anishNewbie
09-10 02:54 PM
hello every1,
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience for EB2 category..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
I was wondering how many of you are here who had applied their labor with MS + 0 years of experience for EB2 category..
Could you please shed some light on your profile and current standing in GC process ??
Thank youu....
wallpaper PALM TREES AND SUMMER SUNSET
Jerrome
11-30 11:36 AM
What is your PD and nationality. without this information nobody can even GUESS how it happened.
EB3_SEP04
08-27 11:23 PM
If employer or attorney are not helpful then there are high chances that they are hiding something, may have communicated to you I-140 approved in EB-2 whereas in real EB-3. One of my friend already have experinced same problem, EB-3 instead of EB-2. His company is in Jersey and the name starts with N.
Another reason why employer is hiding (or don't want to share) suspecting that you can leave him.
Be careful and try some way (as suggested above) to know about your I-140. All the best.
It'd be helpful for readers if you please update your profile with your case details.
Another reason why employer is hiding (or don't want to share) suspecting that you can leave him.
Be careful and try some way (as suggested above) to know about your I-140. All the best.
It'd be helpful for readers if you please update your profile with your case details.
2011 Trees of Summer
ash0210
05-15 12:27 PM
Since yesterday after reading June bulletin, it seems that we are loosing "focus" now..no one is asking what discussions are going on CIR shdeuled on May 14?
Correct me if I am wrong!!
Correct me if I am wrong!!
more...
smisachu
07-13 10:13 AM
I don't know if you guys are aware of this or not. In 1994 when US hosted the Soccer World cup, An Uruguyan player was granted direct Citizenship as US wanted to feild a respectable fight in front of their home crowds.
ita
01-15 06:04 PM
I called but I got the immigration subcommittee's VM. I left a message with my name and the reason I was calling.
more...
murali3000
03-04 12:09 PM
I do a short term stock trading with great profits , if you want I can share my stock picks , PM me.
2010 trees dunks summer 2011
ssingh92
01-24 12:53 AM
Although reference in the text above refers to "receipt date shown on your receipt", I doubt if they really mean that. As per latest processing status, all cases with RD = July 2 should have been processed by now. Is that true? I doubt.
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
If I check my case online I see following
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
If I check my case online I see following
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
more...
gsvisu
07-12 10:16 AM
Is it possible to show also Martin Luther King along with Gandhi in the template photographs ?
The locals & all can relate to MLK faster & better. Also there were previous chains that encouraged to refer MLK.
Remember we get a MLK - national holiday too...
Also modify the poem to reflect that something like...
Using Gandhi’s & MLK or ML King's way as our only tool.
Any suggestions ?
The locals & all can relate to MLK faster & better. Also there were previous chains that encouraged to refer MLK.
Remember we get a MLK - national holiday too...
Also modify the poem to reflect that something like...
Using Gandhi’s & MLK or ML King's way as our only tool.
Any suggestions ?
hair trees dunks summer 2011
needhelp!
10-09 01:26 PM
Dear IV Folks from Texas:
Please come and join our yahoo group. We have a lot of work that we need to do here in the lone star state, and your help and input is needed !!!
Please join our yahoogroup:
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/texasiv
Immediate help will be if you keep this thread bumped for others to join. Appreciated!
Please come and join our yahoo group. We have a lot of work that we need to do here in the lone star state, and your help and input is needed !!!
Please join our yahoogroup:
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/texasiv
Immediate help will be if you keep this thread bumped for others to join. Appreciated!
more...
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRZ6FKFpuJIWQCKdGKZEeD2LPZQok3o6XiNLxN1KgkAedpCN_kxgCNUA1Rkw-SqBsq2K4vHpOeLhILshKUTASVgvWszsR5C_IpBeRctP0qoAAdEB5nRldZGbIAvMgvMgK2DYEygtoit3o/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRZ6FKFpuJIWQCKdGKZEeD2LPZQok3o6XiNLxN1KgkAedpCN_kxgCNUA1Rkw-SqBsq2K4vHpOeLhILshKUTASVgvWszsR5C_IpBeRctP0qoAAdEB5nRldZGbIAvMgvMgK2DYEygtoit3o/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRZ6FKFpuJIWQCKdGKZEeD2LPZQok3o6XiNLxN1KgkAedpCN_kxgCNUA1Rkw-SqBsq2K4vHpOeLhILshKUTASVgvWszsR5C_IpBeRctP0qoAAdEB5nRldZGbIAvMgvMgK2DYEygtoit3o/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjRZ6FKFpuJIWQCKdGKZEeD2LPZQok3o6XiNLxN1KgkAedpCN_kxgCNUA1Rkw-SqBsq2K4vHpOeLhILshKUTASVgvWszsR5C_IpBeRctP0qoAAdEB5nRldZGbIAvMgvMgK2DYEygtoit3o/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
hot Summer, Trees, Clouds
gc67890
11-16 10:19 PM
IV gurus Please help.
My friend joined an X company short time ago. He was about to file GC with that company. The company laid of people in the last week.
Now they are saying to my friend that they cannot file for his labor as they have laid of people and they have to wait 6 months before filing.
Is it true if a company laid of people it should wait 6 month before it files for labor again?
Is there a way to avoid the waiting period.
My friend is in 5 th year of his H1B
Thanks
My friend joined an X company short time ago. He was about to file GC with that company. The company laid of people in the last week.
Now they are saying to my friend that they cannot file for his labor as they have laid of people and they have to wait 6 months before filing.
Is it true if a company laid of people it should wait 6 month before it files for labor again?
Is there a way to avoid the waiting period.
My friend is in 5 th year of his H1B
Thanks
more...
house Summertrees | Free Music
waitin_toolong
07-30 01:31 PM
Congratulations,
dependent getting the approval before primary happens, and the good news about that is that you will be approved as well. Sometimes the people who are supposed to update the system and issue notices dont get to all the applications at one time. or maybe they forget to commit the transaction :)
To those wondering about how he was able to file should browse through archives of bulletins to note that his PD was current at a particular time. and current in July hence approval.
Lets not get upset over the good luck of others. Sometimes it is so hard to be happy for others when our own conditions seem a little gloomy.
dependent getting the approval before primary happens, and the good news about that is that you will be approved as well. Sometimes the people who are supposed to update the system and issue notices dont get to all the applications at one time. or maybe they forget to commit the transaction :)
To those wondering about how he was able to file should browse through archives of bulletins to note that his PD was current at a particular time. and current in July hence approval.
Lets not get upset over the good luck of others. Sometimes it is so hard to be happy for others when our own conditions seem a little gloomy.
tattoo trees. Seamless summer
gc28262
01-16 04:45 PM
AC21: if my new employer is open to do either EAD or H1, what should I prefer? I want to take the least risky route.
If employer offers H1B transfer, use that and also invoke AC21.
If employer offers H1B transfer, use that and also invoke AC21.
more...
pictures Forever Summer Trees Image
ndbhatt
12-21 02:14 PM
The visa bulletin reads "..Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. "
Does this mean 7 % limit per country is set to combined total of FB and EB category and not just EB? Also, does this mean 25,620 annual visa can be allotted for either one of these preferences, EB or FB?:confused:
I have heard earlier that EB preference limit per country is ~9,800. How true does it stand by sections in INA?
Does this mean 7 % limit per country is set to combined total of FB and EB category and not just EB? Also, does this mean 25,620 annual visa can be allotted for either one of these preferences, EB or FB?:confused:
I have heard earlier that EB preference limit per country is ~9,800. How true does it stand by sections in INA?
dresses SPILHAUS Nita,Trees in summer
ashirwadb
10-07 03:52 PM
You'd have to wait for PD to become current to add spouse.
Furthermore, if you get married before I-485 is approved, spouse may be added once PD becomes current, even though by then you have your GC.
Furthermore, if you get married before I-485 is approved, spouse may be added once PD becomes current, even though by then you have your GC.
more...
makeup Whiling away a lazy summer
glus
01-24 09:13 AM
Thks for the response, but what I read on other sites for e.g murthydot.com and some other site in the Internet it is used even for situations where one did not realised their I-94 has expired and thought its not an issue, also for example such as employer forgot to file and its not application mistake as he was not aware about employers miss and etc. So based on a approved LCA one can get H1 approved and even get the unauthorized employment convert it into a valid employment for any period (based on conditions). I'll do more research on this and update this thread.
Meanwhile anyone with any other opinion is welcome here. Thks all
hi there:
One can only work for an H-1B employer for whom H1b petition is approved and is valid. By working for a different employer without filing a transfer of H-1b to the new employer, one falls out of status. Going back to the original employer A would not put such a person back into legal h-1b status at all. Consult an attorney to review your options. However, staying in the U.S. even if you go back to your original employer A, will not repair your out-of-status problem and most likely will count toward being illegally here. The odds are high that the USCIS will notice this sooner or later and you may have a big problem then. Since your visa stamp is till unexpired (I am not sure if it is still valid, even if it is still unexpired), maybe re-entering the U.S. and working for employer A would help, but still you should consult a good immigration attorney to see if that would be OK.
Best Regards,
Meanwhile anyone with any other opinion is welcome here. Thks all
hi there:
One can only work for an H-1B employer for whom H1b petition is approved and is valid. By working for a different employer without filing a transfer of H-1b to the new employer, one falls out of status. Going back to the original employer A would not put such a person back into legal h-1b status at all. Consult an attorney to review your options. However, staying in the U.S. even if you go back to your original employer A, will not repair your out-of-status problem and most likely will count toward being illegally here. The odds are high that the USCIS will notice this sooner or later and you may have a big problem then. Since your visa stamp is till unexpired (I am not sure if it is still valid, even if it is still unexpired), maybe re-entering the U.S. and working for employer A would help, but still you should consult a good immigration attorney to see if that would be OK.
Best Regards,
girlfriend Summer WoodsBirch Trees
wandmaker
06-05 05:20 PM
USCIS has regular pickup schedule, it is the case with few of the applications mailed thru USPS - DONT Worry unless you want the application to reach on or before a specific date.
hairstyles borders, summer houses and
pal351
11-22 09:16 PM
Fee : $305.00
Applied on line, printed the form.
Attached the following and sent them to USCIS
1) 485 - copy.
2) Old APs 2 - Copies.
3) Cover letter explaining that I need to visit my parents as they are old.
4) DL - Copy.
5) Photos : 2 (write A# and name back of them) (I forgot to send the photos with the application)
I forgot to attach the photos and got RFE, sent photos and approved yesterday. Waiting for the physical copy.
Thank You.
Applied on line, printed the form.
Attached the following and sent them to USCIS
1) 485 - copy.
2) Old APs 2 - Copies.
3) Cover letter explaining that I need to visit my parents as they are old.
4) DL - Copy.
5) Photos : 2 (write A# and name back of them) (I forgot to send the photos with the application)
I forgot to attach the photos and got RFE, sent photos and approved yesterday. Waiting for the physical copy.
Thank You.
newyorker123
09-02 01:43 PM
you can mention what all you need in your application. go to the link (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/g-639.pdf) and www.uscis.gov/foia (http://www.uscis.gov/foia)
You can find all detail.
I recently made G-639 request, waiting for the documents, I asked for the complete set of documents tagged to my 485, will it get it me my ETA750 also?
because other guy mentioned other email, foiarequest@dol.gov. Shall I send email to this also?
You can find all detail.
I recently made G-639 request, waiting for the documents, I asked for the complete set of documents tagged to my 485, will it get it me my ETA750 also?
because other guy mentioned other email, foiarequest@dol.gov. Shall I send email to this also?
ksairi
08-16 02:41 PM
--------------bump--------------
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий