The7zen
05-28 02:58 PM
I just did....keep it coming guys.....
wallpaper Jessica Alba and her hubby
tnite
08-03 10:28 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes080307.pdf
Per this press note, Nebraska has issued receipts for I-485 upto July 11 and Texas 26th June....
maybe they meant 07/1/2007
Per this press note, Nebraska has issued receipts for I-485 upto July 11 and Texas 26th June....
maybe they meant 07/1/2007
desi3933
02-18 09:56 AM
I agree with snathan.
This is really a grey area., and totally depends on the adjudication officer. All they look for is the intention to work for that employer at the timing of I-140. That is hard to prove if you never worked for them. And thats easier for the officer to prove you never had any intentions of working for that employer. So who has better advantage here? Not the beneficiary for sure...
Incorrect.
As per Yates memo (link (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf))
It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
This is really a grey area., and totally depends on the adjudication officer. All they look for is the intention to work for that employer at the timing of I-140. That is hard to prove if you never worked for them. And thats easier for the officer to prove you never had any intentions of working for that employer. So who has better advantage here? Not the beneficiary for sure...
Incorrect.
As per Yates memo (link (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf))
It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
2011 kissing Jessica Alba#39;s
abhijitp
07-18 07:00 PM
I think if you got the I-140 approval before mid-August you should be able to apply for AOS. If I were you, I would keep everything (birth certificates, medical exams, photographs, etc) ready and even the application forms completed.
more...
sodh
07-24 12:57 AM
Hi,
My situation is as follows:
1) approved RIR labor 2002
2) approved perm labor 2005
3) approved i-140 2006 (PD 2005)
4) ALL of above for company-A. 2006 company-B took over.
My lawyer said i cannot file and have to start again with new labor as merger/acquistion was 'asset only' type.
I want to self-file i-485 giving the company "name change" letter as the only proof along with the rest of regular documents. Company-B employer is in 100% support of my application.
SHOULD I just waste $$$$ money or take a chance ? PLEASE HELP...TIRED OF WAITING FOR LAST 5 years :(
Regards,
-Ravi
Your Lawyer is right if the merger is only asset type and not transfer of shares between your old company and new company your application will be rejected.
My situation is as follows:
1) approved RIR labor 2002
2) approved perm labor 2005
3) approved i-140 2006 (PD 2005)
4) ALL of above for company-A. 2006 company-B took over.
My lawyer said i cannot file and have to start again with new labor as merger/acquistion was 'asset only' type.
I want to self-file i-485 giving the company "name change" letter as the only proof along with the rest of regular documents. Company-B employer is in 100% support of my application.
SHOULD I just waste $$$$ money or take a chance ? PLEASE HELP...TIRED OF WAITING FOR LAST 5 years :(
Regards,
-Ravi
Your Lawyer is right if the merger is only asset type and not transfer of shares between your old company and new company your application will be rejected.
ilikekilo
04-13 10:07 AM
I have recently switched the job using AC21. I have to move my 401K from my old previous company but here is the issue: in my new company I will not be eligible for the 401 till I complete 6 months with the new company.
If thinking of moving it to IRA account, please let me know what is the procedure involved?
I will really appreciate if some can suggest me what are my other options.
Thanks,
not sure who your old company's brokerage firm is however u should be able to shit all ur 401k to a roth IRA or whatever, however iam not sure abth te tax consequences...calling them is the best way to get ot know more
If thinking of moving it to IRA account, please let me know what is the procedure involved?
I will really appreciate if some can suggest me what are my other options.
Thanks,
not sure who your old company's brokerage firm is however u should be able to shit all ur 401k to a roth IRA or whatever, however iam not sure abth te tax consequences...calling them is the best way to get ot know more
more...
ravi2patel
07-23 11:29 PM
Thanks guys..i did approach another attorney and he said i should be OK as i have a clean record, that i should not get stuck with the 'semantics' of company mergers which happens all the time.
Having said that my current attorney is not asking for more money..so i am confused. But with the Aug.17 deadline fast approaching i will at least complete the paper work and wait for further advice from you kind folks. Thanks
Having said that my current attorney is not asking for more money..so i am confused. But with the Aug.17 deadline fast approaching i will at least complete the paper work and wait for further advice from you kind folks. Thanks
2010 Jessica Alba#39;s husband,
santb1975
11-16 08:06 PM
This Holiday season .... Give a gift to IV
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With Thanksgiving right around the corner lets take the time to thank IV for all the successes we have had so far and for all the hardwork that has been put into this cause. Let's make a Holiday contribution to IV. Please join me in this effort. Let's all contribute. Cheers
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With Thanksgiving right around the corner lets take the time to thank IV for all the successes we have had so far and for all the hardwork that has been put into this cause. Let's make a Holiday contribution to IV. Please join me in this effort. Let's all contribute. Cheers
more...
SGP
10-11 10:25 AM
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
It seems that the bill S 1085 (the Reuniting Families Act (RFA) has become active again. I received e-mails from Senator Menedez and Senator Lautenberg talking about the bill. Senator Menendex mentioned the recapture employment-based visas that haven't been used in past years so that they may be used in future years. Among other things, he also mentioned that he will continue to address the concerns of employment-based visas in the context of comprehensive immigration reform. He is the sponsor of the S 1085 bill.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
I have emailed The Congressman for 12th district of NJ (Rush Holt)
It seems that the bill S 1085 (the Reuniting Families Act (RFA) has become active again. I received e-mails from Senator Menedez and Senator Lautenberg talking about the bill. Senator Menendex mentioned the recapture employment-based visas that haven't been used in past years so that they may be used in future years. Among other things, he also mentioned that he will continue to address the concerns of employment-based visas in the context of comprehensive immigration reform. He is the sponsor of the S 1085 bill.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The �Reuniting American Families Act� (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
I have emailed The Congressman for 12th district of NJ (Rush Holt)
hair Jessica Alba and Cash Warren
rkotamurthy
09-29 02:24 PM
Bump ^^^
more...
bsbawa10
12-10 04:50 PM
I insist that the name of the person who used profane language on IV website be revealed. It is a serious and urgent issue. Such people must be exposed for the public good.
I fully think that if IV is serious for the dignity of its members and wants this not to happen again, then the person should be revealed and banned. I know this has happened in the past also but not taking this kind of action has given courage to such kind of people to attempt it again.
I fully think that if IV is serious for the dignity of its members and wants this not to happen again, then the person should be revealed and banned. I know this has happened in the past also but not taking this kind of action has given courage to such kind of people to attempt it again.
hot Jessica Alba and Cash Warren
Blog Feeds
02-08 06:10 PM
Immigration Visa Attorney Blog Has Just Posted the Following:
As immigration attorneys with very strong roots in the immigrant communities of Los Angeles, the lawyers at Fong & Chun stay current on legislative developments that could affect our clients and their families. On 15 December 2009, over ninety House Democrats unveiled a comprehensive immigration reform bill. The bill is called the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act of 2009 (CIR-ASAP).
President Obama has said there should be comprehensive immigration reform. The bill includes an "earned" legalization program. The program as currently proposed would allow undocumented people in the USA as of 15 December 2009 to apply for legalization. There would be special, more lenient rules for young persons. Many people want to call this an "amnesty," but it is important to see all the details about the program before getting too excited.
There are other provisions for "visa recapture" to reduce waiting times and backlogs. This bill would also put a new employment-eligibility-verification system into place. There would be harsh penalties for hiring unauthorized workers.
These proposed changes are very exciting; however, we must remember that this bill is only a PROPOSAL. It will have many reincarnations before a final bill passes, if a bill passes at all. The President has said he wants CIR on his desk by the end of 2010, but there are obviously many other things occupying the attention of Congress at this time. Stay tuned. --jcf
More... (http://www.immigrationvisaattorneyblog.com/2010/02/immigration-reform-bill-introd.html)
As immigration attorneys with very strong roots in the immigrant communities of Los Angeles, the lawyers at Fong & Chun stay current on legislative developments that could affect our clients and their families. On 15 December 2009, over ninety House Democrats unveiled a comprehensive immigration reform bill. The bill is called the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America's Security and Prosperity Act of 2009 (CIR-ASAP).
President Obama has said there should be comprehensive immigration reform. The bill includes an "earned" legalization program. The program as currently proposed would allow undocumented people in the USA as of 15 December 2009 to apply for legalization. There would be special, more lenient rules for young persons. Many people want to call this an "amnesty," but it is important to see all the details about the program before getting too excited.
There are other provisions for "visa recapture" to reduce waiting times and backlogs. This bill would also put a new employment-eligibility-verification system into place. There would be harsh penalties for hiring unauthorized workers.
These proposed changes are very exciting; however, we must remember that this bill is only a PROPOSAL. It will have many reincarnations before a final bill passes, if a bill passes at all. The President has said he wants CIR on his desk by the end of 2010, but there are obviously many other things occupying the attention of Congress at this time. Stay tuned. --jcf
More... (http://www.immigrationvisaattorneyblog.com/2010/02/immigration-reform-bill-introd.html)
more...
house Jessica Alba and Cash Warren
wandmaker
08-23 05:27 PM
I lost the hope of GC after working 10 years in US because my GC is not approving.
Is it possible to file case against my employer and ask to return money that they deduct from me for GC and the % that they earned from me in last 8 years. I joined my employer for smooth GC process but even my I140 is not approved. My labor went to backlog. Once labor approved than I140 is pending for last 30 months. USCIS is trying to find out that my company is legitimate or not.
Do not argue how I know that I140 is pending because of company. Please let what is process to inform USCIS about my employer. My company files GC so that no one should leave the company. Employer gives hope about GC but I140 never approves. What all evidence I have to collect so that I can prove against my employer. Please suggest.
You can complain to DOL, if you have been paid less than a LCA amount. Also, you can complain to DOL, if the deduction of GC processing fee to DOL as it could have lowered the amount thats in your offer letter. You need have a proof that your company has deducted money for your GC from the paycheck.
BTW, You have no legal grounds to get the revenue (aka % the company earned) the company made out of you during your tenure.
Is it possible to file case against my employer and ask to return money that they deduct from me for GC and the % that they earned from me in last 8 years. I joined my employer for smooth GC process but even my I140 is not approved. My labor went to backlog. Once labor approved than I140 is pending for last 30 months. USCIS is trying to find out that my company is legitimate or not.
Do not argue how I know that I140 is pending because of company. Please let what is process to inform USCIS about my employer. My company files GC so that no one should leave the company. Employer gives hope about GC but I140 never approves. What all evidence I have to collect so that I can prove against my employer. Please suggest.
You can complain to DOL, if you have been paid less than a LCA amount. Also, you can complain to DOL, if the deduction of GC processing fee to DOL as it could have lowered the amount thats in your offer letter. You need have a proof that your company has deducted money for your GC from the paycheck.
BTW, You have no legal grounds to get the revenue (aka % the company earned) the company made out of you during your tenure.
tattoo Fellow clubgoers Jessica Alba
B+ve
05-15 01:19 PM
I would like to clarify one thing....
Are these Certifications from Sun Microsystems, Oracle and IBM consider as supporting documents for 4 year degree or equivalent to any educational qualifications or experience?
I mean, people are doing these certifications even with out a job or while on bench....
I do not want to degrade or project these certifications in low profile or so, I do know the value of these certifications while searching for a job, but could not understand how they will help you in education or experience with USCIS.
Correct me if I am wrong.....
- B+ve
Are these Certifications from Sun Microsystems, Oracle and IBM consider as supporting documents for 4 year degree or equivalent to any educational qualifications or experience?
I mean, people are doing these certifications even with out a job or while on bench....
I do not want to degrade or project these certifications in low profile or so, I do know the value of these certifications while searching for a job, but could not understand how they will help you in education or experience with USCIS.
Correct me if I am wrong.....
- B+ve
more...
pictures kissing Jessica Alba#39;s
lord_labaku
04-14 12:34 AM
it seems clear - a child can claim either parents country chargeability. A spouse can claim a favorable country chargeability. I dont think it says that a parent can claim chargeability of childs birth country.
dresses Cash had been seen kissing
milind70
06-09 02:24 PM
What is the InfoPass # to call. I'm in the same boat. PD: Dec 2003 EB2
GCMan,
No number to call for infopass, you have to book appointments thru the web. I havent taken infopass for a while but no telephone numbers.
GCMan,
No number to call for infopass, you have to book appointments thru the web. I havent taken infopass for a while but no telephone numbers.
more...
makeup filmmaker Cash Warren,
HRPRO
02-21 09:51 AM
Jagan,
If you go in person, the Consular Officer addresses most issues in the afternoon. You could ask for a meeting with him and explain your situation.
I think this will be the easiest resolution.
Hope you get your passport soon.
If you go in person, the Consular Officer addresses most issues in the afternoon. You could ask for a meeting with him and explain your situation.
I think this will be the easiest resolution.
Hope you get your passport soon.
girlfriend Marrying Jessica Alba hasn#39;t
mast_mastmunda
11-10 04:13 PM
Hi,
Thanks for the reply and sorry for creating multiple threads.
- First H1B Employer "A"
-----------------------------
Approved: Oct 2006
Stamped: December 2006
Visa stamp valid till : Oct' 2009
H1B transferred to Employer "B" : June 2007
Traveling to India: November ' 2008
On Dec12, 2007, i saw an update on I-797 from Employer "A" even though
I have moved to Employer "B" by that time.
The Status of I-797 for Employer "A" on USCIS website got changed
to "Cable sent to American Consulate or port of entry notifying them of approval.".
My concern is that whether the above status means that first Employer "A" has revoked the H1B visa?
If yes, doesn't that means that I will NOT be able to use that H1B
visa stamping and *new* I-797 from Employer "B" at port of entry?
Thanks again..look forward to your response
Thanks for the reply and sorry for creating multiple threads.
- First H1B Employer "A"
-----------------------------
Approved: Oct 2006
Stamped: December 2006
Visa stamp valid till : Oct' 2009
H1B transferred to Employer "B" : June 2007
Traveling to India: November ' 2008
On Dec12, 2007, i saw an update on I-797 from Employer "A" even though
I have moved to Employer "B" by that time.
The Status of I-797 for Employer "A" on USCIS website got changed
to "Cable sent to American Consulate or port of entry notifying them of approval.".
My concern is that whether the above status means that first Employer "A" has revoked the H1B visa?
If yes, doesn't that means that I will NOT be able to use that H1B
visa stamping and *new* I-797 from Employer "B" at port of entry?
Thanks again..look forward to your response
hairstyles JESSICA ALBA#39;s husband,
ameryki
07-14 01:54 PM
my lawyer says... apply now.. dont know what will be situ in october.. it might go forward.. backward...my pd is 10/2003.
he says since my medicals are over.. all docs are ready ... so he says file and be part of lawsuit..
is this wise idea...if i say yes.. he will file by next week..
i already sent money for my wife...
my company is not covering my wife's expenses.
the lawyer is charing 600 for legal and 745 for filing...
are these
reasonable fees
What is the lawyer charging you for your wife's application for?? If I am not mistaken all they have to do is add your wife's information alongwith your filing stating you are married and show a copy of marriage certificate as proof. Am I right here people?
he says since my medicals are over.. all docs are ready ... so he says file and be part of lawsuit..
is this wise idea...if i say yes.. he will file by next week..
i already sent money for my wife...
my company is not covering my wife's expenses.
the lawyer is charing 600 for legal and 745 for filing...
are these
reasonable fees
What is the lawyer charging you for your wife's application for?? If I am not mistaken all they have to do is add your wife's information alongwith your filing stating you are married and show a copy of marriage certificate as proof. Am I right here people?
go_guy123
10-11 10:54 AM
It seems that the bill S 1085 (the Reuniting Families Act (RFA) has become active again. I received e-mails from Senator Menedez and Senator Lautenberg talking about the bill. Senator Menendex mentioned the recapture employment-based visas that haven't been used in past years so that they may be used in future years. Among other things, he also mentioned that he will continue to address the concerns of employment-based visas in the context of comprehensive immigration reform. He is the sponsor of the S 1085 bill.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
Senator Menendez in charge of this...looks like Fox guarding the hen house. I suspect he is more interested in hostage taking "employment-based immigrants " for his
"comprehensive immigration reform". Dream act advocates know this and are openly attacking the "frenemies" or "two-faced" pro-immigrant politicians and Senetor Reid in the democratic party.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
Senator Menendez in charge of this...looks like Fox guarding the hen house. I suspect he is more interested in hostage taking "employment-based immigrants " for his
"comprehensive immigration reform". Dream act advocates know this and are openly attacking the "frenemies" or "two-faced" pro-immigrant politicians and Senetor Reid in the democratic party.
kaisersose
07-25 12:35 PM
That is correct. You do not get to sign the 140 as it is has to be applied by the employer. You however, have to sign your approved Labor which will be attached to the 140 application.
No comments:
Post a Comment