Houstonguy
07-15 03:50 PM
Hi Guys, I am in Houston.
sanju
11-09 12:17 AM
Did someone say beer? If you guys will bring in chips and salsa, I will get beer. Let me know if you decide for 7ish on Friday. Will be there.
Cheers,
Cheers,
Legal_In_A_Limbo
04-28 10:07 AM
have you talked to a lawyer. If i am not wrong you have also used AC-21. Do you think revocation/withdrawal of the H-1B, will affect 485 in any way.
mzdial
March 28th, 2004, 11:49 PM
It's always good to catch someone when they have no idea.. :-)
I'll post up my attempts from the fan perspective.. I'll start another thread and share my thoughts on shooting from the stands.
-- Matt
I'll post up my attempts from the fan perspective.. I'll start another thread and share my thoughts on shooting from the stands.
-- Matt
more...
stuckinretro
03-30 10:03 AM
I'm not an attorney, but based on your description it appears like you do not have the EB2 job offer currently open. Typically, If the company gets acquired by another firm, the 140 needs to be amended and more over you are not working for that employer anymore.
I think you should first find out if EB2 job still exists if so, you can send a letter to interfile(transfer) your pending 485 to the new 140. You may need to submit I-140 approval notices and 485 receipt notice along with an employment letter to substantiate your claim.
I got the RFE notification in the mail yesterday and here is the RFE info:
The Service acknowledges that you filed your I-485 Employment Based Application (Receipt #) based on your approved 3rd preference I-140 (Receipt #). Service records indicate that you also have an approved 2nd preference I-140 (Receipt #) with a priority date that affords you an available visa. If you wish to transfer this I-485 to your newly approved Form I-140 a request for conversion must be made in writing. If no response is received, USCIS will continue adjudication on the instant I-485 based on your 3rd preference I-140 and will wait for visa availability based on that preference classification".
I had another approved I-140 in EB2 from the client where I worked as a contractor. That company got acquired by another and am not sure if they still support me in the process.
1) Did anyone receive such RFE?
2) Should I send USCIS a letter by requesting them to trasfer my I-485 to EB2?
3) USCIS had issued this RFE on 03/03/10 with 04/03/10 deadline but I had received it yesterday(3/27/10). I have only 1 week to respond back.
Is there a way to buy some more time if i cant respond back in 3-4 business days?
Please advice. I really appreciate your help!
Thanks in advance.
I think you should first find out if EB2 job still exists if so, you can send a letter to interfile(transfer) your pending 485 to the new 140. You may need to submit I-140 approval notices and 485 receipt notice along with an employment letter to substantiate your claim.
I got the RFE notification in the mail yesterday and here is the RFE info:
The Service acknowledges that you filed your I-485 Employment Based Application (Receipt #) based on your approved 3rd preference I-140 (Receipt #). Service records indicate that you also have an approved 2nd preference I-140 (Receipt #) with a priority date that affords you an available visa. If you wish to transfer this I-485 to your newly approved Form I-140 a request for conversion must be made in writing. If no response is received, USCIS will continue adjudication on the instant I-485 based on your 3rd preference I-140 and will wait for visa availability based on that preference classification".
I had another approved I-140 in EB2 from the client where I worked as a contractor. That company got acquired by another and am not sure if they still support me in the process.
1) Did anyone receive such RFE?
2) Should I send USCIS a letter by requesting them to trasfer my I-485 to EB2?
3) USCIS had issued this RFE on 03/03/10 with 04/03/10 deadline but I had received it yesterday(3/27/10). I have only 1 week to respond back.
Is there a way to buy some more time if i cant respond back in 3-4 business days?
Please advice. I really appreciate your help!
Thanks in advance.
stupendousman11
12-05 12:55 PM
Any updates on the IV Chat? Are the transcripts available anywhere?
more...
titu1972
11-07 01:11 PM
I have applied my I-131 through e-file. Immediately I got the receipt no(LIN##########).
Can anybody tell me what supporting document I need to send to NSC.
By the way, I got my EAD. I don't want to spend money such stupid form fill up which takes 10 min by the attorney.
Can anybody tell me what supporting document I need to send to NSC.
By the way, I got my EAD. I don't want to spend money such stupid form fill up which takes 10 min by the attorney.
H1Girl
08-16 07:19 PM
I was told by my attorneys para leagal (so who knows if this is true or not....) that the ITIN number is the same number that will be issued in the form of ssn.
Fire your Paralegal, if you can...
Fire your Paralegal, if you can...
more...
ibb
10-15 09:18 AM
It's state law.
Why would anybody ask for visa to issue a driver's license? How is one's driving privilege dependent upon visa? No one has ever asked me or my wife or my friends for a visa to issue a driver's license. Is this some law specific to some states?
Why would anybody ask for visa to issue a driver's license? How is one's driving privilege dependent upon visa? No one has ever asked me or my wife or my friends for a visa to issue a driver's license. Is this some law specific to some states?
nashorn
08-12 03:02 PM
They are still processing application received on July 2nd now. I bet none of the application received on July 3rd and later has not been opened yet. So they are safe.
Yeah so far only TWO notices though. I am seriously beginning to wonder if filers between July 2 - July 17 are actually going to be penalized coz NOTHING in USCIS is ever "FIFO".
Yeah so far only TWO notices though. I am seriously beginning to wonder if filers between July 2 - July 17 are actually going to be penalized coz NOTHING in USCIS is ever "FIFO".
more...
raysaikat
04-30 08:55 AM
2) On the other hand, h4 prevents you from doing any kind of work while in US. Although u may still be employee of a company in other country, you CAN't work. Simple.
This is not a very meaningful statement. Do you intend to say that a person on H4 cannot cook or clean his/her house? These are also clearly "work".
Only meaningful restriction can be that a person on H4 cannot be engaged in an employer-employee relationship with a US company. In other words, a US company/individual cannot pay this individual for his/her work. Whether an Indian company is paying his/her cannot be controlled by the US laws. If that person, say, goes everyday to a physical office on the US and works there, then one may try to argue that it is really the US based branch who is paying him/her, which will be a violation. However, if s/he telecommutes from her home to India, then I really fail to see how can s/he be violating anything.
The bottomline is that all argument boils down to the definition of "work". Do you have a reference that defines the word "work" in the context of H visa?
This is not a very meaningful statement. Do you intend to say that a person on H4 cannot cook or clean his/her house? These are also clearly "work".
Only meaningful restriction can be that a person on H4 cannot be engaged in an employer-employee relationship with a US company. In other words, a US company/individual cannot pay this individual for his/her work. Whether an Indian company is paying his/her cannot be controlled by the US laws. If that person, say, goes everyday to a physical office on the US and works there, then one may try to argue that it is really the US based branch who is paying him/her, which will be a violation. However, if s/he telecommutes from her home to India, then I really fail to see how can s/he be violating anything.
The bottomline is that all argument boils down to the definition of "work". Do you have a reference that defines the word "work" in the context of H visa?
njdude26
07-03 09:52 AM
Can a Canadian Citizen work in the USA without a visa ? How easy is that ?
If you are going to stay 2 yrs in Canada, you might as well spend 1 more yr and become a Canadian citizen.
I actually have a similar question. I am in the exact same situation. The question is that in this case if you have an H1 stamped in your passport, is it ok to travel to US on that H1 ? or would you need a B2 tourist visa to travel ?
I am asking since technically you are employed by same employer but you are getting paid by Candian payroll not US Payroll.
If you are going to stay 2 yrs in Canada, you might as well spend 1 more yr and become a Canadian citizen.
I actually have a similar question. I am in the exact same situation. The question is that in this case if you have an H1 stamped in your passport, is it ok to travel to US on that H1 ? or would you need a B2 tourist visa to travel ?
I am asking since technically you are employed by same employer but you are getting paid by Candian payroll not US Payroll.
more...
Michael chertoff
04-26 02:35 PM
Why did we all come to USA?
Did any of you knew the Green card problems when you came?
Did you know the problems when you applied for greencard many years ago?
When was the first time you found out there was a ling wait period and so many problems?
Brother, just relax. Take a deep breath and try to take a nap.. you will be OK. I can understand your frustration.
Get well Soon my friend.
MC
Did any of you knew the Green card problems when you came?
Did you know the problems when you applied for greencard many years ago?
When was the first time you found out there was a ling wait period and so many problems?
Brother, just relax. Take a deep breath and try to take a nap.. you will be OK. I can understand your frustration.
Get well Soon my friend.
MC
boreal
04-09 12:02 AM
I've just got all the info for setting up conference call and meeting with the lawmakers "info" kit.
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
Hey Franklin,
I am interested in participating too, i might not be an active member, but i can contribute when required and when i get some breather from my work..let me know what kind of things are being planned...
Once I've digested the contents of both, I'll be setting up a call, probably early next week. Here is the IV lawmaker kit http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=36
Any help on this would be appreciated, since I'm feeling a little overwhelmed with info! Volunteers for meeting people with me would also be great
I'll post to the yahoo group shortly.
Here're the details on NC_Immigration_Voice:
Group home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NC_Immigration_Voice
Group email address: NC_Immigration_Voice@yahoogroups.com
It is our time to seize the reigns and kick start some momentum
Hey Franklin,
I am interested in participating too, i might not be an active member, but i can contribute when required and when i get some breather from my work..let me know what kind of things are being planned...
more...
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
godspeed
01-15 09:03 AM
I paper filed at TSC on Dec16th got approval on Jan11th, the pace is pretty good considering the holidays in between.
There are several factor which helps aid in faster processing of the applications, mainly the required docs has to be in order and complete.
There are several factor which helps aid in faster processing of the applications, mainly the required docs has to be in order and complete.
more...
gc??
11-09 12:58 PM
Schumpeter: The other elephant | The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/17414206)
When the US govt is ignoring the problems of legal immigration and making it harder and harder to immigrate (especially when the interest of foreign nationals to come here has subsided with unprecedented growth in their native country...) it is foolish to expect to lure skilled people to this country any more
When the US govt is ignoring the problems of legal immigration and making it harder and harder to immigrate (especially when the interest of foreign nationals to come here has subsided with unprecedented growth in their native country...) it is foolish to expect to lure skilled people to this country any more
number30
04-04 02:08 PM
Thanks for your responses. The hospital staff told us it would take 60-90 days to get the SSN. I am stuck until that arrives because only then can I apply for the passport. Any way to get around it?
Call SS office they may give SS on phone or just go and ask them they will give you the number based on which you can apply for passport.
If you apply PIO in person and pick it up in person It will take around week.
Call SS office they may give SS on phone or just go and ask them they will give you the number based on which you can apply for passport.
If you apply PIO in person and pick it up in person It will take around week.
gc_samba
07-17 02:56 PM
My GC was approved last month after a very long wait time. Currently I am working for company B on EAD (not the GC filing employer). The question I had was can I continue to work for company B on a part time basis and join company A (GC filling employer).
Company A has a 9 month probation period I am worried if i quiet company B and company A fire me later then I will be with out job.
So I can work for company A (GC filing employer) full time and at the same time work part time with company B.
So this way if company A does fire me during probation period I continue with company B :confused: on full time basis. Is this ok will it come to haunt me when I file for citizenship?
Company A has a 9 month probation period I am worried if i quiet company B and company A fire me later then I will be with out job.
So I can work for company A (GC filing employer) full time and at the same time work part time with company B.
So this way if company A does fire me during probation period I continue with company B :confused: on full time basis. Is this ok will it come to haunt me when I file for citizenship?
Jerrome
03-10 12:01 AM
You are not suppossed to submit the i-94 which you received along with 797. Submit only the POE i-94.
It was told by Officer when i had a issue with the visa date not mentioned in the i-94 during re-entry.
It was told by Officer when i had a issue with the visa date not mentioned in the i-94 during re-entry.
snathan
05-15 10:49 AM
Hi Pappu,
How about 10000+ people sing a single letter and send it to every congressman/woman or senator. When you ask people to send letter to all congressman/woman they won�t. But i believe they wont hesitate to just sign one letter. Let me know if it�s useful
How about 10000+ people sing a single letter and send it to every congressman/woman or senator. When you ask people to send letter to all congressman/woman they won�t. But i believe they wont hesitate to just sign one letter. Let me know if it�s useful
0 comments:
Post a Comment