mallu
03-04 09:31 PM
It's not like he suddenly realized something. The only reason they changed the policy is that they got sued. Period! :mad: They continue the sabotage with processing dates going backward (which is never supposed to happen!), etc, because they feel no threat to their well-being.
Now USCIS has started finding other reasons , so that their processing times can become sane. "Additional Review" , "RFE for documents issued by INS 10 years ago" etc.
And one example : http://boards.immigration.com/showpost.php?p=1871043&postcount=2902
Now USCIS has started finding other reasons , so that their processing times can become sane. "Additional Review" , "RFE for documents issued by INS 10 years ago" etc.
And one example : http://boards.immigration.com/showpost.php?p=1871043&postcount=2902
wallpaper TATTOO GIRLS | Pregnant
paskal
10-26 12:25 AM
Hi,
I suggest you guys bump this thread periodically and keep it on the front page.
Lynne, I can provide you some help with info on IV members in IN.
Please pm/e mail me. Thanks for your effort!
I suggest you guys bump this thread periodically and keep it on the front page.
Lynne, I can provide you some help with info on IV members in IN.
Please pm/e mail me. Thanks for your effort!
gc_maine2
05-24 08:36 AM
Good job Salil. Keep up the good work.
2011 Pregnant Belly Tattoo
nrakkati
01-29 02:09 AM
My AP is approved on 27th, but I did not receive it so far. I already booked my tickets and have only one day left for my travel.
Would it be safe to travel now? Are there any risks involved in doing so?
Please advice.
Thank you
Would it be safe to travel now? Are there any risks involved in doing so?
Please advice.
Thank you
more...
gc_mania_03
10-01 11:14 AM
Add me in..
canleo98
08-09 02:40 PM
My PD was not current in June07, company attorney applied for 3 year extension along with approved I-140. Receipt Date for H1B extension application was June 14th 2007 and H1B was approved on July27th 2007 for one year only. As per FAQ# 2(Q 17), I was eligible for 3 year extension, Can we ask for ammendment in H1B extension. If yes, what is the process for requesting ammendment and what document do we need to file. Any idea how much time it is going to take, is it going to take same time as H1B extension timeline. All your views and answers are welcome.
Here it is
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
Here it is
Q #17 in http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/EBFAQ1.pdf
Q17: How will USCIS interpret the language of AC21 Sec 104(c) (for three-year H-1B extensions) during a period in which AOS applications could be filed?
A17. USCIS interprets AC21 �104(c) as only applicable when an alien, who is the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, is eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status but for application of the per country limitations. Any petitioner seeking an H-1B extension on behalf of a beneficiary pursuant to AC21 �104(c) must thus establish that at the time of filing for such extension, the alien is not eligible to be granted lawful permanent resident status on account of the per country immigrant visa limitations.
And here is what OH says in his breaking news for July 24th after this memo
0724/2007: AC 21 Three-Year Increment H-1B Extension Petition Availability in July and August 2007
Under Section 104(c) of AC 21 Act, those who have an approved I-140 petition or pending EB-485 application with the approved I-140 petition are eligible for the H-1B extension in three-year increment, if they cannot file EB-485 or EB-485 is pending but cannot be adjudicated because of the visa number unavailability for him/her. The question remained whether visa number should be unavailable at the time of filing of H-1B extension or at the time of adjudication of filing. The USCIS FAQ indicates that it will be determined by the date of filing rather than date of adjudication.
You should ask your lawyer to get an amendment. I read here yday somebody doing that.
more...
dollar500
08-03 10:16 AM
Why again it's stuck around May 2001. Somebody mention about the new law now at that time they were able to do concurrent filing. Not quite clear now!
2010 Fitness - Pregnancy - Tattoo .
HOPE_GC_SOON
07-16 11:47 AM
I second this: NO Link of Wage Level to EB2. what all matters is Qualification and Job requirement. That's what I heard from my Paralegal.
I agree. I am EB2 and my Prevailing_Wage_Level is Level II
I agree. I am EB2 and my Prevailing_Wage_Level is Level II
more...
desi3933
06-25 10:41 AM
D...3933,
A Different question. Do we need to file FBAR if anyone has more than 10K USD in foreign accounts?
.....
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/725808-post105.html
.
A Different question. Do we need to file FBAR if anyone has more than 10K USD in foreign accounts?
.....
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/725808-post105.html
.
hair pregnant angel
Mohit_Malkani
10-08 11:13 AM
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
paskal
07-20 08:33 PM
a link that says 485 filing needs tax returns.
please see the official instructions with the 485 form and note what is actually asked for- it's not much- and no W2 or tax returns are mentioned.
please see the official instructions with the 485 form and note what is actually asked for- it's not much- and no W2 or tax returns are mentioned.
hot Jolie Tattoos Pregnant
GoGreen
07-18 10:39 AM
Yes, You need to file it along with the receipt notice so that they can associate it with your 485.
Thanks, So the bottom line is, you cannot apply for an EAD without a I485 receipt, but you can apply for 485 and EAD together.
Thanks, So the bottom line is, you cannot apply for an EAD without a I485 receipt, but you can apply for 485 and EAD together.
more...
house tattoo pregnancy, pregnant
Bhaskar_80
06-10 02:42 PM
Once again Thanks Mr. Glutin,
So it means, when I apply for H1B Transfer this time, I will get an H1B Visa valid till May 2012 right? Please let me know whether my assumption is right.
Also am I eligible to process my i140 through Premium Processing?
Thanks and Regards,
So it means, when I apply for H1B Transfer this time, I will get an H1B Visa valid till May 2012 right? Please let me know whether my assumption is right.
Also am I eligible to process my i140 through Premium Processing?
Thanks and Regards,
tattoo Pregnant woman with tattoo
sammyb
04-20 06:53 AM
any luck with PIMS pre-verification ... please share ...
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
more...
pictures Pregnant Henna Tattoos 1
satishku_2000
01-07 07:05 PM
Employers can withdraw the 140 , It could result in NOID for 485 . Please be prepared to respond to NOID.
By law you may be in safe area but please be prepared with all the required documents to respond a potential NOID.
By law you may be in safe area but please be prepared with all the required documents to respond a potential NOID.
dresses Tori Spelling Debuts Pregnant
jayleno
08-08 10:08 PM
Hey ..You could take GMAT training or something from Kaplan which issues F-1 Visa for 3 months which is the duration of the course. 20 hours of mandatory attendence is there per week and you cannot work during that time....but you are covered legally. First get an F-1 and then apply for a H-1. I did this in 2004.
more...
makeup and Tattoos in Pregnancy
loudoggs
07-30 01:14 PM
Congrats!!!
I guess timing really matters......and you were at the right place at the right time....
I have got my case approved as well. I also received my GC cards. Thanks for all the info and Best of Luck,
I guess timing really matters......and you were at the right place at the right time....
I have got my case approved as well. I also received my GC cards. Thanks for all the info and Best of Luck,
girlfriend baby, tattoo, pregnant
gxr
09-26 02:12 PM
Got EAD approved on 09/25. Filed on 07/03, RN is 09/11. - NSC, 140 still pending.
hairstyles Religious Tattoo.
add78
06-11 08:56 AM
This is a first step in the full reinstatement of PP for 140. As USCIS has said before, due to the immense backlog they cannot adjudicate all 140 PPs in the 15-day window but they are in need of the extra $1500 that PP fetches them. This will enable them to get a little more $$ for a relatively smaller 140 cases upgraded to PP which they could adjudicate in 15 days. It also alleviates the stranded folks who could not extend H-1 if Perm was <365 and 140 pending. Let us see in time (a few months at least) how much backlog is cleared as USCIS diverts more resources to 140 cases.
freedom_fighter
01-14 01:13 PM
she had sep 2004 eb2.
i've changed my pd date to avoid confusion. USCIS is going by the queue, so dont worry..
i've changed my pd date to avoid confusion. USCIS is going by the queue, so dont worry..
swamy
12-24 10:46 AM
Hi
Will the email i sent have any advantage to him?
Please help
Thanks
MRD
Nope - it does not legally bind you though it hurts your credibility.
Will the email i sent have any advantage to him?
Please help
Thanks
MRD
Nope - it does not legally bind you though it hurts your credibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment