zuhail
05-07 11:23 AM
Some are of the opinion that filing AC21 draws unnecessary attention & scrutiny of your application (apparently which would not happen if you do not file AC21).
But I found this article from Murthy.com to be conclusive on this matter.
MurthyDotCom : Risk of GC Rescission for Failure to Notify Change of Job / Employer! (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_risres.html)
Filing AC21 is the safest approach -- I guess there is no need worry if the papers are in line.
But I found this article from Murthy.com to be conclusive on this matter.
MurthyDotCom : Risk of GC Rescission for Failure to Notify Change of Job / Employer! (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_risres.html)
Filing AC21 is the safest approach -- I guess there is no need worry if the papers are in line.
wallpaper All Red Dragon wallpapers
pt326bc
09-27 01:59 PM
Most likely you received the original FP notice and the lawyer received the courtesy copy (like in my case).
You should take the original FP notice (if possible) which is what my lawyer told me; although if your notice doesn't arrive (missing or stolen) then you could take the one which your lawyer received.
Just my 2 cents not a legal opinion.
Regards.
You should take the original FP notice (if possible) which is what my lawyer told me; although if your notice doesn't arrive (missing or stolen) then you could take the one which your lawyer received.
Just my 2 cents not a legal opinion.
Regards.
lazycis
12-03 01:02 PM
No, you don't have to be employed while in EAD but do remember GC is future job, if have something to show them then you are safe.
Correct, with a few exceptions:
1) I-140 can be automatically revoked if the petitioning employer goes out of business.
2) I-140 can be withdrawn by the petitioning employer.
If you do not expect these two events while you are waiting for I-485 approval, there is no need to work.
Correct, with a few exceptions:
1) I-140 can be automatically revoked if the petitioning employer goes out of business.
2) I-140 can be withdrawn by the petitioning employer.
If you do not expect these two events while you are waiting for I-485 approval, there is no need to work.
2011 Cowboy #39;Red Dragon#39;
maverick_joe
05-06 09:22 AM
and secondly there is no i-140 premium processing as of now..:(
more...
eastindia
08-03 09:30 PM
The summer intern who replied to your email did not read it. Why don't you now go and protest against disrespect to your valued email and meet the Senator. Do you really think sending emails will get yes or no on a bill. Unless you are Bill Gates sending an email, who cares. We do not even have votes.
willwin
07-03 11:23 AM
EB-3-I is stuck in 01...not likely to move till Oct and then in OCT08..it will move by couple three months for the next 12 months till OCT 09..What are the option for EB-3 stuck here..from 01, 02, 03 ....
1) Convert to EB-2 ?.
2) wait for legislation from Logfren to pass
3) wait another 3 years...already in the Queue from 01..
If I choose to convert to EB-2..I have to put in a PERM and then I-140..what is the time line for getting my LC thro PERM and then my I-140 in EB2 cleared?? based on the current processing times..
Do I wait to see if Logfren's legislation goes thro ..if doesnt go with the conversion to EB-2...???
Please help me decide...
thanks
What you could possibly see at end-of-tunnel are:
Lofgren bill passing before election and recaptured numbers becoming available from 10/2008. All categories may become current and remain current for 6 months to a year.
OR
EB3 ROW becoming current atleast by end of next fiscal year (by 09/2009, so that EB3 I would start progressing at a faster rate.
OR
you (and everyone in EB3 I) would be asking the same question even after 3-4 years.
Oh well, Happy July 4th!!
1) Convert to EB-2 ?.
2) wait for legislation from Logfren to pass
3) wait another 3 years...already in the Queue from 01..
If I choose to convert to EB-2..I have to put in a PERM and then I-140..what is the time line for getting my LC thro PERM and then my I-140 in EB2 cleared?? based on the current processing times..
Do I wait to see if Logfren's legislation goes thro ..if doesnt go with the conversion to EB-2...???
Please help me decide...
thanks
What you could possibly see at end-of-tunnel are:
Lofgren bill passing before election and recaptured numbers becoming available from 10/2008. All categories may become current and remain current for 6 months to a year.
OR
EB3 ROW becoming current atleast by end of next fiscal year (by 09/2009, so that EB3 I would start progressing at a faster rate.
OR
you (and everyone in EB3 I) would be asking the same question even after 3-4 years.
Oh well, Happy July 4th!!
more...
roseball
02-09 03:08 PM
Hi,
My spouse is working on H1-B in Los Angeles. His company acquired another company in Bay Area, so now he wants to work out of Bay Area, from this acquired company's office.
1. Does he need to file a transfer memorandum ?
2. WIll there be a change in wages ?
3. Are there any other steps before he starts to work in BayArea ?
Please help.
Thanks.
If the new place of employment is more than 50 miles, then a new LCA has to be obtained. In your case, your parent company might also have to file a Successor of Interest petition for your H1 depending on the terms of acquisition (irrespective of whether you move to bay area or not).
My spouse is working on H1-B in Los Angeles. His company acquired another company in Bay Area, so now he wants to work out of Bay Area, from this acquired company's office.
1. Does he need to file a transfer memorandum ?
2. WIll there be a change in wages ?
3. Are there any other steps before he starts to work in BayArea ?
Please help.
Thanks.
If the new place of employment is more than 50 miles, then a new LCA has to be obtained. In your case, your parent company might also have to file a Successor of Interest petition for your H1 depending on the terms of acquisition (irrespective of whether you move to bay area or not).
2010 mikel red dragon image graphic
god_bless_you
06-14 09:14 PM
From Today's Lou Dobb's....
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
more...
rsayed
04-26 06:50 PM
Be careful with what you post on this thread.
Assume that all such threads that have lawmakers name in title may be read by someone in their staff so BE VERY CAREFUL in posting stuff that is a comment on any lawmaker.
Restrain would be a good idea.
I agree...
Assume that all such threads that have lawmakers name in title may be read by someone in their staff so BE VERY CAREFUL in posting stuff that is a comment on any lawmaker.
Restrain would be a good idea.
I agree...
hair Dragons | Systems and Control
Dhundhun
08-15 12:43 AM
USCIS is fishing form I485 application pool, in approvable cases, 2006 cases are nearest and an easy catch.
more...
gc4sk
07-05 09:41 PM
They (USCIS/DOS) want us to go back to our home country after gaining 6 years of experience so that we can compete with them directly.
hot Red dragon is another
EB2ToEB3
08-22 01:53 PM
I doubt that you need BS in CS. I have a BS degree in Chem engg but recently my I-140 got approved without any issue.
more...
house Red Dragon Wallpaper by
belmontboy
08-12 10:10 PM
To celebrate the success :D
hurrah!....
..
...
...
wait a min..success of what??
hurrah!....
..
...
...
wait a min..success of what??
tattoo gallery | Nash Wallpaper
bayarea07
03-20 05:44 PM
Well, if you go according to the Lawyer of this forum with which guys had a conference call (you can hear the recording thats on the home page of this site)
Then its advisable to apply in EB3 category and her reasoning was that with her experience she has seen lots of EB2 application in the past few years and very less EB3 apps and hence chances of EB3 being processed earlier than EB2 are quiet high.
I needed some advice on this situation I've found myself in.
I have a PERM application filed with my current employer (EB2, Oct 2007). Like most EB2 apps, mine is under a business necessity audit and we have filed an audit response for it. My lawyers are pretty sure that we will clear the audit. Guessing from , the response may be 2-3 months away.
Now I have a second offer from another company. Everything about the job and company is better than my current, but the legal team at this second company says that they will only file in EB3 (even though the job requirement says Bachelors + 8 yrs). They say that they have other EB2 audits going on and have made it a policy to only do EB3 going forward.
I'm on the 5th year of my H1 (don't ask, had a PD of 2005, caught up in BEC and got laid off last May, refiled Oct 07 with the current employer) and this probably will be the last chance for me to change jobs before I cool my heels and wait for the repercussions of the July Fiasco to be over with.
I can't decide on weather to keep my existing EB2 job or take the new offer and step down to EB3.
Please help!
Then its advisable to apply in EB3 category and her reasoning was that with her experience she has seen lots of EB2 application in the past few years and very less EB3 apps and hence chances of EB3 being processed earlier than EB2 are quiet high.
I needed some advice on this situation I've found myself in.
I have a PERM application filed with my current employer (EB2, Oct 2007). Like most EB2 apps, mine is under a business necessity audit and we have filed an audit response for it. My lawyers are pretty sure that we will clear the audit. Guessing from , the response may be 2-3 months away.
Now I have a second offer from another company. Everything about the job and company is better than my current, but the legal team at this second company says that they will only file in EB3 (even though the job requirement says Bachelors + 8 yrs). They say that they have other EB2 audits going on and have made it a policy to only do EB3 going forward.
I'm on the 5th year of my H1 (don't ask, had a PD of 2005, caught up in BEC and got laid off last May, refiled Oct 07 with the current employer) and this probably will be the last chance for me to change jobs before I cool my heels and wait for the repercussions of the July Fiasco to be over with.
I can't decide on weather to keep my existing EB2 job or take the new offer and step down to EB3.
Please help!
more...
pictures Red Dragon
maristella61
04-20 09:22 AM
He is talking about the original first letter of approval , not an extension
Does any one have any input or suggestion?
Does any one have any input or suggestion?
dresses Red Dragon
jhaalaa
03-19 04:15 PM
I guess OKies are lazy guys. Please post your details so we can help do some more than just benefit from the efforts of others assuming Lady Luck would eventually smile anyway so why bother her now!
more...
makeup sunset dragon fly picture and
gcseeker2002
07-14 01:08 PM
Can someone confirm the same for BA via London?
London requires all travellers without valid visa stamping to have transit visa, hundreds of threads out there that discuss this.
London requires all travellers without valid visa stamping to have transit visa, hundreds of threads out there that discuss this.
girlfriend Tags: red dragon custom card,
martinvisalaw
07-28 11:02 AM
I still have 2 weeks before I leave for my trip, now is it advisable to apply for another AP this week and wait for it to come? Will that application make my current AP invalid?
From what I understand, you need to be here in the US while you apply for your AP, but can travel on your older AP while this one is still in process. Is this correct?
Is there a chance for AP denial, and how does that affect the chance of an AP extension in Future?
You cannot enter the US on Advance Parole (AP) unless you had that specific AP when you left. So you cannot apply for AP now, leave the US, have someone send the approved AP to you in India, and use that AP to return to the US next year..
There is always a slight chance that the AP will be denied. However that should not affect your chances of getting a new AP in the future.
From what I understand, you need to be here in the US while you apply for your AP, but can travel on your older AP while this one is still in process. Is this correct?
Is there a chance for AP denial, and how does that affect the chance of an AP extension in Future?
You cannot enter the US on Advance Parole (AP) unless you had that specific AP when you left. So you cannot apply for AP now, leave the US, have someone send the approved AP to you in India, and use that AP to return to the US next year..
There is always a slight chance that the AP will be denied. However that should not affect your chances of getting a new AP in the future.
hairstyles Red dragon is a great
EndlessWait
12-14 11:17 AM
if so then its tough
JA1HIND
01-24 01:44 PM
Yeh you guys are right, almost everyone is doing it. Don't know whats up with her.....
If I was you, would give a second thought or have a plan B in place to switch to better attorney who at least knows some basic not like your current lawyer....(ask your lawyer to take some crash course & refresh her memory!!!)
not to scare you but a friendly advise you many want to re-think about this attorney who filed your 140/485 and don't know what type of damage she must have already done with your application and having good attorney will at least helpful if something goes wrong (for god's NOTHING wrong should happen to you or anyone in this whole GC process). this GC journey it self is a toucher!!
If I was you, would give a second thought or have a plan B in place to switch to better attorney who at least knows some basic not like your current lawyer....(ask your lawyer to take some crash course & refresh her memory!!!)
not to scare you but a friendly advise you many want to re-think about this attorney who filed your 140/485 and don't know what type of damage she must have already done with your application and having good attorney will at least helpful if something goes wrong (for god's NOTHING wrong should happen to you or anyone in this whole GC process). this GC journey it self is a toucher!!
raju123
06-11 06:12 PM
Be careful for making every one fool !
Mistake..............Now i am not able to change the title-sorry guys.
Mistake..............Now i am not able to change the title-sorry guys.
0 comments:
Post a Comment