DallasBlue
09-26 09:14 PM
Check out the local chapter messages on how to call in.
wallpaper of Love+hate+quotes
ashkam
04-22 08:51 AM
Yes, I am 100% sure. One can move from H1-B to H-4 and then back to H1-B within 12 months and not get counted towards cap.
Of course, if you some one wants legal advice, they would need to pay for it rt through a lawyers? That is given .
You are incorrect. Please read my prior post. If you have an approved I-140, you can be on H4 as long as you want and still switch to H1B without getting affected by the quota.
Of course, if you some one wants legal advice, they would need to pay for it rt through a lawyers? That is given .
You are incorrect. Please read my prior post. If you have an approved I-140, you can be on H4 as long as you want and still switch to H1B without getting affected by the quota.
nogc12
07-29 11:45 AM
You can use the Eb2 failing to wait another 17 years:p
2011 I AM IMPRISONED BY GREED, HATE
cool_guy_onnet1
06-01 01:49 PM
Hers's the SOURCE...
http://www.shusterman.com/toc-it.html#B
FIRST ITEM IN THE LIST
Let's fill the mailboxes over the weekend... I am driving to Atlantic city-- Worse the traffic, better for IV!! I will be calling for 3 full hours! Love my Blackberry 8800, fill in the numbers and just keep calling using "auto dial next feature"!
http://www.shusterman.com/toc-it.html#B
First ITEM in the list
http://www.shusterman.com/toc-it.html#B
FIRST ITEM IN THE LIST
Let's fill the mailboxes over the weekend... I am driving to Atlantic city-- Worse the traffic, better for IV!! I will be calling for 3 full hours! Love my Blackberry 8800, fill in the numbers and just keep calling using "auto dial next feature"!
http://www.shusterman.com/toc-it.html#B
First ITEM in the list
more...
joeshmoe
03-26 04:30 PM
Don't listen to those who would tell you that you need 5 years after your degree was awarded. TALK TO A FREAKING LAWYER.
Well... thanks for your reply but maybe you are one of the lucky ones who never been scr... up by the lawyers in the past. Well.. I have and others as well. Just becuase the lawyer says "it can be done" (read: pay now and we will see what USCIS will say later) I am not necessarily going to believe in that ...
CIRcus is in the early stages of the show so hopefully it will pick up the steam soon I will not need to go through the EB2/EB3 pains ....
Well... thanks for your reply but maybe you are one of the lucky ones who never been scr... up by the lawyers in the past. Well.. I have and others as well. Just becuase the lawyer says "it can be done" (read: pay now and we will see what USCIS will say later) I am not necessarily going to believe in that ...
CIRcus is in the early stages of the show so hopefully it will pick up the steam soon I will not need to go through the EB2/EB3 pains ....
ck_b2001
07-17 07:05 PM
You need to be in US untill you recieve "Reciept of Notice". For those who filed Jul 2nd may be a special case as untill today it was thought to be rejected. In this situation i dont know how that rule will apply. On your return you have to show the 485 reciept notice along with your valid H1/H4 Visa (if Travel document is pending) to enter to US. It may mess up the database at POE if you do not mention pending 485.
I would advise you seek legal advice if you have filed on Jul 2nd and you or your spouse has or is travelled (ing) abroad.
My wife was planning on travelling next week and she has to cancell her trip to be safe.
I would advise you seek legal advice if you have filed on Jul 2nd and you or your spouse has or is travelled (ing) abroad.
My wife was planning on travelling next week and she has to cancell her trip to be safe.
more...
gcgalore
08-05 10:22 PM
I got my approval email today, but my wife's online status remain unchanged received and pending. Does USCIS process dependent's application separately? Both mine and wife's application was sent the same day, FP notices were received at the same time..I mean everything was done at the same time except approval.
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?
2010 humiliated: Someone should
jgh_res
05-17 10:01 AM
Here is the link:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html
Posted article is below. Refer to the highlighted section :
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's address from the Oval Office on border security and illegal immigration failed to satisfy either advocates of amnesty or those demanding that the government secure our borders and ports. Whether by design or not, however, the president did manage to advance public awareness of both crises.
The president finally acknowledged the unsustainable social and economic burdens of permitting millions of illegal aliens to forge documents, pressure our public schools and hospitals, and overtax our local and state budgets.
And the president, in asking for more border patrol officers and sending 6,000 National Guardsmen to our southern border to support the Border Patrol, also acknowledged the federal government's utter failure to protect the American people by securing our borders, across which as many as three million illegal aliens enter this country each year.
President Bush's five-point plan began with the words, "First, the United States must secure its borders." But the president did not assign any urgency to the national task of doing so. Deploying as many as 6,000 members of the National Guard to help secure our broken border with Mexico is positive step.
But the president's proposal to place those National Guardsmen in some sort of adjunct support role is peculiar at best, and without question, woefully inadequate. The president sounded as if he were trying to appease Mexico's President Vicente Fox, assuring him we would not militarize the border. If there is to be appeasement at all, that should fall to the Mexican government rather than President Bush.
Not only are millions of illegal aliens entering the United States each year across that border, but so are illegal drugs. More cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine and marijuana flood across the Mexican than from any other place, more than three decades into the war on drugs.
President Bush and all the open borders advocates should be held to account for not doing everything in their power to destroy the drug traffic across our borders, as well as illegal immigration.
If it is necessary to send 20,000 -- 30,000 National Guard troops to the border with Mexico to preserve our national sovereignty and protect the American people from rampant drug trafficking, illegal immigration and the threat of terrorists, than I cannot imagine why this president and this Congress would hesitate to do so.
And how can this president and this Congress begin to rationalize placing immigration reform, which has been neglected since the last amnesty 20 years ago, ahead of national security and the safety of all Americans?
President Bush went on to say that in order to secure our borders we must create a temporary guest worker program. What? Come again, Mr. President. The president knows better, and so do the American people. Control of our borders and ports is necessary to our national security and a temporary worker program is an exploitive luxury for corporate America.
The president also said we need to hold employers who hire illegal aliens accountable, but he failed to say how. What should be the penalties for these illegal employers? How large a fine should they receive? How many years in jail for the executives of such companies?
It would have been inspiring to hear the president say that he and his friend Vicente Fox had discussed illegal immigration and drug trafficking and reached an agreement that both our country's militaries would be used to create a joint border security force, one that working together would ensure the integrity of the Untied States/Mexico border.
Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.
Aside from the fact that both political parties are complicit with corporate America and special interests in placing so-called immigration reform ahead of border and port security speaks volumes about our elected officials' commitment to the national interest and the weight and influence of corporate America over both parties.
Mr. President, I don't think the American people will tolerate this much longer.
more...
radhay
05-15 11:57 AM
Not an expert but my guess is this window of opportunity will exist till next Fiscal year's bulletin is out i.e around 10th sep 2007. If you haven't already filed 485 you are unlikely to be approved during the window. I would go with aggressive approach i.e file based on pending EB2 and upgrade to PP. If you want to be conservtive because you never know if the porting will be accepted or not, or if it may add more delay just file eb3 485 right away, take the beneifts like ead etc.. and later port if retrogressed.
Here's a rather strange and may be uncommon situation for someone I know who needs suggestions from gurus here...such huge PD movements do result in strange situations such as these :)
EB3 India Labor + I-140 certified with PD Feb 2003
EB2-140 pending at NSC hoping to port the EB3 PD date
So both cases are now current, which leads to a couple of options for AOS:
1. File based on approved EB3 (and risk a potential retrogression in future)
2. File based on pending EB2 140 before it is approved (and risk potential RFE, etc. and who knows if it would be too late to revert to the EB3)
The other option is to upgrade the EB2 140 to PP, but could you please list the relative merits of the above two options?
Here's a rather strange and may be uncommon situation for someone I know who needs suggestions from gurus here...such huge PD movements do result in strange situations such as these :)
EB3 India Labor + I-140 certified with PD Feb 2003
EB2-140 pending at NSC hoping to port the EB3 PD date
So both cases are now current, which leads to a couple of options for AOS:
1. File based on approved EB3 (and risk a potential retrogression in future)
2. File based on pending EB2 140 before it is approved (and risk potential RFE, etc. and who knows if it would be too late to revert to the EB3)
The other option is to upgrade the EB2 140 to PP, but could you please list the relative merits of the above two options?
hair you we kill someone hell
GCAmigo
12-04 10:30 AM
isn't that what is happening now?
more...
kutra
07-21 04:04 PM
Why does USCIS want TB test done? Many countries like India have BCG vaccination administered at childhood thus preventing TB. However, such people will show a false positive if administered a skin test for TB.
This is causing many Indians to go for a chest xray. I feel this is a ridiculous requirement.
True, however...
USCIS SOP clearly states that a TB SKin test is required. Last year during the July fiasco, I remember Murthy had an article that said if you ONLY submit a chest x-ray, you will still get a RFE (despite chest x-ray being normal) for not performing the skin test.
Ironical, isn't it, how and why the IOs suddenly decide to go by the book! FIFIO is also a part of the SOP, but you know the rest... ...!
This is causing many Indians to go for a chest xray. I feel this is a ridiculous requirement.
True, however...
USCIS SOP clearly states that a TB SKin test is required. Last year during the July fiasco, I remember Murthy had an article that said if you ONLY submit a chest x-ray, you will still get a RFE (despite chest x-ray being normal) for not performing the skin test.
Ironical, isn't it, how and why the IOs suddenly decide to go by the book! FIFIO is also a part of the SOP, but you know the rest... ...!
hot Flee from hate, mischief and
ras
02-07 12:18 PM
Any guess!!!
more...
house “Loving someone and having
solaris27
02-24 01:26 PM
i don't know but he put it there
tattoo We need to blame someone other
ryan
01-26 03:35 PM
Seriously, who cares that Andhra bagged 7 ranks. How on earth is it relevant to the discussion going on here? Plus this isn't a forum for Indians only(and I'm Indian).
Stop posting these nonsense, amateur messages.
LOL! Nicely said. Some of the "talent & skill" that move here, is just most unfortunate.
Stop posting these nonsense, amateur messages.
LOL! Nicely said. Some of the "talent & skill" that move here, is just most unfortunate.
more...
pictures You can send them to someone
JazzByTheBay
09-08 11:49 AM
Given the demographics of the greater Seattle area in general, and Redmond in particular - I'm surprised "softies" haven't taken over the WA chapter completely... :)
Hope to see all of you in DC..
cheers!
jazz
My wife and me have joined the yahoogroups for WA chapter, We are going for the rally, how can we encourage more friends in WA state to go? I know there are people willing to sponsor, provide part of funds, help with accommodation and so on and if anyone in WA has any of these limitations, people are willing to coordinate. How do we get the point across to all Washingtonian GC sufferers or people who just filed for 485 and don't see the bleak tomorrow. How do we wake them up all up? We have so many employers here, is there something we can do to wake them up from the slumber and mirage of filing 485? I must admit, I was sleeping too until yesterday when we booked our tickets.
Hope to see all of you in DC..
cheers!
jazz
My wife and me have joined the yahoogroups for WA chapter, We are going for the rally, how can we encourage more friends in WA state to go? I know there are people willing to sponsor, provide part of funds, help with accommodation and so on and if anyone in WA has any of these limitations, people are willing to coordinate. How do we get the point across to all Washingtonian GC sufferers or people who just filed for 485 and don't see the bleak tomorrow. How do we wake them up all up? We have so many employers here, is there something we can do to wake them up from the slumber and mirage of filing 485? I must admit, I was sleeping too until yesterday when we booked our tickets.
dresses best quotes eller catarina
matreen
01-22 03:00 AM
I am also in similar boat....please advice guys....
what happend once you invoke your AC21 and travell on AP ......
What would be the best answers at POE if they ask I am working for the GC sponsered Employer?
M
what happend once you invoke your AC21 and travell on AP ......
What would be the best answers at POE if they ask I am working for the GC sponsered Employer?
M
more...
makeup Hate crime statistics
ita
11-20 04:50 PM
My AP was approved for multiple trips. So I can use the 2 stamped AP as many times as I want. The officer told me that when I use the APs for my next trip then they are going stamp the same APs again. And that I will not need to submit anything on my next trip. It would be advisable to keep some photocopies of the AP just in case they ask for a copy.
How do you know AP is approved for multiple entries?
I thought AP in general is for multiple entries.
Is there a way to tell from your approval notice it your AP was approved for multiple times?
Thank you.
How do you know AP is approved for multiple entries?
I thought AP in general is for multiple entries.
Is there a way to tell from your approval notice it your AP was approved for multiple times?
Thank you.
girlfriend Sappy/inspiring quotes
PD_Dec2002
07-22 10:10 PM
This is my GC application history
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
A1: Receipt date is assigned by USCIS when they re-enter or mark your case as PP. This is different from when FedEx delivered the PP request. In my friend's case, the difference in these two dates was 10 business days. This was in early June and his I-140 was approved in 3 business days.
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
1. PD for Labor - Aug 2003
2. Labor(Regular) Application Approved - Nov 2005
3. i-140 applied in Jan 2006
4. RFE received question was for company not self, i-140 withdrawn.
5. Transferred my H1 to the companys sister concern and reapplied for i140 in June 2006.
6. Applied for i140 premium processing on June 22nd, 2007.
Current status for i-140 : Recieved and pending at Nebraska service center.
Questions
Q1. What is i-140 receipt date for premium processing. Is it the date the fed-ex package is recvd by USCIS or is it a date issued by USCIS that should reach my lawyer?
Q2. If in case the USCIS need to provide my attorney a receipt date, we have NOT received one as yet. Does that mean they have not even looked at the application as yet?
Q3. Can i apply for i485 in the worst case that i do not receive approval for i140 by Aug 17th under the concurrent filing rule.
Any assistance would be highly appreciated.
A1: Receipt date is assigned by USCIS when they re-enter or mark your case as PP. This is different from when FedEx delivered the PP request. In my friend's case, the difference in these two dates was 10 business days. This was in early June and his I-140 was approved in 3 business days.
A2: Most probably, that is what has happened.
A3: In Rajiv Khanna's conference call (you can download them from his Web site), he suggested the concurrent filing option when someone asked him a similar question.
Good luck!
Thanks,
Jayant
hairstyles but quotesalways remember others may , you- gt love , down you , Aug , cannot love you but i way I+love+you+but+hate+you+quotes
gcadream
03-04 08:24 AM
Thanks a lot Rakson for updating the forum with valuable question and answers with the lawyer. Really appreciate it !!
It cleared lot of my doubts as well but regarding point 'C'
[C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?]
I have heard lawyers saying in this forum itself that it can be a problem if the previous employer revokes the approved I-140, irrespective whether it was fraud or not. I don't have the links saved for that discussion, otherwise I would have pasted it.
But are you very sure about point 'C' that what ever ur lawyer said is correct and final ?
It cleared lot of my doubts as well but regarding point 'C'
[C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?]
I have heard lawyers saying in this forum itself that it can be a problem if the previous employer revokes the approved I-140, irrespective whether it was fraud or not. I don't have the links saved for that discussion, otherwise I would have pasted it.
But are you very sure about point 'C' that what ever ur lawyer said is correct and final ?
fuzzy logic
07-01 12:47 PM
I am in the same situation currently.
My company's attorneys believe that mine is not an AC21 case because I am going from Software Engineer (per PERM) to Lead Software Engineer, with substantial pay hike.
They are sending me papers for H-1B amendment and extension only (extension because my H-1B will expire soon).
Why is there a need to invoke AC21 in your case? Is there substantial change in responsibilities?
I think there will have to AC21 invoked as there is change in the job location. Secondly I will be going from Senior Assurance Associate to Assurance Manager. There will be additional responsibilities from what I already have.
I hope this H1B amendment will not impede in anyway the GC process. Would it? Thanks!
My company's attorneys believe that mine is not an AC21 case because I am going from Software Engineer (per PERM) to Lead Software Engineer, with substantial pay hike.
They are sending me papers for H-1B amendment and extension only (extension because my H-1B will expire soon).
Why is there a need to invoke AC21 in your case? Is there substantial change in responsibilities?
I think there will have to AC21 invoked as there is change in the job location. Secondly I will be going from Senior Assurance Associate to Assurance Manager. There will be additional responsibilities from what I already have.
I hope this H1B amendment will not impede in anyway the GC process. Would it? Thanks!
iptel
02-14 01:17 PM
Chapter 2: Skills for the U.S. Workforce.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/ch2-erp06.pdf
covers great deal of importance of H1B and Green Card. May be we can consider it to be part of our presentation.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/ch2-erp06.pdf
covers great deal of importance of H1B and Green Card. May be we can consider it to be part of our presentation.
No comments:
Post a Comment