gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
wallpaper arcode vector art.
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
greenguru
04-01 12:26 AM
Sure.. I was having the same question.
Here is how it happens,
1. When you file for your I-140 Under EB2 you also provide the A#
2. So when your I-140 gets approved your 485 case will automatically know about this.
What you have do
1. Go to InfoPass and verify that your new I-140 is present on your application.
2. Call USCIS Help desk and check. Also tell them you filed in employment based and that your Priority date is current(Ofcourse if it is current only tell them). Request them to open an SR
3. your case will be approved in 25 days.
For me it took 20 days after i opened the SR. The official time is 45 days to 60 days.
Cheers, GG
Here is how it happens,
1. When you file for your I-140 Under EB2 you also provide the A#
2. So when your I-140 gets approved your 485 case will automatically know about this.
What you have do
1. Go to InfoPass and verify that your new I-140 is present on your application.
2. Call USCIS Help desk and check. Also tell them you filed in employment based and that your Priority date is current(Ofcourse if it is current only tell them). Request them to open an SR
3. your case will be approved in 25 days.
For me it took 20 days after i opened the SR. The official time is 45 days to 60 days.
Cheers, GG
2011 people magazine barcode.
gc_chahiye
10-01 12:52 PM
They are not dumb , they might be already keeping a watch on you while on soil.
no the point is, CHECKING itself is taking 2-3 years. Why would they start keeping a watch on someone if he/she is not a suspect? There are literally millions of pending applications, they cant keep a watch on everyone.
The reason for slow name checks was discussed earlier somewhere (Ombudsmans report?): lack of resources and interest on the FBI side of things.
no the point is, CHECKING itself is taking 2-3 years. Why would they start keeping a watch on someone if he/she is not a suspect? There are literally millions of pending applications, they cant keep a watch on everyone.
The reason for slow name checks was discussed earlier somewhere (Ombudsmans report?): lack of resources and interest on the FBI side of things.
more...
purgan
08-06 09:26 AM
Well a lot of people I know have coverted from EB3 to EB2 while retaining their old PDs, so i'mnot sure about EB2 dates staying in 2004.
cox
June 16th, 2005, 10:14 PM
#1 is really good. The eye in #2 is too much in shadow, and what highlight in the eye that can be brought out looks strange (some angular reflection visible in Nik's version). Also, the white wing blaze is center frame, and pulls your eye from the face.
Besides the better pose etc. of #1, the eye contact is much better, and that makes the shot, IMHO. Dark animals, especially birds with high contrast plumage are really hard to shoot, and you got him in #1.
Besides the better pose etc. of #1, the eye contact is much better, and that makes the shot, IMHO. Dark animals, especially birds with high contrast plumage are really hard to shoot, and you got him in #1.
more...
milind70
07-25 11:19 PM
I just received a confirmation email that I485 of my wife got approved just a couple of days back. But I myself have not received anything. Its kind of weird because she was my dependent and I was the primary applicant.
Can somebody please suggest if they have seen something like this before ?Do I need to do anything ?
It is not wierd, i have heard about such cases where dependent gets approval prior to primary. You may want to take an Infopass and visit the local office and inquire with them regarding your case. I think you should see your approval pretty soon.
Can somebody please suggest if they have seen something like this before ?Do I need to do anything ?
It is not wierd, i have heard about such cases where dependent gets approval prior to primary. You may want to take an Infopass and visit the local office and inquire with them regarding your case. I think you should see your approval pretty soon.
2010 people magazine most beautiful
NolaIndian32
02-13 02:03 PM
This is one IV you don't want to be left without: IV - Immigration Voice, working for the Employment Based Legal Immigrant Community
more...
aadimanav
08-31 12:00 PM
There are 22,965 IV members. Won't it be good if everyone casts his/her vote. The result would be dramatically different.
hair blackberry arcode images.
ram04
02-03 06:14 PM
Infopass confirmed approved and I got it by mail after 30 days.
After on line status change it is 14 days.
After on line status change it is 14 days.
more...
NIW
08-31 12:02 PM
Just take it easy on this guy. He is a hard nosed, narcistic, self proclaimed immigration reforming CNN anchor who made millions just by talking and writing books on Immigration issues. There is some truth in his talk show but most of it is fabricated lie exaggerated by the media.
I really pity him because he has to come up with some immigration news everyday to save his job unlike Anderson Cooper or Wolf Blitz.
But as long as the immigration community, who has time and again proved its extra ordinary skills by getting Nobels, Pulitzers, Outstanding physician awards, humanitarian awards, he can't change a bit of law. The corporate america wants brain and skills, and we have them. We will prevail......
Just change the TV channel
I really pity him because he has to come up with some immigration news everyday to save his job unlike Anderson Cooper or Wolf Blitz.
But as long as the immigration community, who has time and again proved its extra ordinary skills by getting Nobels, Pulitzers, Outstanding physician awards, humanitarian awards, he can't change a bit of law. The corporate america wants brain and skills, and we have them. We will prevail......
Just change the TV channel
hot T MAGAZINE; T MAGAZINE. supremedesigner people magazine barcode. magazine
appusheth
03-19 12:21 PM
No. The check was with the new fee but dated 2005. As per law, checks dated older than 6 months are VOID.
more...
house magazine barcode png. arcode
gemini23
07-27 10:23 AM
thanks for answering. I guess this is a stupid question, but i have one.
would the applicant need to have a job while applying for EAD renewal?
would the applicant need to have a job while applying for EAD renewal?
tattoo magazine barcode vector.
tabletpc
07-30 09:13 AM
Sad to know about u r situation and hope u will get out of it soon.
Remember when a emplyee losses job ts the responsibility of the emplyoer to report to USCICS to cancel the H1B for that employee. Just wondering if u r employer has/not reported to USCICS. Talk to them and try to get some time until u can transfer u r h1b....!!!!
As of porting....yes you can port PD once u r i-140 is approved. Is u r I-140 approved..??if its pending..u could be at risk if u get RFE and u r employer don't respond on time. Then you can't have n approved i-140 so will not be able to port PD. However if u have approved i-140 then , all u need to do in new job is get PERM done and use the earlier PD.
You can port PD from Eb3 to any employment category.
Did i answer u r queries...???
Good luck
Remember when a emplyee losses job ts the responsibility of the emplyoer to report to USCICS to cancel the H1B for that employee. Just wondering if u r employer has/not reported to USCICS. Talk to them and try to get some time until u can transfer u r h1b....!!!!
As of porting....yes you can port PD once u r i-140 is approved. Is u r I-140 approved..??if its pending..u could be at risk if u get RFE and u r employer don't respond on time. Then you can't have n approved i-140 so will not be able to port PD. However if u have approved i-140 then , all u need to do in new job is get PERM done and use the earlier PD.
You can port PD from Eb3 to any employment category.
Did i answer u r queries...???
Good luck
more...
pictures people magazine barcode. people magazine barcode. magazine barcode image.
antonyabraham
04-20 04:32 PM
I am also going to India and will be attending appearing for interview at Chennai consulate. I wanted to use AP, but I-140 which was filed on Feb 2007 at NSC is still pending.
Indian consulates do not check the details in PIMS in advance, unlike some consulates in Mexico and Canada. I have written to Chennai consulate and they said they wouldn�t verify my information until I appear for interview in person. I wonder why different consulates have different policies.
But according to murthy.com, PIMS system is more comprehensive now and should have more people in it (as communicated by USCIS to ALIA)
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_nivpim.html
Indian consulates do not check the details in PIMS in advance, unlike some consulates in Mexico and Canada. I have written to Chennai consulate and they said they wouldn�t verify my information until I appear for interview in person. I wonder why different consulates have different policies.
But according to murthy.com, PIMS system is more comprehensive now and should have more people in it (as communicated by USCIS to ALIA)
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_nivpim.html
dresses people magazine barcode. magazine barcode vector
dealsnet
08-04 03:28 PM
I think the abused spouse cause is for the people getting GC with family based catagory. The temporary GC holder after marriage can do this with the help of the lawyer. The spouse abuse and all kind od stuff, to get GC if the husband/wife is not supportive. I know a person got that way after he is abused by his wife and got separated after she bring him from India.
For employment based GC, she yet to file I-485, I don't think she can file forcefully without the help of her husband. Employment based GC for the dependants is a permanent one, not like family based upon marriage.
Talk with a lawyer to find out the options.
Best way is to reconcile with the husband.
She/her friends can discuss this with her husband. If he supports apply for 485 and wait till the approval of that . She can file divorce after that.
If her husband is not supportive and doesnt want to add her for 485 then there is a special category (I dont remember the exact thing)/something like under certain circumstances ( which is like you are Abandoned by husband without no fault of your own and if you go back your hubbys family is going to harass you ...) This u need to check with a lawyer
Rajesh
For employment based GC, she yet to file I-485, I don't think she can file forcefully without the help of her husband. Employment based GC for the dependants is a permanent one, not like family based upon marriage.
Talk with a lawyer to find out the options.
Best way is to reconcile with the husband.
She/her friends can discuss this with her husband. If he supports apply for 485 and wait till the approval of that . She can file divorce after that.
If her husband is not supportive and doesnt want to add her for 485 then there is a special category (I dont remember the exact thing)/something like under certain circumstances ( which is like you are Abandoned by husband without no fault of your own and if you go back your hubbys family is going to harass you ...) This u need to check with a lawyer
Rajesh
more...
makeup Who actually thought magazine
admesystems
01-11 07:20 PM
I485 through Marriage pending for NC.
I was out of status more than a year when I got married.
Can I apply for advance parole?
Does anyone know anything about it?
anyone?
I was out of status more than a year when I got married.
Can I apply for advance parole?
Does anyone know anything about it?
anyone?
girlfriend as inside the magazine!
Siboo
07-28 07:22 PM
My prediction for this year..
EB1 = Current
EB2 = Jan 2003 (Because of BEC cases coming out, chance for them to file I-485 in October)
EB3 = U
This looks like September 13 bulletin.
What about October 02, 2007 update??:D :D
EB1 = Current
EB2 = Jan 2003 (Because of BEC cases coming out, chance for them to file I-485 in October)
EB3 = U
This looks like September 13 bulletin.
What about October 02, 2007 update??:D :D
hairstyles people magazine barcode. magazine barcode png. magazine barcode png.
antihero
11-26 01:15 PM
You won't have any issue with Indian Emigration officials in India. They are well aware of advanced parole as a means of entry to US.
Thanks for encouraging words. So can you confirm that the reentry to US does not require any other visa if one is carrying I-485 receipt and AP?
Also, can somebody who traveled in such a share the experience with me?
Thanks for encouraging words. So can you confirm that the reentry to US does not require any other visa if one is carrying I-485 receipt and AP?
Also, can somebody who traveled in such a share the experience with me?
angelfire76
10-05 01:11 PM
As I've been hearing different versions of this conference call.
1. Expect further retrogressions on the visa bulletins
This is common among all versions
2. USCIS received approximately 800,000 total applications in July and August in addition, they received 100,000 family based I-485 cases in JulyThis is a very debatable number. The number is estimated to be close to 200k EB applications. FB, Asylum etc. also add to this 800k number. The CIS official is just saying "We are inefficient as we are swamped with work"
3. Do not expect premium processing to be re-instated for I-140s for a while
Not true. Premium processing is expected to start from Jan 2008 as soon as this mess is over. It's a money maker for CIS and a cash-strapped org will not simply kill the golden goose.
7. Aytes said they are trying to set it up that next year the EAD and Advance Paroles will be issued for more than a one year expiration and that there may possibly be one document issued for both the EAD and APs. More on this will come by the end of the year.
Not strange, considering that you "pre-pay" for your EAD and AP for filers who have filed and will file after July 30,2007. It only increases CIS workload to renew EAD and AP everyyear for free. What I've heard is that this is only for applicants who applied after new fee structure is in effect. :(
9. Since the BEC will be updated, Carlson said to expect an increase in audits for the PERM cases at the end of this year and next year----make sure ALL of the recruitment requirements are being met; no fraud involved; employees not being required to pay or pay back labor expenses; employees not involved in the recruitment, etc.
PERM audits started beginning October 2006.
12. New PERM form on March 28, 2008
13. Carlson stated that the DOL�s position on attorney fees are the foreign national can have an attorney represent him/her for letters of support, previous job descriptions etc. to prepare for the upcoming I-140 stage and ensure that he fits the already prepared job offer requirements, but ALL fees and costs associated with the PERM filing (job offer requirements, advertising, recruitment, preparing the form, filing the form, motions, etc) MUST be paid by the company. FAQ�s are on the DOL website.
Nothing new. This law was introduced on July 16th by DOL.
14. Work site enforcement----expect CIS officers to request to see I-9s---Make sure the I-9s are being properly completed by the employers.
Work site enforcement of employers who have petitioned as H1-B dependent.
16. WATCH OUT FOR DUIs---in both nonimmigrant and immigrant cases!!! Delays are occurring in these cases.
Makes sense.Speeding tickets go only into driving record, but DUIs go into criminal record too. That would make sense. But would anybody with a DUI be a responsible immigrant / citizen in the first place?
17. The US consulates and CBP are Googling you!
This is absolute nonsense. Apparently they've a far more sophisticated database than what Google will ever have. :rolleyes:
1. Expect further retrogressions on the visa bulletins
This is common among all versions
2. USCIS received approximately 800,000 total applications in July and August in addition, they received 100,000 family based I-485 cases in JulyThis is a very debatable number. The number is estimated to be close to 200k EB applications. FB, Asylum etc. also add to this 800k number. The CIS official is just saying "We are inefficient as we are swamped with work"
3. Do not expect premium processing to be re-instated for I-140s for a while
Not true. Premium processing is expected to start from Jan 2008 as soon as this mess is over. It's a money maker for CIS and a cash-strapped org will not simply kill the golden goose.
7. Aytes said they are trying to set it up that next year the EAD and Advance Paroles will be issued for more than a one year expiration and that there may possibly be one document issued for both the EAD and APs. More on this will come by the end of the year.
Not strange, considering that you "pre-pay" for your EAD and AP for filers who have filed and will file after July 30,2007. It only increases CIS workload to renew EAD and AP everyyear for free. What I've heard is that this is only for applicants who applied after new fee structure is in effect. :(
9. Since the BEC will be updated, Carlson said to expect an increase in audits for the PERM cases at the end of this year and next year----make sure ALL of the recruitment requirements are being met; no fraud involved; employees not being required to pay or pay back labor expenses; employees not involved in the recruitment, etc.
PERM audits started beginning October 2006.
12. New PERM form on March 28, 2008
13. Carlson stated that the DOL�s position on attorney fees are the foreign national can have an attorney represent him/her for letters of support, previous job descriptions etc. to prepare for the upcoming I-140 stage and ensure that he fits the already prepared job offer requirements, but ALL fees and costs associated with the PERM filing (job offer requirements, advertising, recruitment, preparing the form, filing the form, motions, etc) MUST be paid by the company. FAQ�s are on the DOL website.
Nothing new. This law was introduced on July 16th by DOL.
14. Work site enforcement----expect CIS officers to request to see I-9s---Make sure the I-9s are being properly completed by the employers.
Work site enforcement of employers who have petitioned as H1-B dependent.
16. WATCH OUT FOR DUIs---in both nonimmigrant and immigrant cases!!! Delays are occurring in these cases.
Makes sense.Speeding tickets go only into driving record, but DUIs go into criminal record too. That would make sense. But would anybody with a DUI be a responsible immigrant / citizen in the first place?
17. The US consulates and CBP are Googling you!
This is absolute nonsense. Apparently they've a far more sophisticated database than what Google will ever have. :rolleyes:
seahawks
04-28 11:52 AM
See the whole thing here : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/02/AR2006010201376.html
My regtrogression brothers and sisters.....IF WE WANT TO END RETROGRESSION and end the H1B blackout WE HAVE GOT TO SEPARATE OURSELVES FROM THE ILLEGAL KIND and point out the congress and the general populace that there is another kind of immigration which is called ***TADA*** LEGAL IMMIGRATION. Its involves a process of granting permenant residence and citizenship to folks who are
1) Present Legally.
2) Entered LEgally.
3) Work legally.
4) Pay their income taxes.
5) Pay their social security and medicare taxes even when there is no guarantee of the benefits of either until they actually become citizens.
6) Play by the rules, file petitions for work permits and for permenant residency.
Our goal is not the hurt or help the cause of illegals but to make sure that we dont get punished due to wrath against them. After all, we played by the rules and we wait in line by the rules. We dont need amnesty. We need fair deal.
I once again urge you all to channel your energy to immigrationvoice.org This is a non-profit established with goal of ending retrogression using the next immigration bill as a vehicle. Its folks like you and me Losing sleep over retrogression. People like us wondering "What wrong did I do to deserve another 5-6 years of H1B extensions". I am not asking you to put money upfront. It does not cost anything to enroll or join or volunteer. But pooling ideas is invaluable. Stop sulking. Act now. [/QUOTE]
I totally agree we need participation more than anything else and spread the word. I have been sending feelers to friends who somehow don't get it. They pay attention when I talk to them, but then there is no action. Its a shame, but kudos to all of you guys. As for me, I have lined up to meet up with assistants, office staff for law makers from my district and offices from Senators of Washington state. I am working on the logistics to provide my inputs on Retrogression and IV. So far I have heard both of them support immigration reform. I am requesting to meet with them in person, but me and my wife needs to meet with office staff first. Next week will keep you guys posted more.
My regtrogression brothers and sisters.....IF WE WANT TO END RETROGRESSION and end the H1B blackout WE HAVE GOT TO SEPARATE OURSELVES FROM THE ILLEGAL KIND and point out the congress and the general populace that there is another kind of immigration which is called ***TADA*** LEGAL IMMIGRATION. Its involves a process of granting permenant residence and citizenship to folks who are
1) Present Legally.
2) Entered LEgally.
3) Work legally.
4) Pay their income taxes.
5) Pay their social security and medicare taxes even when there is no guarantee of the benefits of either until they actually become citizens.
6) Play by the rules, file petitions for work permits and for permenant residency.
Our goal is not the hurt or help the cause of illegals but to make sure that we dont get punished due to wrath against them. After all, we played by the rules and we wait in line by the rules. We dont need amnesty. We need fair deal.
I once again urge you all to channel your energy to immigrationvoice.org This is a non-profit established with goal of ending retrogression using the next immigration bill as a vehicle. Its folks like you and me Losing sleep over retrogression. People like us wondering "What wrong did I do to deserve another 5-6 years of H1B extensions". I am not asking you to put money upfront. It does not cost anything to enroll or join or volunteer. But pooling ideas is invaluable. Stop sulking. Act now. [/QUOTE]
I totally agree we need participation more than anything else and spread the word. I have been sending feelers to friends who somehow don't get it. They pay attention when I talk to them, but then there is no action. Its a shame, but kudos to all of you guys. As for me, I have lined up to meet up with assistants, office staff for law makers from my district and offices from Senators of Washington state. I am working on the logistics to provide my inputs on Retrogression and IV. So far I have heard both of them support immigration reform. I am requesting to meet with them in person, but me and my wife needs to meet with office staff first. Next week will keep you guys posted more.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น