techskill
08-10 05:44 PM
There is an Indian guy who applied on June 1st and got approved.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=143709&postcount=2169
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=144063&postcount=2195
But the OP's approval doesn't make sense
But that was Oct 2002 PD, so he was eligible to file
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=143709&postcount=2169
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=144063&postcount=2195
But the OP's approval doesn't make sense
But that was Oct 2002 PD, so he was eligible to file
wallpaper PIC GALLERY FOR PART 2
javadeveloper
08-25 06:12 AM
Is it true that if we apply for candadian PR we can't apply for visitors visa to cananda.
I want to apply for PR to canada and also would like to go for stamping to cananda sometime after 4-5 months.
Thanks in advance...
Discussions are here http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=738 . Good Luck
I want to apply for PR to canada and also would like to go for stamping to cananda sometime after 4-5 months.
Thanks in advance...
Discussions are here http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=738 . Good Luck
gc_kaavaali
06-28 05:05 PM
Read carefully. It says 'However, there is an exception for people in H, L, K or V'. You are not on H1 right. That condition won't applicable for you.
Read the link Immigration: EAD and AP (http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/ead-ap.php), especially the advance parole section.
"However, there is an exception for people in H, L, K or V status: you may return to the US using either an AP or a valid visa (H1, H4, L1 or L2), and it won't jeopardize your AOS application."
Read the link Immigration: EAD and AP (http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/ead-ap.php), especially the advance parole section.
"However, there is an exception for people in H, L, K or V status: you may return to the US using either an AP or a valid visa (H1, H4, L1 or L2), and it won't jeopardize your AOS application."
2011 Zoom Lebron signature shoe
razis123
12-27 11:37 AM
what if i want to join a company(like Teksystems,GCI,etc,...) on an hourly basis on their W2.What will be my status when an assignment is over and i have to search for another project.
more...
dixie
02-12 07:36 PM
Also do you know which is more difficult to get approved EB3 or EB2 without raising any red flags ? I am trying to understand which one is safe to play.
EB3 is generally easier to pass scrutiny at the I-140 stage. If you are from ROW, however, switching to EB2 has a HUGE advantage - you are talking of the difference between waiting at 3-4 years to get even an EAD card and potentially getting your GC in an year (EB2 ROW).
If you are from India, there is no significant benefit to switching. The only difference is the date on which the PD is stuck - whether it is April 2001 or Jan 2003, the dates are going to remain there for the next decade absent CIR/SKILL. If CIR/SKILL does get passed, both will likely become current. Either way, you don't gain much although I see an inexplicable rush from EB3 India folks to jump to the EB2 bandwagon.
EB3 is generally easier to pass scrutiny at the I-140 stage. If you are from ROW, however, switching to EB2 has a HUGE advantage - you are talking of the difference between waiting at 3-4 years to get even an EAD card and potentially getting your GC in an year (EB2 ROW).
If you are from India, there is no significant benefit to switching. The only difference is the date on which the PD is stuck - whether it is April 2001 or Jan 2003, the dates are going to remain there for the next decade absent CIR/SKILL. If CIR/SKILL does get passed, both will likely become current. Either way, you don't gain much although I see an inexplicable rush from EB3 India folks to jump to the EB2 bandwagon.
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
more...
lostinbeta
10-04 12:20 AM
Good Luck=)
2010 few months begging LeBron
Imigrait
01-26 11:06 AM
Great AP dates have finally moved :) . Hopefully should get mine by Feb end.
more...
linuxra
02-17 08:09 PM
currently iam working with vsginc they filed my greencard processing through different company axiom
i applied for 485 and iam past 180 days
i have never been on axiom payroll
can anybody tell me can i use ac21 portability ?
Thanks
i applied for 485 and iam past 180 days
i have never been on axiom payroll
can anybody tell me can i use ac21 portability ?
Thanks
hair nike-lebron-shoes/grey
traveldoc
09-10 02:12 PM
I have a strange situation with my AP renewal:
Applied for AP renewal for both Primary and dependant on August 8th
Dependent received AP approval on Sept 2nd
Primary called USCIS to expedite process on grounds of medical emergency on Sept 2nd and Received a letter from USCIS on sept 8th - saying this - "The status of this service record is: Since the date we received your request, we have approved your case and sent an approval notice to you on 9/1/2009 to the address we have on file. If you do not receive the notice withing 30 days, then please contact our office again". But when I check the online status on USCIS.gov it says "Case received and Pending". How can the system say 2 different things?
I made Infopass appointment today and went to the office to see if they can follow up on this situation and they just said their system says case 'Approved' so wait for 30 days.
Anyone in the same situation? Any suggestions? Is there anyway I can apply for a duplicate or something? What if I just go ahead and re-apply for my AP before the 30 days...what other risks are involved other than loosing $305.
Applied for AP renewal for both Primary and dependant on August 8th
Dependent received AP approval on Sept 2nd
Primary called USCIS to expedite process on grounds of medical emergency on Sept 2nd and Received a letter from USCIS on sept 8th - saying this - "The status of this service record is: Since the date we received your request, we have approved your case and sent an approval notice to you on 9/1/2009 to the address we have on file. If you do not receive the notice withing 30 days, then please contact our office again". But when I check the online status on USCIS.gov it says "Case received and Pending". How can the system say 2 different things?
I made Infopass appointment today and went to the office to see if they can follow up on this situation and they just said their system says case 'Approved' so wait for 30 days.
Anyone in the same situation? Any suggestions? Is there anyway I can apply for a duplicate or something? What if I just go ahead and re-apply for my AP before the 30 days...what other risks are involved other than loosing $305.
more...
uma77
10-17 03:04 PM
Guys,
excuse my ignorance, where (link to the website) can i look up these codes? Thank you in advance.
excuse my ignorance, where (link to the website) can i look up these codes? Thank you in advance.
hot Simple Tip For All You LeBron
eucalyptus.mp
02-18 09:02 AM
As my employer is asking me to go back to India , what options I am having to get extention ? Can I file GC my own ?
more...
house shoe, the Zoom Lebron VI,
ritwik_ind
11-11 11:30 AM
Where are the winners posted? It's already 11th !
tattoo lebron shoes 1. lebron shoes
MissionImpossibleGC
08-24 11:34 AM
You can complain to DOL, if you have been paid less than a LCA amount. Also, you can complain to DOL, if the deduction of GC processing fee to DOL as it could have lowered the amount thats in your offer letter. You need have a proof that your company has deducted money for your GC from the paycheck.
BTW, You have no legal grounds to get the revenue (aka % the company earned) the company made out of you during your tenure.
In my paycheck and salary slips there are deduction but reason or description of the deduction are not mentioned. I have all salary slips with me. I am working on % based so some time even after deduction my anual salary is not less than 8 years old offer letter. My anual salary vary from 55k to 100k depending on project rate and lenth of projects in year. I find my own project since last 5 - 6 years and pay % to my greedy company for nothing. It took me 8 years to find out my company because my company is not a very small company and looks decent from top serface.
BTW, You have no legal grounds to get the revenue (aka % the company earned) the company made out of you during your tenure.
In my paycheck and salary slips there are deduction but reason or description of the deduction are not mentioned. I have all salary slips with me. I am working on % based so some time even after deduction my anual salary is not less than 8 years old offer letter. My anual salary vary from 55k to 100k depending on project rate and lenth of projects in year. I find my own project since last 5 - 6 years and pay % to my greedy company for nothing. It took me 8 years to find out my company because my company is not a very small company and looks decent from top serface.
more...
pictures Lebron Vs Kobe: The Better
SirDuke
01-04 10:02 AM
Are Tweening Engines ok to use? TweenLite for instance?
dresses Lebron James Shoes: Nike
smiling08
09-16 10:32 AM
i only know the Premium Processing is taking 1000 and CIS will need to response within 15 days
more...
makeup nike-lebron-shoeslack/white
pcbadgujar
01-22 03:18 PM
No you don't need to be on payroll before filing the PERM. That is what I did. GC can be applied for future employment.
girlfriend Basketball Shoes,Lebron James
willy007
10-19 02:26 PM
You are required to send a notice to your lawyer letting him know that you no longer require his/her service. Also notify USCIS in writing that your lawyer does not represent you anymore and send correspondence to you directly. If any USCIS notice addressed to you was transmitted to your former counsel, it should be available to you from counsel. You may wish to request forwarding of all post-representation correspondence that arrived after representation ceased. Although that lawyer may have no obligation to perform any services for you, the office should not impede your ability to answer USCIS requests. You should call the service center and request a copy of any correspondence that was sent to your lawyer until the lawyer sends a notice to USCIS letting them know that he no longer represents your case or until another lawyer files a G-28 for you.
I hope this helps and good luck on your greencard chase.
So it seems that there is no official form to file to notify USCIS that the lawyer doesn't represent me anymore right?
My AOS is processed in Nebraska Processing Center. Is that where I should send in my notification? Thanks.
I hope this helps and good luck on your greencard chase.
So it seems that there is no official form to file to notify USCIS that the lawyer doesn't represent me anymore right?
My AOS is processed in Nebraska Processing Center. Is that where I should send in my notification? Thanks.
hairstyles Zoom Lebron V shoes
ubetman
08-04 03:14 PM
Thank you guyz for your responses.
I understand if G-28 forms are not sent, then all correspondence will sent to me which is good. But my concern is what if my lawyer signs the forms as a representative and not sending G-28 forms to represent the case.
This is the process which i have gone through:
1. My lawyer sent the questionnaire forms for 485/131/765. I filled the forms with my personal information and sent them to him online.
2. He made the necessary corrections and filled some gaps and sent them back to me for my signature. At the end of each form his name and address is printed as a representative of my case. He asked me to send all the forms signed along with reqd. documents.
when his name and adddress is printed and he signs the forms, then it shows he is representing the case. Then he has to send G-28 forms for each form I guess. If he didn't signed the forms as a representative then I guess all correspondence comes to me but my concern if he signs the forms but not sending G-28 for each form, then I guess I am in trouble for not sending G-28 forms...am I thinking correctly...suggestions plz...
My lawyer is not that responsive. He always says(pretends) that he is busy(not sure though)..I send an email but no response yet. If really G-28 forms required and if he sends the packet without them, then as per USCIS my application will be rejected right away. No time to reapply also.
thanks in advance....
I understand if G-28 forms are not sent, then all correspondence will sent to me which is good. But my concern is what if my lawyer signs the forms as a representative and not sending G-28 forms to represent the case.
This is the process which i have gone through:
1. My lawyer sent the questionnaire forms for 485/131/765. I filled the forms with my personal information and sent them to him online.
2. He made the necessary corrections and filled some gaps and sent them back to me for my signature. At the end of each form his name and address is printed as a representative of my case. He asked me to send all the forms signed along with reqd. documents.
when his name and adddress is printed and he signs the forms, then it shows he is representing the case. Then he has to send G-28 forms for each form I guess. If he didn't signed the forms as a representative then I guess all correspondence comes to me but my concern if he signs the forms but not sending G-28 for each form, then I guess I am in trouble for not sending G-28 forms...am I thinking correctly...suggestions plz...
My lawyer is not that responsive. He always says(pretends) that he is busy(not sure though)..I send an email but no response yet. If really G-28 forms required and if he sends the packet without them, then as per USCIS my application will be rejected right away. No time to reapply also.
thanks in advance....
bibs
05-11 02:45 AM
Thanks Morchu.
I will go ahead and will apply EAD with $180/ as filing fee.
I will go ahead and will apply EAD with $180/ as filing fee.
work4pd
07-20 01:38 PM
Decoupling H1B and H-4 Time ?
RIP 'Labor Substitution' is the best thing happened ever happened so far!!!
RIP 'Labor Substitution' is the best thing happened ever happened so far!!!
0 comments:
Post a Comment