only solution to all the problems. I would say the reversal of the July 2 visa bulletine didn't just happen because of the flowers the members sent, the law suit AILA wanted to file against USCIS was one of the major reason apart from the California's Lawmakers letter. So please don't try to cut peoples idea by trying to belittle them, if you don't agree with them it is ok, if everyone agreed on the same thing life will be so dull.
gjoe/and others,
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
I don't know for whatever reason you don't see the fact what people are talking about here, but I don't blame you. If what people want here doesn't suit our case we may not like it. But please, just trying to beat around the bush is not going to help anyone here for that matter not just me alone.
You suggestion of sending flowers seems like that is the only solution to all the problems. I would say the reversal of the July 2 visa bulletine didn't just happen because of the flowers the members sent, the law suit AILA wanted to file against USCIS was one of the major reason apart from the California's Lawmakers letter. So please don't try to cut peoples idea by trying to belittle them, if you don't agree with them it is ok, if everyone agreed on the same thing life will be so dull.
gjoe/and others,
No one's trying to cut the line here. If there's any, it's purely procedural and has nothing to do with 'Ending Retrogression'. With or without retrogression someone might get an RFE, get stuck in namecheck etc. Ending retrogression provides earlier PDs better chances of getting GC faster (if dates are 'C' you get it the month you clear RFE, Name check etc.)
Just posting here isn't helping you cause. Instead you guys can get together and start sending flowers to USCIS director requesting him to publish the complete list of GC applications approved every year. It's the first step in enforcing FIFO. Right now there is no such list and no way of knowing who got their GC out of turn. And while you guys are at it also send some flowers to FBI to clear Namechecks FIFO, to DOL to approve PERM petitions FIFO etc.
Go spend those $50 at Flowers.com folks. Start writing to Senators, collect money, do the lobbying etc. Who's stopping you?
Or do you want logiclife, pappu and rest of the IV core to do it PRO BONO for you?
belmontboy
09-27 04:42 PM
CO's words have been mostly pessimistic..and upsetting so far...
It's the reality.
It's the reality.
miapplicant
10-04 11:30 AM
All,
I just want to share some goods news from side.
All my checks got cashed today. I applied on July 23rd at NSC and got the receipt #'s from WAC.
I hope who ever is waiting for RN's they will get soon.
Thanks,
-rk.
Wow, I was in the same boat as you but we still have not heard anything:( What should we do?
I just want to share some goods news from side.
All my checks got cashed today. I applied on July 23rd at NSC and got the receipt #'s from WAC.
I hope who ever is waiting for RN's they will get soon.
Thanks,
-rk.
Wow, I was in the same boat as you but we still have not heard anything:( What should we do?
No comments:
Post a Comment