buddhaas
02-02 03:57 PM
Why Is H-1B A Dirty Word?
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
wallpaper nathan kress and jennette mccurdy. Nathan Kress - Premiere Of
rishikesh75
11-09 10:47 AM
Luckily I had all but the 1st one when I entered in US. Please see the format letter below [please note that I am copying the format from a word doc & may not display correctly
Dear Sir/Madam,
In response to your letter requesting evidence for FORM I-131. Please find below mentioned details.
a. Copies of all I-94 issued- I do not have copy of I-94 that was issued to me on <>Date (my first arrival in US on H1). The original I-94 was returned to airline official at the time of boarding the flight.
The following entries are in TAB format
Date of Entry mm/DD/yyyy
Date of Exit mm/DD/yyyy
I-94 # NA
Copy Avail? N
Remarks Original I-94 was handed over to airlines staff at the time of boarding [Departed by flight xxx ]. To support my claim, please see attached passport copy that shows arrival record in India on <xxx> [pages 3-4]
b. Approval notices for extensions or change of Status- My original H1 [XXXX] expired on [XXX]. An H1 renewal notice was filed on [XXXX] and was approved on [XXX] [WAC-XXX]. I am attaching copies of both the approval notices.
c. Any other Evidence of your lawful immigrations status: I am attaching a copy of approved I-140 [SRC-XXX] and a copy of I-485 filing receipt [WAC-XXXX]
d. Evidence of relationship: I am attaching the following documents
1. Copy of my birth certificate
2. Copy of my marriage certificate
Thanks & Regards,
<Your Name>
Encl:
1. Passport copy pages displaying the visa issued ,date of entries to US on H1 and displaying the date of arrival in India [6 pages]
2. Copies of H1 approval & extension approval notice [2 pages]
3. Copies of I-94’s issued [5 pages]
4. Copy of I-140 approval [1 pages]
5. Copy of I-485 filing receipt [1 pages]
6. Copy of birth certificate [1 page]
7. Copy of marriage certificate [1 page]
Hope this helps
QUOTE=MYGCBY2010;193771]How did you respond to your RFE?.. Did you have copies of all of your I -94 ?.. Please let me know...[/QUOTE]
Dear Sir/Madam,
In response to your letter requesting evidence for FORM I-131. Please find below mentioned details.
a. Copies of all I-94 issued- I do not have copy of I-94 that was issued to me on <>Date (my first arrival in US on H1). The original I-94 was returned to airline official at the time of boarding the flight.
The following entries are in TAB format
Date of Entry mm/DD/yyyy
Date of Exit mm/DD/yyyy
I-94 # NA
Copy Avail? N
Remarks Original I-94 was handed over to airlines staff at the time of boarding [Departed by flight xxx ]. To support my claim, please see attached passport copy that shows arrival record in India on <xxx> [pages 3-4]
b. Approval notices for extensions or change of Status- My original H1 [XXXX] expired on [XXX]. An H1 renewal notice was filed on [XXXX] and was approved on [XXX] [WAC-XXX]. I am attaching copies of both the approval notices.
c. Any other Evidence of your lawful immigrations status: I am attaching a copy of approved I-140 [SRC-XXX] and a copy of I-485 filing receipt [WAC-XXXX]
d. Evidence of relationship: I am attaching the following documents
1. Copy of my birth certificate
2. Copy of my marriage certificate
Thanks & Regards,
<Your Name>
Encl:
1. Passport copy pages displaying the visa issued ,date of entries to US on H1 and displaying the date of arrival in India [6 pages]
2. Copies of H1 approval & extension approval notice [2 pages]
3. Copies of I-94’s issued [5 pages]
4. Copy of I-140 approval [1 pages]
5. Copy of I-485 filing receipt [1 pages]
6. Copy of birth certificate [1 page]
7. Copy of marriage certificate [1 page]
Hope this helps
QUOTE=MYGCBY2010;193771]How did you respond to your RFE?.. Did you have copies of all of your I -94 ?.. Please let me know...[/QUOTE]
GotGC??
05-15 12:03 PM
Thanks for your reply.
My understanding is there can be only one AOS at any time.
- So if the AOS is applied based on the EB3 140, can another AOS be filed based on EB2?
- If a AOS has been applied based on EB3, can it be "upgraded" to EB2 ??
Thanks.
Not an expert but my guess is this window of opportunity will exist till next Fiscal year's bulletin is out i.e around 10th sep 2007. If you haven't already filed 485 you are unlikely to be approved during the window. I would go with aggressive approach i.e file based on pending EB2 and upgrade to PP. If you want to be conservtive because you never know if the porting will be accepted or not, or if it may add more delay just file eb3 485 right away, take the beneifts like ead etc.. and later port if retrogressed.
My understanding is there can be only one AOS at any time.
- So if the AOS is applied based on the EB3 140, can another AOS be filed based on EB2?
- If a AOS has been applied based on EB3, can it be "upgraded" to EB2 ??
Thanks.
Not an expert but my guess is this window of opportunity will exist till next Fiscal year's bulletin is out i.e around 10th sep 2007. If you haven't already filed 485 you are unlikely to be approved during the window. I would go with aggressive approach i.e file based on pending EB2 and upgrade to PP. If you want to be conservtive because you never know if the porting will be accepted or not, or if it may add more delay just file eb3 485 right away, take the beneifts like ead etc.. and later port if retrogressed.
2011 nathan kress and jennette
mani_r1
12-12 04:50 PM
I have my H1B till 2010. Say on my way back from India I used AP. The AP is valid till Nov 2008. What will be my new I94 expiry date? Am I reading it correctly that if I present my H1B to the POE he stamps the I94 with 2010 Expiry date. If I don't show him my H1B then he stamps the I94 with Nov 2008 expiry date.
1. If the officer stamps my I94 with Nov 2008 expiry date, how can we get it extended after entering US.
2. Is it by filing another H1B extension?
3.If I don't want to file H1B extention what is the other option to get the I94 extended beyond Nov 2008.
Thanks
1. If the officer stamps my I94 with Nov 2008 expiry date, how can we get it extended after entering US.
2. Is it by filing another H1B extension?
3.If I don't want to file H1B extention what is the other option to get the I94 extended beyond Nov 2008.
Thanks
more...
plassey
08-13 10:48 AM
Congratulations but I was wondering if you are more an exception then a rule...:confused:
Yes, i opened a new thread so that everybody can see that CIS does mostly work on cases according to 485 Receipt Date. Otherwise i can't justify my EAD approval. I filed 485 and AP on June 18th and got RNs 2 weeks later. But EAD was filed later on July 12th. I got the receipt number for EAD from the back of my cashed check but never got actual Receipt Notice. Today i got the email that card production has been ordered.
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
Yes, i opened a new thread so that everybody can see that CIS does mostly work on cases according to 485 Receipt Date. Otherwise i can't justify my EAD approval. I filed 485 and AP on June 18th and got RNs 2 weeks later. But EAD was filed later on July 12th. I got the receipt number for EAD from the back of my cashed check but never got actual Receipt Notice. Today i got the email that card production has been ordered.
So if they have to approve an EAD filed in mid July, they must have gone with the 485 Receipt date. There is an LUD for our APs too for this Sunday. I'm happy that they are processing the cases in somewhat FIFO order. I was expecting EAD only 3-4months later since i filed it along with the July flood of applications.
Dec2002 EB3 India.
ssnd03
07-12 06:44 PM
The FBI name check is a bottleneck agreed. BUTTT It has NOTHING to do with the recent VB fiasco!
Some people were approved by the USCIS even WITHOUT the name checks. This is entirely a US Dept of State vs USCIS mess.
It certainly is US Dept of State vs USCIS lack of communication. But when there are so many pending I485s, the unused green card visas every year are due FBI background check delay.
Retrogression is due to more demand than supply and country quotas.
But yearly unused visas are due to FBI background check delay.
There is a clear difference.
Now the rumour that on July 1 some GCs were approved without FBI check completion maybe true. But that violation is a recent event. And there could be multitude of reasons for this violation. But it is a violation
Some people were approved by the USCIS even WITHOUT the name checks. This is entirely a US Dept of State vs USCIS mess.
It certainly is US Dept of State vs USCIS lack of communication. But when there are so many pending I485s, the unused green card visas every year are due FBI background check delay.
Retrogression is due to more demand than supply and country quotas.
But yearly unused visas are due to FBI background check delay.
There is a clear difference.
Now the rumour that on July 1 some GCs were approved without FBI check completion maybe true. But that violation is a recent event. And there could be multitude of reasons for this violation. But it is a violation
more...
Juan28210
11-06 11:48 AM
Thanks FinalGC!
Yes, I have that paid health benefits clause in my contract that I would use as counter-attack to my employer if they ever get back to me.
Yes, I have that paid health benefits clause in my contract that I would use as counter-attack to my employer if they ever get back to me.
2010 alljennette mccurdy suite
noone2day78
02-10 04:32 PM
Hi all,
I have received my EAD in oct 07 and my AP last month, with my spouse being primary applicant. Currently I am on h1b, however, I have a better offer at hand thro another employer who does not sponsor h1b. I was searching for posts on comparing h1b vs ead..but could not locate one.
Could someone enlighten me on this issue as to what wld be common issues that are raised if one switches to ead (other than the possibility of being out of status). I am presuming that if my spouse stays on h1b I can switch to h4 status if required?
Please advice..I need to make a decision this weekend!!
Thanks
San
I have received my EAD in oct 07 and my AP last month, with my spouse being primary applicant. Currently I am on h1b, however, I have a better offer at hand thro another employer who does not sponsor h1b. I was searching for posts on comparing h1b vs ead..but could not locate one.
Could someone enlighten me on this issue as to what wld be common issues that are raised if one switches to ead (other than the possibility of being out of status). I am presuming that if my spouse stays on h1b I can switch to h4 status if required?
Please advice..I need to make a decision this weekend!!
Thanks
San
more...
gc_on_demand
06-13 04:15 PM
Please call..
hair nathan kress and jennette
acecupid
02-24 02:43 PM
How long did you get extension for without purchase order or letter from client ?
more...
RDB
01-09 12:38 PM
This is probably not true - you can always show the landing stamp (of your destination country) to prove that you were out of US. Every country will stamp your passport on arrival.
It means that on paper you never left the US. In the meantime if your I-94 expired, you would technically be out of status in the US.
It means that on paper you never left the US. In the meantime if your I-94 expired, you would technically be out of status in the US.
hot Jennette McCurdy starred
TeddyKoochu
01-06 10:11 AM
Hey Teddy,
During you process for porting from EB3 to EB2 did you:
1. Do this within the same organization after getting your advanced degree?
2. Did you have to file for a new PERM and start from the begineeing under EB2?
3. Were you successfully able to port your PD or did you start with a new PD under EB2?
Hi Harry mine was an EB2 case to begin with, no porting. Only this is my timing was not correct and I missed the Jul 07 window, the labor filing took way too long. So kind of in the same boat as you, trying to find legal avenues to upgrade to EB1. Let�s wait for some advice to come by. Looking at your case as well I believe that EB1-A is the only option.
During you process for porting from EB3 to EB2 did you:
1. Do this within the same organization after getting your advanced degree?
2. Did you have to file for a new PERM and start from the begineeing under EB2?
3. Were you successfully able to port your PD or did you start with a new PD under EB2?
Hi Harry mine was an EB2 case to begin with, no porting. Only this is my timing was not correct and I missed the Jul 07 window, the labor filing took way too long. So kind of in the same boat as you, trying to find legal avenues to upgrade to EB1. Let�s wait for some advice to come by. Looking at your case as well I believe that EB1-A is the only option.
more...
house nathan kress and jennette
sravani
05-15 01:05 PM
Here's a rather strange and may be uncommon situation for someone I know who needs suggestions from gurus here...such huge PD movements do result in strange situations such as these :)
EB3 India Labor + I-140 certified with PD Feb 2003
EB2-140 pending at NSC hoping to port the EB3 PD date
So both cases are now current, which leads to a couple of options for AOS:
1. File based on approved EB3 (and risk a potential retrogression in future)
2. File based on pending EB2 140 before it is approved (and risk potential RFE, etc. and who knows if it would be too late to revert to the EB3)
The other option is to upgrade the EB2 140 to PP, but could you please list the relative merits of the above two options?
My case is also similar and I decided to go with EB2
My EB3 PD is Nov 2002. I got promotion this year and same company applied for my EB2 labor via Perm and got approved with in couple of months.
My attorney already filed my 485 application concurrently while applying for EB2 I-140 PD (PP) last month. I got an RFE(edu: 3 year Engineering degree). My EB2 I-140 is approved yesterday after receiving the RFE response. It's better to utilize the EB2 category if you can, in case if they decide to retrogress again, it's likely that you will get the GC soon with EB2 PD than EB3 PD.
EB3 India Labor + I-140 certified with PD Feb 2003
EB2-140 pending at NSC hoping to port the EB3 PD date
So both cases are now current, which leads to a couple of options for AOS:
1. File based on approved EB3 (and risk a potential retrogression in future)
2. File based on pending EB2 140 before it is approved (and risk potential RFE, etc. and who knows if it would be too late to revert to the EB3)
The other option is to upgrade the EB2 140 to PP, but could you please list the relative merits of the above two options?
My case is also similar and I decided to go with EB2
My EB3 PD is Nov 2002. I got promotion this year and same company applied for my EB2 labor via Perm and got approved with in couple of months.
My attorney already filed my 485 application concurrently while applying for EB2 I-140 PD (PP) last month. I got an RFE(edu: 3 year Engineering degree). My EB2 I-140 is approved yesterday after receiving the RFE response. It's better to utilize the EB2 category if you can, in case if they decide to retrogress again, it's likely that you will get the GC soon with EB2 PD than EB3 PD.
tattoo jennette mccurdy and nathan
ksiddaba
07-14 06:40 PM
Dallas, TX
more...
pictures is nathan kress and jennette
WeShallOvercome
07-20 02:11 PM
My H1 is expiring in Oct 2008 and my employer did not allow me to apply for EAD.
As for your questions, If you don't have a valid H1 and no EAD, you are out of status. That can have an adverse effect on your I-485 if such period exceeds 180 days.
about the 90-day thing, USCIS used to allow you to walk into a local office and get an interim EAD if your EAD application is pending for 90 days or more, but they seem to have discontinued that practice. Moreover, it will take much longer than 90 days now to get an EAD.
You can apply EAD yourself but you need the I-485 receipt notice for that and I'm sure such employer won't give that to you either.
As for your questions, If you don't have a valid H1 and no EAD, you are out of status. That can have an adverse effect on your I-485 if such period exceeds 180 days.
about the 90-day thing, USCIS used to allow you to walk into a local office and get an interim EAD if your EAD application is pending for 90 days or more, but they seem to have discontinued that practice. Moreover, it will take much longer than 90 days now to get an EAD.
You can apply EAD yourself but you need the I-485 receipt notice for that and I'm sure such employer won't give that to you either.
dresses is nathan kress and jennette
ronhira
09-27 12:51 AM
y not ask SEC or NASDAQ to file for your h1..... that should take care of things..... if u r making 10 trades in a day ..... during day time..... then u r actually not working in u'r real job..... y not have h1 for the job that u r really doing...... just trying to help by suggesting a way out.....
more...
makeup jennette mccurdy and nathan
Imigrait
09-07 02:15 PM
ok........ After thinking about it for a while, I think I have the answer now.
What zephyrr is saying is that you should be able to show that your promotion is a new job in itself and it is significantly different from the job you were doing prior to your filing for Green Card, although it might be in the same company.
What zephyrr is saying is that you should be able to show that your promotion is a new job in itself and it is significantly different from the job you were doing prior to your filing for Green Card, although it might be in the same company.
girlfriend nathan kress and jennette mccurdy. nathan kress and jennette
radhagd
03-09 03:19 PM
H1B is not required for filing Perm labour. You can file Labour in EB2 and after labour got approval you can file I140 along with Request to port PD. Once you get I140 approved with early PD on it,file another I485 under Consular Processing, when your dates are current. This will not effect your current EB3 I485.
hairstyles Jennette McCurdy Nathan
invincibleasian
02-10 05:27 PM
I hope they dont flood the US from UK now. Then we will have more retrogression!
vxg
09-03 01:43 PM
I am in the same boat as you.. See SLUD on both bases on 09/01/09 with EAC08** pending at TSC. Waiting.
Will add companionship i am at TSC with an EAC receipt no and still waiting wherein i see that they are approving cases with Dec 04 priority while folks with Jul 04 are still waiting. The RD and ND is useless too as i am seeing aprovals for folks who mailed there apps after me one guy posted on IV that he filed I-485 in 2008 with Dec 04 PD and got approval. This seems like last year where they completely ignored 2004 folks and approved 2005 and 2006 cases. I do not have much hope this month either.
Will add companionship i am at TSC with an EAC receipt no and still waiting wherein i see that they are approving cases with Dec 04 priority while folks with Jul 04 are still waiting. The RD and ND is useless too as i am seeing aprovals for folks who mailed there apps after me one guy posted on IV that he filed I-485 in 2008 with Dec 04 PD and got approval. This seems like last year where they completely ignored 2004 folks and approved 2005 and 2006 cases. I do not have much hope this month either.
kondur_007
06-08 02:09 PM
What if someone returned the initial I94 but not the latest one because we attched the wrong I94 portion, will we need to send the new I94 after extension back to USCIS as well?
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
In my opinion, you do not really have to. here are a few points (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Surrendering I 94 establishes the day/date when you left US.
2. If you have more than one I 94 (from the same entry), the "white one" will be attached to your passport and others (that came with extension or change of status) will be attached to your approval notices. THEY ALL ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SAME NUMBER. So, technically you have to surrender them all when you leave the country, but if you surrender any one of them, it still establishes the same thing and you do not need to do anything about the rest.
3. If you forgot to return I 94 altogether, keep a record of your leaving US on specific date (copy of boarding passes, passport stamp of entry in another country etc) and you can use that as an evidence of leaving in time (if asked about it in future). OR you can return your I 94 at a laterdate with these copies attached to USCIS.
I have not heard of anyone getting in trouble because of not returning I 94 (please correct me on this if any of you have heard of it) - as long as they did not overstay.
No comments:
Post a Comment