ivgclive
07-25 10:00 AM
Wait a minute....
So, it does not matter whether you have GC or not,
Dealing with USCIS and paying lawyers are part of rest of your life....
So, it does not matter whether you have GC or not,
Dealing with USCIS and paying lawyers are part of rest of your life....
wallpaper july august 2011 calendar.
tnite
06-26 02:35 PM
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
If I am not wrong that amendment has been changed considerably.
the new amendment states that Employer abased GC will be phased out in 5 yrs and then merit based kicks in
H1B quota for US Master's Grad is 40K according to the amendment.
If I get the link I will post it
If I am not wrong that amendment has been changed considerably.
the new amendment states that Employer abased GC will be phased out in 5 yrs and then merit based kicks in
H1B quota for US Master's Grad is 40K according to the amendment.
If I get the link I will post it
gee_see
10-18 10:57 PM
LC Salary:- $85,000
LC Location:- New York
New Job Salary:- $74,000
New job Title and Job duties are same.
Is it advisable to invoke AC21 when new job salary is less than original LC salary but more than prevailing wage of new location.
As per Aytes memo there should not be substantial salary difference. Has anyone invoked AC21 when new job salary is less than LC salary.
I've consulted few immigration laywer and the opinion differs.
Experts.... Please help
LC Location:- New York
New Job Salary:- $74,000
New job Title and Job duties are same.
Is it advisable to invoke AC21 when new job salary is less than original LC salary but more than prevailing wage of new location.
As per Aytes memo there should not be substantial salary difference. Has anyone invoked AC21 when new job salary is less than LC salary.
I've consulted few immigration laywer and the opinion differs.
Experts.... Please help
2011 August 2011
Berkeleybee
04-03 04:36 PM
brb2, Thanks for pointing it out. Actually the figure of 15% makes our case stronger. We will have it changed.
Seeing as how I and Stuck labor were the ones to put that National Interest Fact sheet together thought I should respond:
The NAS report is available at http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
The document is quoting from page ES-8 of the NAS report -- I'm cutting and pasting from the document
"In Germany, 36% of undergraduates receive their degrees in science and engineering. In China, the
figure is 59%, and in Japan 66%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 32%."
The NAS document end note says "Based on data from Data are from National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Appendix Table 2-33."
The document you have linked to says
In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.27 In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.
And the document footnote says
Analysis conducted by the Association of American Universities. 2006. National Defense Education and Innovation Initiative. Based on data in National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Appendix Table 2-33. For countries with both short and long degrees, the ratios are calculated with both short and long degrees as the numerator.
So this is pretty odd -- both are based on the same base dataset, and it looks like the second document calculates the % differently. Also not sure why one says "science and engineering" and the other says "natural science and engineering"
Seeing as how I and Stuck labor were the ones to put that National Interest Fact sheet together thought I should respond:
The NAS report is available at http://fermat.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html
The document is quoting from page ES-8 of the NAS report -- I'm cutting and pasting from the document
"In Germany, 36% of undergraduates receive their degrees in science and engineering. In China, the
figure is 59%, and in Japan 66%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 32%."
The NAS document end note says "Based on data from Data are from National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation, Appendix Table 2-33."
The document you have linked to says
In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.27 In South Korea, 38% of all undergraduates receive their degrees in natural science or engineering. In France, the figure is 47%, in China, 50%, and in Singapore 67%. In the United States, the corresponding figure is 15%.
And the document footnote says
Analysis conducted by the Association of American Universities. 2006. National Defense Education and Innovation Initiative. Based on data in National Science Board. 2004. Science and Engineering Indicators 2004 (NSB 04-01). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Appendix Table 2-33. For countries with both short and long degrees, the ratios are calculated with both short and long degrees as the numerator.
So this is pretty odd -- both are based on the same base dataset, and it looks like the second document calculates the % differently. Also not sure why one says "science and engineering" and the other says "natural science and engineering"
more...
myeb2gc
02-24 02:35 PM
Hi,
I recently got my H1B extension. My consulting firm is smaller, i did not even submitted my client letter. One thing is that i am with the same employer since i am in US. As far as i know if you dont change your employer OR if you have all the documentation properly submitted then i think things will be smoother.
I recently got my H1B extension. My consulting firm is smaller, i did not even submitted my client letter. One thing is that i am with the same employer since i am in US. As far as i know if you dont change your employer OR if you have all the documentation properly submitted then i think things will be smoother.
nousername
04-07 01:12 PM
What the hell.. Can someone please explain this in plain English?
AAO Decision on Substituted Labor Certifications (http://www.cilawgroup.com/news/2010/04/03/aao-decision-on-substituted-labor-certifications/)
AAO Decision on Substituted Labor Certifications (http://www.cilawgroup.com/news/2010/04/03/aao-decision-on-substituted-labor-certifications/)
more...
NKR
06-04 05:02 PM
They might not send one to you if you request over the phone, this is for your own security since you keep hearing about cases where personal identity is stolen. If you have an online account, log in and send a request from there, they might send it to your email for a nominal fee though I am not sure. I got mine from Bank of America for 10$
2010 july august 2011 calendar. may
lkapildev
04-15 03:12 PM
Nothing will affect you. You are at the beinging stage of your GC. Donot get tensed or panic .. all will be smooth. I donot think there is any way to to inform DOL. Contact your attroney for any clarification.
more...
learning01
04-06 10:28 PM
In the evening, problems: a meltdown over process.
Two issues:
1. Democrats want to limit the number of amendments that can be debated on the deal. GOP opponents to the bipartisan deal have a slew of amendments they want to offer.
Durbin said an anticipated large number of amendments would be the equivalent of a filibuster.
Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who helped broker the bi-partisan immigration provisions, said this is an unfair demand from Democrats.
2. Democrats want Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Az.) to agree in advance who he will pick to be on an immigration bill House-Senate conference committee.
If the Senate passes an immigration bill, it will be vastly different from the measure the House passed on Dec. 16. The two versions would have to be reconciled if a bill is to get to the president to sign. A bill can be virtually rewritten at this stage.
``We are concerned whether or not this Congress will have the strength to go up against Jim Sensenbrenner,�� said Durbin.
Read my post in IV News Article Thread: (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=7424&postcount=164)
Two issues:
1. Democrats want to limit the number of amendments that can be debated on the deal. GOP opponents to the bipartisan deal have a slew of amendments they want to offer.
Durbin said an anticipated large number of amendments would be the equivalent of a filibuster.
Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who helped broker the bi-partisan immigration provisions, said this is an unfair demand from Democrats.
2. Democrats want Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Az.) to agree in advance who he will pick to be on an immigration bill House-Senate conference committee.
If the Senate passes an immigration bill, it will be vastly different from the measure the House passed on Dec. 16. The two versions would have to be reconciled if a bill is to get to the president to sign. A bill can be virtually rewritten at this stage.
``We are concerned whether or not this Congress will have the strength to go up against Jim Sensenbrenner,�� said Durbin.
Read my post in IV News Article Thread: (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=7424&postcount=164)
hair july august 2011 calendar. may
gc_bulgaria
02-12 03:38 PM
My husband is ROW and dependent. I am primary and EB2 India.
Therefore cross charge comes into play.
Therefore cross charge comes into play.
more...
Prasad_FL
08-05 12:03 PM
Last year I renewed my passport in Houston thru usps mail. They took 5 weeks for me. Even if you go in person, they would take 2 days for processing. Check with the consulate.
hot may june july august 2011
wildcat1313
03-30 11:32 PM
Client lawyers have advised against it. So vendor can't do anything. I'm still trying to see if they can fax it directly to the consulate or send it in seal envelope to them
Everyone from HR Head to Technology Heads are involved and are doing the best to help me. And then I'm just a contractor whom they can always kick to the curbside.
Everyone from HR Head to Technology Heads are involved and are doing the best to help me. And then I'm just a contractor whom they can always kick to the curbside.
more...
house may. june. july. august
retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
tattoo in June, July and August
ss1026
04-10 03:56 PM
163,000 applns for general and more than 31,200 applns for advanced degree.
WASHINGTON � U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced a preliminary number of nearly 163,000 H-1B petitions received during the filing period ending on April 7, 2008. More than 31,200 of those petitions were for the advanced degree category.
I read this as saying this....
The 163k number includes the advance degree number. So it is 132K for general and 31k for advance
WASHINGTON � U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced a preliminary number of nearly 163,000 H-1B petitions received during the filing period ending on April 7, 2008. More than 31,200 of those petitions were for the advanced degree category.
I read this as saying this....
The 163k number includes the advance degree number. So it is 132K for general and 31k for advance
more...
pictures house July 2011 middot; August 2011 may june july august 2011 calendar. may,
dngoyal
07-27 02:32 PM
Yeah, he did, but no form is signed by me. Moreover I have not given any authorization form.
Is it OK.
Please confirm.
Thanks for the earlier reply.
Is it OK.
Please confirm.
Thanks for the earlier reply.
dresses may june july august 2011
zephyrr
12-02 10:15 PM
From another thread on IV, I've read that you should keep a copy of
you approved 140 as proof that your 140 was approved. You should
definitely check with a lawyer before making a move. It is true that
you can get a 3 yr H1B extension based on your old 140. If the old
140 is revoked, according to the law, you are not allowed to get an
extension based on it - however, a memorandum issued by USCIS
says that you can. It would be best to get a 3 yr extension before you switch.
but employer keeps the LC and I-140. If I move to new employer
what is the proof that my I-140 was approved.
Thanks
you approved 140 as proof that your 140 was approved. You should
definitely check with a lawyer before making a move. It is true that
you can get a 3 yr H1B extension based on your old 140. If the old
140 is revoked, according to the law, you are not allowed to get an
extension based on it - however, a memorandum issued by USCIS
says that you can. It would be best to get a 3 yr extension before you switch.
but employer keeps the LC and I-140. If I move to new employer
what is the proof that my I-140 was approved.
Thanks
more...
makeup house may june july august
amitga
02-09 08:01 PM
One day we will also get notice to leave US, just like doctors in UK have got.
girlfriend july august 2011 calendar.
leoindiano
08-03 12:23 PM
I have the notice of action for my I-140 approval. It doesn't mention an A# anywhere. Are you sure about this?
There should be a box for A number, is it blank?
There should be a box for A number, is it blank?
hairstyles July 2011 middot; August 2011
kami97
06-11 03:25 PM
Thanks so much for the info. Really appreciate it. I think I will then wait and see if they send a RFE. Best wishes to all!
vinzak
01-07 12:10 PM
waitingwaiting, may you could change the subject of this thread to something like "Bill to move DV numbers to EB!!!". It'll probably get more attention.
chris
02-05 09:02 PM
One time one IO told me once you file your 485 or any application means USCIS is working on your case. You have to wait until they mail a decission. (what are we going to do though :p)
Here under review means same above meaning. Since your PD is not current. Even though they are working on your case doesn't mean any thing. :p
Good luck though. (we are seeing on forums that people are getting GCs without PD's are current.) :mad:
Cris,
I just called teh number and was able to talk to the officer.. he said the case under review.. means.. Any idea.
Thanks again.
Here under review means same above meaning. Since your PD is not current. Even though they are working on your case doesn't mean any thing. :p
Good luck though. (we are seeing on forums that people are getting GCs without PD's are current.) :mad:
Cris,
I just called teh number and was able to talk to the officer.. he said the case under review.. means.. Any idea.
Thanks again.
No comments:
Post a Comment