rahulpatel
08-14 04:35 PM
Please note that, this is no more the issue of not-paying me at all-- He cleverly cleared recently the amount which is stated on my LCA H1. What he is actually withholding, is the difference of this and the actual salary (percentage) that was agreed upon, at that time.
wallpaper short funny quotes. short
looivy
03-23 02:39 AM
Can a legal expert provide advice as to whether I can use EAD/AP to get in?
Bump again
Bump again
pappu
07-30 09:08 AM
I decided to write this post after seeing a comment ‘there is no IV core per se’ on another thread by a member and also seeing how people ask questions during these calls.
I have been in a couple of calls in the past and have more or less decided to stay away from them. Here are some of my reasons:
Most callers come to these calls to ask questions on their own personal case and think as if Ombudsman office will solve their problem in the call. This does not happen. They are always asked to contact the office using a form if they want any answer about their own case. Even the callers waiting for their turn to ask questions do not take the clue and still continue to ask questions about their case status and get the same standard answers. This in my opinion is a waste of time and opportunity our community gets to interface with Obudsman’s office.
In the past the call topics were very different from the questions asked and people never cared to stay within the agenda. Even in yesterday’s call, how many of us really read the Ombudsman’s 2008 report before going to the call and asked questions about the report , discussed inefficiencies in the system and asked progress on the steps being taken to improve them?
If most of the call time is wasted in individual case questions and standard responses, we will never get a chance to fix the system and help ourselves and everyone. The community needs to rise above their own selfish interests and think as a community. IV core has always put community’s interest before their own and have never created action items or ask lists that are tailored for their own cases. We have always used the meeting opportunities with administration and lawmakers to discuss problems faced by the community rather than an individual and discussed solutions that will benefit the community rather than an individual.
Only once we start thinking like a community can we succeed. Else there will be divisions in the community. EB2s and EB3 will argue with each other. People will leave IV once they get their own GC or even do not care about others waiting in behind them. The fact that not even one thousand members have contributed a nominal $5 in the latest campaign tells us something.
I hope this post at least makes a difference in the next Ombudsman call.
I have been in a couple of calls in the past and have more or less decided to stay away from them. Here are some of my reasons:
Most callers come to these calls to ask questions on their own personal case and think as if Ombudsman office will solve their problem in the call. This does not happen. They are always asked to contact the office using a form if they want any answer about their own case. Even the callers waiting for their turn to ask questions do not take the clue and still continue to ask questions about their case status and get the same standard answers. This in my opinion is a waste of time and opportunity our community gets to interface with Obudsman’s office.
In the past the call topics were very different from the questions asked and people never cared to stay within the agenda. Even in yesterday’s call, how many of us really read the Ombudsman’s 2008 report before going to the call and asked questions about the report , discussed inefficiencies in the system and asked progress on the steps being taken to improve them?
If most of the call time is wasted in individual case questions and standard responses, we will never get a chance to fix the system and help ourselves and everyone. The community needs to rise above their own selfish interests and think as a community. IV core has always put community’s interest before their own and have never created action items or ask lists that are tailored for their own cases. We have always used the meeting opportunities with administration and lawmakers to discuss problems faced by the community rather than an individual and discussed solutions that will benefit the community rather than an individual.
Only once we start thinking like a community can we succeed. Else there will be divisions in the community. EB2s and EB3 will argue with each other. People will leave IV once they get their own GC or even do not care about others waiting in behind them. The fact that not even one thousand members have contributed a nominal $5 in the latest campaign tells us something.
I hope this post at least makes a difference in the next Ombudsman call.
2011 short funny quotes about
gc_on_demand
03-25 02:16 PM
Folks,
I would like to share my success story of getting my I-485 application approved with a revoked/withdrawn I-140. We received our Green Cards and Welcome Letters in the mail yesterday. If you go through my profile, you should be able to get most of the information, but here it is anyway:
1] Company A applied for my LC followed by the I-140 application. We never got a chance to file I-485.
2] After I quite company A, they withdrew my I-140 application.
3] Company B started the process again with my labor application, followed by my new I-140 application. We didn't capture the older PD at this stage, but the A# was the same as the old one.
4] When we sent in our I-485 application, we included a letter describing that we would like to retain the older PD (we sent them a snippet of page 27 of the Field Adjudicator's Manual - Yates memo). In the interest of being transparent, we mentioned that the earlier I-140 was withdrawn by the previous employer. After an unrelated RFE, our case was finally approved last Friday (03/18).
I am sharing this information so that others who are stuck in a similar situation can use this as a datapoint in their struggle against the USCIS. I wish you all the very best in your Green Card journey.
You said you didn't get a chance to file for I 485 with company A , means you did transfer H1b. Did company A withdraw before you transfered H1b ? Did you do transfer with in initial 6 year of H1b ?
I would like to share my success story of getting my I-485 application approved with a revoked/withdrawn I-140. We received our Green Cards and Welcome Letters in the mail yesterday. If you go through my profile, you should be able to get most of the information, but here it is anyway:
1] Company A applied for my LC followed by the I-140 application. We never got a chance to file I-485.
2] After I quite company A, they withdrew my I-140 application.
3] Company B started the process again with my labor application, followed by my new I-140 application. We didn't capture the older PD at this stage, but the A# was the same as the old one.
4] When we sent in our I-485 application, we included a letter describing that we would like to retain the older PD (we sent them a snippet of page 27 of the Field Adjudicator's Manual - Yates memo). In the interest of being transparent, we mentioned that the earlier I-140 was withdrawn by the previous employer. After an unrelated RFE, our case was finally approved last Friday (03/18).
I am sharing this information so that others who are stuck in a similar situation can use this as a datapoint in their struggle against the USCIS. I wish you all the very best in your Green Card journey.
You said you didn't get a chance to file for I 485 with company A , means you did transfer H1b. Did company A withdraw before you transfered H1b ? Did you do transfer with in initial 6 year of H1b ?
more...
Ramba
05-01 11:42 AM
Thats exactly my plan. It will be accompanied by covering letter, a spreadsheet and a recommendation.
I will be sending mainly to DOS , DHS and USCIS
First USCIS has no control or rights in visa allocation. It is 100% DOS job. I am not pesimistic, but it may not helpful. DOS under obligations, sets the cutoff dates in various catagories as per INA, its regulations and their SOP. Recommending some procedure is a major change for them. They have to verify whatever you recommend does not violate INA, and the regulations. Even ombudusman has not achived to modify the visa allocation procedure at DOS. Only thing you can do is, if you have any evidence that DOS is not following the INA or the regulation, you can bring to their notice. Thats all you can do.
I will be sending mainly to DOS , DHS and USCIS
First USCIS has no control or rights in visa allocation. It is 100% DOS job. I am not pesimistic, but it may not helpful. DOS under obligations, sets the cutoff dates in various catagories as per INA, its regulations and their SOP. Recommending some procedure is a major change for them. They have to verify whatever you recommend does not violate INA, and the regulations. Even ombudusman has not achived to modify the visa allocation procedure at DOS. Only thing you can do is, if you have any evidence that DOS is not following the INA or the regulation, you can bring to their notice. Thats all you can do.
siva008
02-24 03:04 PM
I have a Master's program in US and had 3 years previous work ex. Filed my H1B transfer on Sep, which was recently converted to premium processing. Got the RFE as listed below:
If it is your contention that the beneficialry is qualified to perform services in the specialty occupation yu have described through a combination of education, specialised training and/or work experience in areas related to the specialty . you must submit an evaluation from an official who has the authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the speciality at an accredited college or univeristy, which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience.
With the evaluation, the official must include a letter from the dean or provost of the official's affiliated education instutions, stating that the evaluating offical has the authoriity to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience. The dean or provost must also state in the letter whether the affiliated educational instutiion has a program for granting credit based on a indicidual's training and/or work experience, If the evealuator bases the evaluation partly or completely on the beneficiary's work experience. the evaluation must vlearly demonstate that:
) The beneficiary''s training and/or work experience included the theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge required by the specialty;
2) The claimed experience was gained while working with peers, supervisors, and/or subordinates who have a degree or equivalent in the specialty
3) The beneficiary has recognition of expertise in the specialty evidenced by at least one type of documentation
A) Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two recognized authorities in the same specialty occupation;
B) Membership in a recognized foreign or United States association or society in the specialty
occupation;
C) Published material by or about the alien in professional publications, trade journals, or major newspapers;
D) licensure or registration to practice the specialty occupation in a foreign country; or Achievements
if any one has similar problem please share
Thanks
Hi NoUserName,
here more details:
Bachelors in Civil
Masters in Civil
And having 3+ years experience as computer systems analyst
My lawyer is saying just educational evaluation is fine but after I read the query they are looking for more.
I really confused how to answer this query, if you have any ideal please help me
If it is your contention that the beneficialry is qualified to perform services in the specialty occupation yu have described through a combination of education, specialised training and/or work experience in areas related to the specialty . you must submit an evaluation from an official who has the authority to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience in the speciality at an accredited college or univeristy, which has a program for granting such credit based on an individual's training and/or work experience.
With the evaluation, the official must include a letter from the dean or provost of the official's affiliated education instutions, stating that the evaluating offical has the authoriity to grant college-level credit for training and/or experience. The dean or provost must also state in the letter whether the affiliated educational instutiion has a program for granting credit based on a indicidual's training and/or work experience, If the evealuator bases the evaluation partly or completely on the beneficiary's work experience. the evaluation must vlearly demonstate that:
) The beneficiary''s training and/or work experience included the theoretical and practical application of specialized knowledge required by the specialty;
2) The claimed experience was gained while working with peers, supervisors, and/or subordinates who have a degree or equivalent in the specialty
3) The beneficiary has recognition of expertise in the specialty evidenced by at least one type of documentation
A) Recognition of expertise in the specialty occupation by at least two recognized authorities in the same specialty occupation;
B) Membership in a recognized foreign or United States association or society in the specialty
occupation;
C) Published material by or about the alien in professional publications, trade journals, or major newspapers;
D) licensure or registration to practice the specialty occupation in a foreign country; or Achievements
if any one has similar problem please share
Thanks
Hi NoUserName,
here more details:
Bachelors in Civil
Masters in Civil
And having 3+ years experience as computer systems analyst
My lawyer is saying just educational evaluation is fine but after I read the query they are looking for more.
I really confused how to answer this query, if you have any ideal please help me
more...
logiclife
04-08 12:23 AM
like S 1932 that deals with other issues then you risk the House getting those thrown out during conference committee.
The advantage is that it will slide thru easily in senate. Problem is that house members use the S 1932 tactic to get immigration provisions thrown out in bills that are not related to immigration or touch immigration on a tangent like competitiveness bills.
The advantage is that it will slide thru easily in senate. Problem is that house members use the S 1932 tactic to get immigration provisions thrown out in bills that are not related to immigration or touch immigration on a tangent like competitiveness bills.
2010 short funny sayings and quotes. quotes and sayings about life
GCNirvana007
10-08 04:14 PM
I got my green card from Company A. During my labor process i renewed my H1B from Company B which expired last month.
Right now who is my employer Company A or B or none of the above?.
Right now who is my employer Company A or B or none of the above?.
more...
asterix
02-17 10:13 PM
All, Help me understand this.
If I look at this link below on # of immigrant visa's approved every year for for each country it shows the total for India (all category EB 1-5) as
06 -10.7k
05 -46K
04 - 39k
03 - 20k
02 - 41k
01 - 41k
Am I reading this right because this certainly is more than the country limit. Also the total # of visa's given seem to be more than the annual limit. I thought there were some 250k visas that were lost, were the limits higher during these years?
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Under each link look for - Immigrant Visas Issued and Adjustments of Status Subject to Numerical Limitations (by Foreign State Chargeability): Fiscal Year 2006
If I look at this link below on # of immigrant visa's approved every year for for each country it shows the total for India (all category EB 1-5) as
06 -10.7k
05 -46K
04 - 39k
03 - 20k
02 - 41k
01 - 41k
Am I reading this right because this certainly is more than the country limit. Also the total # of visa's given seem to be more than the annual limit. I thought there were some 250k visas that were lost, were the limits higher during these years?
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/statistics/statistics_1476.html
Under each link look for - Immigrant Visas Issued and Adjustments of Status Subject to Numerical Limitations (by Foreign State Chargeability): Fiscal Year 2006
hair short funny quotes about love.
spicy_guy
07-30 02:27 PM
Can someone translate (if you have patience)?
more...
caond
05-07 05:41 AM
I am holding J-1 student visa (academic training) from 8/2007 and will be expired on 7/31/2010, sponsor by U of Colorado. I am working as a postdoc for a project funded by NIH until 2013 at VCU. My advisor want to change my visa category from J-1 student to J-1 scholar, sponsor by VCU, to continue the project.
According to an international advisor at VCU where I am applying J-1 scholar, I cannot change from J-1 student to J-1 scholar due to 12-month bar:
[Time spent in the United States in any J status (including J-2 status) during the 12-month period preceding the prospective professor or research scholar's program begin date may affect the alien's eligibility for participation as a Professor or Research Scholar.
22 C.F.R. � 62.20(d)(2) establishes what is referred to as the "12-month bar." The general proposition of the 12-month bar is that an alien is not eligible to begin an exchange program as a Professor or Research Scholar based on a DS-2019 issued "to begin a new program" if he or she was physically present in any J status (including J-2 status) for "all or part of" the "twelve month period immediately preceding the date of program commencement set forth on his or her Form DS-2019." ]
But according to an international advisor at University of Colorado (my current sponsor for J1 student) that the 12-month bar is not applicable for me due to exception:
[(A) J-1 transfers. The 12 month bar is not applicable to those who will begin a program by transferring to a new program sponsor under the transfer procedures of 22 C.F.R. � 62.42 ;
22 C.F.R. � 62.20(d)(2)(i) ]
Who is right? What should I do? :confused:
I appreciate any help !!!
According to an international advisor at VCU where I am applying J-1 scholar, I cannot change from J-1 student to J-1 scholar due to 12-month bar:
[Time spent in the United States in any J status (including J-2 status) during the 12-month period preceding the prospective professor or research scholar's program begin date may affect the alien's eligibility for participation as a Professor or Research Scholar.
22 C.F.R. � 62.20(d)(2) establishes what is referred to as the "12-month bar." The general proposition of the 12-month bar is that an alien is not eligible to begin an exchange program as a Professor or Research Scholar based on a DS-2019 issued "to begin a new program" if he or she was physically present in any J status (including J-2 status) for "all or part of" the "twelve month period immediately preceding the date of program commencement set forth on his or her Form DS-2019." ]
But according to an international advisor at University of Colorado (my current sponsor for J1 student) that the 12-month bar is not applicable for me due to exception:
[(A) J-1 transfers. The 12 month bar is not applicable to those who will begin a program by transferring to a new program sponsor under the transfer procedures of 22 C.F.R. � 62.42 ;
22 C.F.R. � 62.20(d)(2)(i) ]
Who is right? What should I do? :confused:
I appreciate any help !!!
hot 2011 short funny quotes about
aadimanav
10-16 11:15 PM
You are "legally" eligible to take any job or start your own business.
Some good job search websites are:
www.monster.com
www.dice.com
www.hotjobs.com
www.careerbuilder.com
Some good job search websites are:
www.monster.com
www.dice.com
www.hotjobs.com
www.careerbuilder.com
more...
house short funny quotes about life.
neerajvir
07-17 06:18 PM
Just put a $100 contribution and pledge to put more in every quarter!
tattoo hot Short Funny Quotes about
authrd
08-23 10:59 AM
bumping/hoping for replies
more...
pictures Short funny quotes about life
LookingForGC
12-09 02:13 AM
by the way, I forgot to mention that I was in India when my GC was adjudicated on Oct 22.
At the immigration POE, I told the officer that my GC was granted while I was away. They took me to a room, I waited for 10 minutes, they checked on their system and later told me that I'm good to enter on GC. I looked at my passport where they had canceled my H1 visa and stamped LPR on the immigration stamp which stands for Legal Permanent Resident.
So, no probs returning to the U.S. I even took the liberty to stand in the GC/ citizen Q at the airport :D
Congratulations!
Good to know this info. Best wishes!
At the immigration POE, I told the officer that my GC was granted while I was away. They took me to a room, I waited for 10 minutes, they checked on their system and later told me that I'm good to enter on GC. I looked at my passport where they had canceled my H1 visa and stamped LPR on the immigration stamp which stands for Legal Permanent Resident.
So, no probs returning to the U.S. I even took the liberty to stand in the GC/ citizen Q at the airport :D
Congratulations!
Good to know this info. Best wishes!
dresses Short funny sayings about
jsb
08-31 09:43 AM
Is it Received date or Notice date?
There is a separate thread on Receipt Date/Notice Date. Note that on the Processing Dates page, USCIS makes reference to 'receipt notice date', which is close to date a processing center received the case (which in some cases, is several months later than the date stamped on your receipt, which is the date USCIS received your case in the mailroom).
Also Published dates appear to be to indicate last case processed. Thus if published date for a processing center is Aug 31, 2007, it means that the center believes that all cases prior to this date have been processed. It does not mean they have not seen, or will not see, any cases received (by the center) after this date.
Further, strict sequenced processing is not feasible. Cases are distributed to IO's in lots. Thus if case 1-100 are given to A, and 101-200 are given to B, and both begin working at the same time starting at first case they have in their lot, case 101 will be seen much earlier than case 100, etc.
There is a separate thread on Receipt Date/Notice Date. Note that on the Processing Dates page, USCIS makes reference to 'receipt notice date', which is close to date a processing center received the case (which in some cases, is several months later than the date stamped on your receipt, which is the date USCIS received your case in the mailroom).
Also Published dates appear to be to indicate last case processed. Thus if published date for a processing center is Aug 31, 2007, it means that the center believes that all cases prior to this date have been processed. It does not mean they have not seen, or will not see, any cases received (by the center) after this date.
Further, strict sequenced processing is not feasible. Cases are distributed to IO's in lots. Thus if case 1-100 are given to A, and 101-200 are given to B, and both begin working at the same time starting at first case they have in their lot, case 101 will be seen much earlier than case 100, etc.
more...
makeup hair funny quotes about life
pthoko
05-31 11:22 AM
My PD is current. Still I am not discontinuing my 50.00 per month contribution that I have been doing since january.
Great Thank YOU, Guys like you have no match!!! :)
Great Thank YOU, Guys like you have no match!!! :)
girlfriend short funny quotes about life
.JPG "hot short funny quotes about")
desi3933
03-02 10:17 AM
The answer is Yes & No. You are correct that CIS should only care of status from last entry on visa. But CIS does ask for all the documents from your first entry to US. Though you can always invoke 245(k) in case you have status issues that does not stop CIS from asking old documents
Well, please allow me make it clear. In order to request change or extension of status, the applicant must be maintaining visa status at time of the application. This is law. But status is defined from the moment one enter into the country. Whenever one enters on a visa status, previous visa status and details do not matter. They can not go back beyond date of entry.
By the way - section 245(k) does not apply to change/extension of status. It applies ONLY to employment based adjustment of status application (I-485).
Link to 245(k) memo (http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/245%28k%29_14Jul08.pdf)
____________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
Well, please allow me make it clear. In order to request change or extension of status, the applicant must be maintaining visa status at time of the application. This is law. But status is defined from the moment one enter into the country. Whenever one enters on a visa status, previous visa status and details do not matter. They can not go back beyond date of entry.
By the way - section 245(k) does not apply to change/extension of status. It applies ONLY to employment based adjustment of status application (I-485).
Link to 245(k) memo (http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/245%28k%29_14Jul08.pdf)
____________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
hairstyles short funny life quotes and
GC_ASP
07-20 08:25 AM
You don't need any support from your ex-employer for your wife's 485. But you need your 485 receipt for this along with the affidavit and marriage certificate.
Pagal
09-17 12:50 PM
Hello,
Closing of the sponsoring company may turn out to be a blessing in disguise ... if you show up at Comany A and ask for the employment as listed in your application, Comany A can show its inability to employ you siting the pending closure. As soon as this happens, you are a free agent to work with any other company in same/similar job. I remember reading this advice on murthy last year and you might find some links through IV archives as well.
Good luck!
Closing of the sponsoring company may turn out to be a blessing in disguise ... if you show up at Comany A and ask for the employment as listed in your application, Comany A can show its inability to employ you siting the pending closure. As soon as this happens, you are a free agent to work with any other company in same/similar job. I remember reading this advice on murthy last year and you might find some links through IV archives as well.
Good luck!
Abhinaym
01-31 01:27 PM
I found this link:
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.6.IS:)
(Abhi_Jais, the link u pasted wasn't working for me.)
Bill Text - 112th Congress (2011-2012) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:S.6.IS:)
(Abhi_Jais, the link u pasted wasn't working for me.)
