maxy
10-16 01:19 PM
sounds good...thanks
look at your labor app... it states your proffered wage, job description etc. those are the terms and conditions... you can still get an EVL from your employer and have your lawyer (or have yourself) write a letter explaining how the EVL covers terms and conditions on the labor cert. in any case, this is a really stupid and unenforceable rfe... i mean how can the new employer even know whats in the labor and i-140? and without knowing that how can an employer "indicate" any compliance with t&c of labor and 140? i think you should be fine with just a plain evl that matches your job description and salary... at most, you can write a letter saying that "yeah the t&c continues to be valid".
my 2 cents.
look at your labor app... it states your proffered wage, job description etc. those are the terms and conditions... you can still get an EVL from your employer and have your lawyer (or have yourself) write a letter explaining how the EVL covers terms and conditions on the labor cert. in any case, this is a really stupid and unenforceable rfe... i mean how can the new employer even know whats in the labor and i-140? and without knowing that how can an employer "indicate" any compliance with t&c of labor and 140? i think you should be fine with just a plain evl that matches your job description and salary... at most, you can write a letter saying that "yeah the t&c continues to be valid".
my 2 cents.
wallpaper Skandar Keynes Pictures:
seahawks
06-26 02:39 PM
While filing for my wife's G-325A form, her last name was filled in first name and first name as last name. We got our FP notice yesterday and thats when I went back and reviewed all the forms I filed. I was wondering if any of you know what can be done so that an honest mistake can be corrected?
Any input appreciated. I understand it is for information purpose only and not many of us are attorneys, so no disclosure required :)
Any input appreciated. I understand it is for information purpose only and not many of us are attorneys, so no disclosure required :)
SAPGURU
07-11 03:12 PM
Gurus,
Here is my situation.
Labor filed with company A in April 2006 and I-140 EB2 approved in May 2007. Could not file I-485 last year due to personal reasons.
Changed the Job to company B in Sep 2007.Company B filed PERM EB2 in Feb 2008 and got approved in Aril 2008. I-140 filed in June 2008 with priority date recapture request and still pending.
My 6th year of H1B is expiring in March 2009.
My question is, can I file my I-485 based on my previously approved EB2 I140.
What should be best approach for me? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Here is my situation.
Labor filed with company A in April 2006 and I-140 EB2 approved in May 2007. Could not file I-485 last year due to personal reasons.
Changed the Job to company B in Sep 2007.Company B filed PERM EB2 in Feb 2008 and got approved in Aril 2008. I-140 filed in June 2008 with priority date recapture request and still pending.
My 6th year of H1B is expiring in March 2009.
My question is, can I file my I-485 based on my previously approved EB2 I140.
What should be best approach for me? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
2011 quotes for a brother
admin
03-15 01:22 PM
this person is bringing some valid points to ponder. People please go through her posting and i agree with her regarding the numbers is still 10% only for india. we need to fight for removing the per country limit, or else, we may probably be in this retrogression mess for quite sometime.
eb3retro,
Your concerns are well placed. Please be rest assured that we're working on reinstating the AC21 clause on per country limits.
Due to the sensitive nature of lobbying, we're sorry that we will not be able to divulge any more detailed information.
eb3retro,
Your concerns are well placed. Please be rest assured that we're working on reinstating the AC21 clause on per country limits.
Due to the sensitive nature of lobbying, we're sorry that we will not be able to divulge any more detailed information.
more...
permfiling
12-10 01:03 AM
My cousin took a offer from a employer in CA few months ago who did her H1 transfer but the condition mentioned in the agreement is that
In the event the employee voluntarily resigns or her employment is terminated for performance or cause prior to 4 years, employee agrees to reimburse the "Employer" for the full amount of legal, administrative and filing fees associated with the sponsorship of the employee's work visas as permitted by law.
The employer won't do premium processing so my cousin paid $1000 on her own but she had to travel outside the country to canada to get a new I-94. The employer's law firm filed the paper work with canada embassy in US to get a canadian visa.
Now my cousin got her GC through her hubby which her employer does not know. She is debating if she needs to inform her manager and company as they might ask her to sign any agreement or give back H1 fees.
The employment laws in CA are different so how can she move (if moves within 4 yrs) to another company without paying anything or a little fee to the employer. I told her that H1-B fees are not too high maybe around $4000.00 so the employer will have to spend lot of money on the lawyer's to go to court to suit her if she left say after 2 years of employment as she feels that the agreement is one sided considering the time line.
In the event the employee voluntarily resigns or her employment is terminated for performance or cause prior to 4 years, employee agrees to reimburse the "Employer" for the full amount of legal, administrative and filing fees associated with the sponsorship of the employee's work visas as permitted by law.
The employer won't do premium processing so my cousin paid $1000 on her own but she had to travel outside the country to canada to get a new I-94. The employer's law firm filed the paper work with canada embassy in US to get a canadian visa.
Now my cousin got her GC through her hubby which her employer does not know. She is debating if she needs to inform her manager and company as they might ask her to sign any agreement or give back H1 fees.
The employment laws in CA are different so how can she move (if moves within 4 yrs) to another company without paying anything or a little fee to the employer. I told her that H1-B fees are not too high maybe around $4000.00 so the employer will have to spend lot of money on the lawyer's to go to court to suit her if she left say after 2 years of employment as she feels that the agreement is one sided considering the time line.
santosh19
10-31 02:08 PM
What confuses me is or are you saying that calfornia service center no more process the H1-B extension. But when you go to processing time in USCIS website it still shows you that they process H1-B extension
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=CSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=CSC
more...
prom2
10-02 09:07 PM
So ND definitely matters. Check your position in queue using ND. Not RD.
So in my opinion with current situation PD matters in the end. Luck matters first. :(
I am agree with you.
So in my opinion with current situation PD matters in the end. Luck matters first. :(
I am agree with you.
2010 girlfriend
GC092003
04-13 12:50 PM
I have same concerned. I have been waiting for too long to get my GC procee done. I can't live with current employer any longer. I am waiting for 1-485 to be filled. My PD is sept 03. Do you guys have any feeling if we can file it before this summer (like July)? Another concern is based on current situation with USCIS, it is about 8 month wait for I-485 to be processed. As you mentioned, it might be longer waiting time for this process since many people who had waited, will be filing. Please give me your feeling of feasibility date. Thanx.
more...
kumarh1b
01-28 05:16 PM
Can some please advice me how to proceed further Please find the denial notice for your reference. All your inputs means a lot to me. Please help me and guide in proper direction.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
hair third world countries
pasupuleti
09-25 05:08 PM
I got denied by discover credit card due to not having a green card.
They said, it is just their policy that they won't give credit cards to
people who don't have green cards.
I could't co-sign my friends student loan application as i did't have a green card. They said, i have to be Permanent legal resident to co-sign.
Though i have a mortgage now, my first mortagage application got denied on same grounds.
Apparently fannie mae guildelines stipulates that H1B(foriegn investment) needs to put 60% down to get a mortgage loan.
But most of the lenders do mortgages anyways even for the people who does't have a ssn:).
No one has ever been denied mortgage because their green card is pending, all other things (credit record, finances etc) being equal...that would constitute housing discrimintaion...
Just a thought, especially in response to those (and there are some on this forum) who feel discriminated in this country and compare their situation to that of exploited laborers in some podunk land...
They said, it is just their policy that they won't give credit cards to
people who don't have green cards.
I could't co-sign my friends student loan application as i did't have a green card. They said, i have to be Permanent legal resident to co-sign.
Though i have a mortgage now, my first mortagage application got denied on same grounds.
Apparently fannie mae guildelines stipulates that H1B(foriegn investment) needs to put 60% down to get a mortgage loan.
But most of the lenders do mortgages anyways even for the people who does't have a ssn:).
No one has ever been denied mortgage because their green card is pending, all other things (credit record, finances etc) being equal...that would constitute housing discrimintaion...
Just a thought, especially in response to those (and there are some on this forum) who feel discriminated in this country and compare their situation to that of exploited laborers in some podunk land...
more...
GCWhru
08-20 11:41 AM
We are also in the same situation. Mine got approved on Aug 11th but no LUD on spouse's case.
We had a Infopass appointment today, very nice IO informed us that NC and BC are cleared and case is still pending at TSC.
He asked me to call 1800 and open a status inquiry (SR), but I requested him to open one for me, since I have/had very tough time with 1800. He was kind enough to open a SR and gave me the reference number too. He also informed me that I will be receiving a mail from USCIS within 30 days explaining the status of the case.
We had a Infopass appointment today, very nice IO informed us that NC and BC are cleared and case is still pending at TSC.
He asked me to call 1800 and open a status inquiry (SR), but I requested him to open one for me, since I have/had very tough time with 1800. He was kind enough to open a SR and gave me the reference number too. He also informed me that I will be receiving a mail from USCIS within 30 days explaining the status of the case.
hot hot Short
desi3933
06-25 02:18 PM
I agree. The argument that the AOS applicant doesn't need to have a job now is very aggressive and should only be used if absolutely necessary. If there is any chance of finding a new job soon, the first step would be to ask for more time to respond to the RFE.
Thanks Elaine.
My understanding is that, from legal point of view, the conditions for job offer must be maintained at all times while I-485 is pending. If there is a time when Job offer, that is same/similar to I-140 petition, is not available then the pending I-485 application can be denied just on this basis alone.
Could you please share your views on this.
.
Thanks Elaine.
My understanding is that, from legal point of view, the conditions for job offer must be maintained at all times while I-485 is pending. If there is a time when Job offer, that is same/similar to I-140 petition, is not available then the pending I-485 application can be denied just on this basis alone.
Could you please share your views on this.
.
more...
house adolescence santrock 13th
royus77
07-17 10:29 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
tattoo ounce
manish1905
10-06 04:02 PM
Hi Manish,
I hope everything goes well with you.
Did the officials call you or come to see you in person?
yes the official did came in person at my work without any notice.He even took mu picture at my desk.it was hell of a surprice.He even wanted talk with my Supervisor but he was on vacation that day.
I hope everything goes well with you.
Did the officials call you or come to see you in person?
yes the official did came in person at my work without any notice.He even took mu picture at my desk.it was hell of a surprice.He even wanted talk with my Supervisor but he was on vacation that day.
more...
pictures black flower wallpaper.
gc_kaavaali
12-08 01:33 PM
Hi guys,
IV need contributions to invest in the omnibus bill Lobbying efforts.. for more details look at below thread...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15905
IV need contributions to invest in the omnibus bill Lobbying efforts.. for more details look at below thread...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15905
dresses lung cancer ribbon.
vejella
08-01 11:07 PM
2008 quota can never be used in 2007.
I mean most of the 2008 quote WILL BE used not already been used..
I mean most of the 2008 quote WILL BE used not already been used..
more...
makeup emo love hands. emo love
mariusp
02-22 09:28 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
girlfriend lil wayne new look
saimrathi
07-17 02:58 PM
This is from Logiclife.. all hope isnt lost yet
The latest update we received is the the annoucement to be made soon will be as follows:
1. DHS will withdraw it decision and act according to original bulletin released in July which had EB dates current for everyone except EB-other worker category.
2. The July bulletin (original one released on June 12th) will remain effective for 30 days more and will be effective all the way thru August 17th.
This is good news. It will be announced soon. We got this information from very reliable source. You have 30 more days to file your I-485.
Thank you for your patience.
The latest update we received is the the annoucement to be made soon will be as follows:
1. DHS will withdraw it decision and act according to original bulletin released in July which had EB dates current for everyone except EB-other worker category.
2. The July bulletin (original one released on June 12th) will remain effective for 30 days more and will be effective all the way thru August 17th.
This is good news. It will be announced soon. We got this information from very reliable source. You have 30 more days to file your I-485.
Thank you for your patience.
hairstyles margaret bourke white.
genius
11-20 09:18 PM
Should we mail paulmcd@cmp.com (Paul McDougall )of information Week.
See: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=194700008&subSection=All+Stories
See: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=194700008&subSection=All+Stories
eastindia
04-22 09:28 AM
So basically you are saying you cannot sue the people responsible for greencard problem.
I think the only option left is to either sue God or sue yourself for your bad luck.
I think the only option left is to either sue God or sue yourself for your bad luck.
anandrajesh
05-04 01:59 PM
Hi Madhuri,
Do you have any more information regarding this.
I am in the same boat .
My LC got approved through perm in my 6th year
and I140 applied and pending .
6th year expires in Sept06.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
You can get your H1 extended based on Approved Labor / Pending Labor for 365 days. You get H1 extensions in 1 yr increments. If your 140 is approved as well then you get your H1 in 3 yr increments.
I got my labor/140 done and my 6th Yr H1 is expiring Aug 31 and i shld be eligible for 3 yr extension due to Visa Number Unavailability.
Do you have any more information regarding this.
I am in the same boat .
My LC got approved through perm in my 6th year
and I140 applied and pending .
6th year expires in Sept06.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
You can get your H1 extended based on Approved Labor / Pending Labor for 365 days. You get H1 extensions in 1 yr increments. If your 140 is approved as well then you get your H1 in 3 yr increments.
I got my labor/140 done and my 6th Yr H1 is expiring Aug 31 and i shld be eligible for 3 yr extension due to Visa Number Unavailability.
No comments:
Post a Comment