pkv
01-08 10:38 AM
This might be a simple stupid question,
Can you please update, if you used a standard 2*2 passport taken here in the applicaiton form or got one 3.5 cm * 3.5 cm as put in the passport form. If yes, where did you took one. The standard size Passport Photo appears to be a little bigger than the one specified in the Passport application.
I used standard 2x2. Its mentioned at their website too.
Can you please update, if you used a standard 2*2 passport taken here in the applicaiton form or got one 3.5 cm * 3.5 cm as put in the passport form. If yes, where did you took one. The standard size Passport Photo appears to be a little bigger than the one specified in the Passport application.
I used standard 2x2. Its mentioned at their website too.
wallpaper short hair cuts for women.
xela
06-10 12:51 PM
It s been a while since i have said anything here, and mostly because it seems this has become a "everyones racist against indians" and everyone else isnt important kind of talk.
while I understand most here are from India, please refrain from putting the ROW people down and make it sound like we have no wait at all. i ve been here since 2000 and started my green card process in 2003. I m just as frustrated, but I refrain from coming here and telling everyone how ROW should get all the good stuff and the rest can go to ....
:(:confused:
we should fax/email letters to lawmakers/senators from every angle. One way of doing this would be drafting a letter with the calculation and a quote " Just for Indians, and chinese nationality for rest of the world = 1year"
We should be attacking in each and every angle so they get used to reading our issues and would come with a solution.
MAKE A NOISE
while I understand most here are from India, please refrain from putting the ROW people down and make it sound like we have no wait at all. i ve been here since 2000 and started my green card process in 2003. I m just as frustrated, but I refrain from coming here and telling everyone how ROW should get all the good stuff and the rest can go to ....
:(:confused:
we should fax/email letters to lawmakers/senators from every angle. One way of doing this would be drafting a letter with the calculation and a quote " Just for Indians, and chinese nationality for rest of the world = 1year"
We should be attacking in each and every angle so they get used to reading our issues and would come with a solution.
MAKE A NOISE
lost_in_migration
05-14 08:28 PM
Thats the spirit
I will support IV even i have Gc .GO IV.
I will support IV even i have Gc .GO IV.
2011 Stylish Short Haircuts 2011
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
sh2005
08-13 10:43 AM
Yes, i opened a new thread so that everybody can see that CIS does mostly work on cases according to 485 Receipt Date. Otherwise i can't justify my EAD approval. I filed 485 and AP on June 18th and got RNs 2 weeks later. But EAD was filed later on July 12th. I got the receipt number for EAD from the back of my cashed check but never got actual Receipt Notice. Today i got the email that card production has been ordered.
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
How about the processing date that was shown for your service center? I applied my I-485, EAD and AP in May (got my RN in may as well). The processing time for EAD and AP is shown to be March 26, 2007 for NSC. But, I recently got my EAD approved and an RFE for AP. So, is the website for processing time not updated as accurately as it made to be seen or somehow some applications (like mine and yours) bypass the FIFO?
On a separate note, I got an email that an RFE has been issued for my EAD, but I already got the EAD card in hand, before the RFE was issued!!!
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
How about the processing date that was shown for your service center? I applied my I-485, EAD and AP in May (got my RN in may as well). The processing time for EAD and AP is shown to be March 26, 2007 for NSC. But, I recently got my EAD approved and an RFE for AP. So, is the website for processing time not updated as accurately as it made to be seen or somehow some applications (like mine and yours) bypass the FIFO?
On a separate note, I got an email that an RFE has been issued for my EAD, but I already got the EAD card in hand, before the RFE was issued!!!
nagio
08-13 12:29 PM
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama on Friday signed into law a $600 million border security that will put more agents and equipment along the Mexican border.
...
Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100813/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_border_security)
...
Link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100813/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_border_security)
more...
priti8888
10-01 01:03 PM
This is how PD and RD work.
ASSUME ALL ARE EB3
Mr. A PD JULY 2004 RD MARCH 2005(1)
Mr B PD FEB 2004 RD DECEMBER 2005 (2)
MR C PD JAN 2003 RD JANAURY 2006 (3)
USCIS Processes applications based on RD. After they are processed they are in the "staging area" (pre-adjudicated)
IF ALL visa bulletin DATES ARE "CURRENT" MR A would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "May 2003" Mr. C would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "MAY 2004 "MR B would get GC first
If visa bulletin date is August 2004 "Mr A would get GC first"
In a summary, when PD is current, people with the earliest RD would get GC first. Your PD HAS to be CURRENT to be eligible for a visa number.
ASSUME ALL ARE EB3
Mr. A PD JULY 2004 RD MARCH 2005(1)
Mr B PD FEB 2004 RD DECEMBER 2005 (2)
MR C PD JAN 2003 RD JANAURY 2006 (3)
USCIS Processes applications based on RD. After they are processed they are in the "staging area" (pre-adjudicated)
IF ALL visa bulletin DATES ARE "CURRENT" MR A would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "May 2003" Mr. C would get GC first
If visa bulletin date has a PD of "MAY 2004 "MR B would get GC first
If visa bulletin date is August 2004 "Mr A would get GC first"
In a summary, when PD is current, people with the earliest RD would get GC first. Your PD HAS to be CURRENT to be eligible for a visa number.
2010 short hair styles for women
hpandey
02-26 03:24 PM
Hello,
I have not seen the 485 receipt notice come through and its been over 6 months since I applied. Down the line after a few months we will have to start preparing for EAD and AP renewal and I take it we will need a copy of the 485 receipt notice to file? Any thoughts.
That's strange that you got your EAD and AP but did not get the I-485 receipt. I think its time for you to call the USCIS helpdesk and if that doesn't prove helpful then take an infopass appointment to find out what's going on .
I have not seen the 485 receipt notice come through and its been over 6 months since I applied. Down the line after a few months we will have to start preparing for EAD and AP renewal and I take it we will need a copy of the 485 receipt notice to file? Any thoughts.
That's strange that you got your EAD and AP but did not get the I-485 receipt. I think its time for you to call the USCIS helpdesk and if that doesn't prove helpful then take an infopass appointment to find out what's going on .
more...
makemygc
06-22 11:18 AM
Due to time contraints doctor sent me for a chest x-ray and skipped the TB skin test. Chest x-ray came back negative. Question: Is a TB skin test required if a chest x-ray is negative? No remarks were made as to why TB skin test was not given. Should suggest, to a reasonable person, that no active TB is present
My civil surgeon advised me against by-passing skin test. He said, he has done that in the past but peope got an RFE.
My civil surgeon advised me against by-passing skin test. He said, he has done that in the past but peope got an RFE.
hair Cool Short Hairstyles 2011
alien2006
08-08 07:33 AM
guys many of us are considering going back to india.. any idea on whether those who have 40 credits will be eligible for social security from india...
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
Try this website - http://groups.msn.com/R2INRIFinanceAndInvestments for good info if you want to go back to India.
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
Try this website - http://groups.msn.com/R2INRIFinanceAndInvestments for good info if you want to go back to India.
more...
Raju
04-09 03:39 PM
Friends,
I am working for company A and I have offer from Company B, I thinking of my options, Here is my situation
1. I have approved I140 > 180 days in actually 300 days
2. I have approved EAD
3. mine is labor transfer case and I used an existing labor that matched my job profile
4. Company B is ready to hire me in the same/similar role and are ready to give AC21 employment letter with same details as in my labor.
5. I have approved copy of my labor that was transferred and all other copies related to my case like I140, I485 application and Advance parole etc,....
Please give me some guidance on if I should be accepting the offer from Company B, I am concerned because my labor was transferred from another employee. I have worked for company A for nearly 4 years now and my GC is in process for almost 4 years, labor switch was done like 2 years ago.
Based on this explanation do you see any risk and am I missing anything here, in terms of getting specific documentation from company A application..
please help
I think you are in good shape here
I am working for company A and I have offer from Company B, I thinking of my options, Here is my situation
1. I have approved I140 > 180 days in actually 300 days
2. I have approved EAD
3. mine is labor transfer case and I used an existing labor that matched my job profile
4. Company B is ready to hire me in the same/similar role and are ready to give AC21 employment letter with same details as in my labor.
5. I have approved copy of my labor that was transferred and all other copies related to my case like I140, I485 application and Advance parole etc,....
Please give me some guidance on if I should be accepting the offer from Company B, I am concerned because my labor was transferred from another employee. I have worked for company A for nearly 4 years now and my GC is in process for almost 4 years, labor switch was done like 2 years ago.
Based on this explanation do you see any risk and am I missing anything here, in terms of getting specific documentation from company A application..
please help
I think you are in good shape here
hot hairstyles 2011 short hair
maxy
09-27 09:47 AM
I have approved I140 notice ... i dont see A# can you pls help me find that number in approval notice (797)
more...
house short hair styles for women
ajcates
11-24 11:28 AM
I want the kawoosh one to win mainly because of the cool name.
tattoo hairstyles 2011 women.
seetheavatar
10-15 03:33 PM
Don't worry guys.If you have received a mail saying that your GC is posted and if it is more than 30 days you can contact the customer service and create a service request.
You will get your card within 30 days.
If it was sent to a different address it would be returned to USCIS and you will be getting a mail saying that your GC was returned.
For this case also you have to create a service request and you will get your card within 30 days.
You will get your card within 30 days.
If it was sent to a different address it would be returned to USCIS and you will be getting a mail saying that your GC was returned.
For this case also you have to create a service request and you will get your card within 30 days.
more...
pictures Short Haircuts For Women 2011
HOPE_GC_SOON
01-31 02:24 PM
Gurus:
My friend got into this situation.
He had EB2 Labor approved with PD 08/2005 and I140 approved.. He is in final six months of his H1.
Now, interestingly his EB3 labor from Previous employer was just approved. However, he is no more working with them. But could convince them to file I140 for the apprvoed EB3 (which is PD 09/2003). and would like to Port the PD to his current EB2 with his present employer.
Did any oone of you experienced this and if so, can you please share your experience..
What are the Dos and Donts for this case.. Appreciate your replies.
Thanks,
:)
My friend got into this situation.
He had EB2 Labor approved with PD 08/2005 and I140 approved.. He is in final six months of his H1.
Now, interestingly his EB3 labor from Previous employer was just approved. However, he is no more working with them. But could convince them to file I140 for the apprvoed EB3 (which is PD 09/2003). and would like to Port the PD to his current EB2 with his present employer.
Did any oone of you experienced this and if so, can you please share your experience..
What are the Dos and Donts for this case.. Appreciate your replies.
Thanks,
:)
dresses short hair styles for women
senthil1
06-11 05:35 PM
There may be two observations in this.
1. They may try to bring CIR one more time and pass in Senate or
2.They will make alive CIR talks till this year end. This will make sure that other piece meal bills like Skil, Agricultural jobs bill will not be brought for debate till CIR is alive
Second case is the best bet for numbersusa, alipac etc.
1. They may try to bring CIR one more time and pass in Senate or
2.They will make alive CIR talks till this year end. This will make sure that other piece meal bills like Skil, Agricultural jobs bill will not be brought for debate till CIR is alive
Second case is the best bet for numbersusa, alipac etc.
more...
makeup very short hair styles 2011
chanduv23
08-02 05:30 PM
create a yahoogroups or googlegroups and start adding people in, maybe you can have one group for FL initially and then divide norrth and south
girlfriend short hair styles 2011
hopefulgc
09-02 11:57 AM
If this is not like a "third world" goverrnment/municipality office, then what is?
I think we all might just have to form groups of 10 people each and file group WOMs replete with reimbursement of attorney expenses.
Edit. Latest ..on my case.(with a little history) and this is hilarious.
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
I think we all might just have to form groups of 10 people each and file group WOMs replete with reimbursement of attorney expenses.
Edit. Latest ..on my case.(with a little history) and this is hilarious.
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
hairstyles hairstyles 2011 short hair
mchhokar
05-15 03:23 PM
Is it ok to file H1b while L1 is on appeal.. IS USCIS ok with this fact.. Filing the visas simultaneously under two categorie?
pou-pou
06-11 08:44 PM
wow :D I have done good here :D :lol:
well, the guy with the green swan stamp should win though :love:
well, the guy with the green swan stamp should win though :love:
WillIWin?
08-13 02:09 PM
I dont agree with the laws passed, but here is the math to come up with the $600 million figure they are quoting.
# of possible H1Bs = 85k (65k + 20k)
Fees (additional) = $2000
Total Fees = $170 million ($2k x 85k)
The fee increase is for 4 years = (2010-2014)
GRAND Total = $680 million ($170 million x 4)
# of possible H1Bs = 85k (65k + 20k)
Fees (additional) = $2000
Total Fees = $170 million ($2k x 85k)
The fee increase is for 4 years = (2010-2014)
GRAND Total = $680 million ($170 million x 4)
No comments:
Post a Comment