ramus
06-04 10:25 AM
Its old bill........IV has bill text on home page. We don't need to go anywhere to find text.
Please please send web-fax now if you have not already.
Thanks.
This is the text that i see on Govtrack.us
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-1348
Are we missing some thing here, I see SKILL is part of this draft!!:confused:
Please please send web-fax now if you have not already.
Thanks.
This is the text that i see on Govtrack.us
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s110-1348
Are we missing some thing here, I see SKILL is part of this draft!!:confused:
wallpaper Firetrap Vee Icon Rose
eagerr2i
09-17 03:03 PM
IV is not against H1B as such. Majority of IV members are presently on H1B program.
IV does not support the increase of H1B visa quota before the EB immigrant visa mess is cleared. Also, IV has comdemned every single abuse of of H1B by small consulting firms or the 'fly by night operators' who abuse the system by not paying the prevailing wages to employees or not paying them at all while the consultant is on bench.
One of the IV core members pointed out in a recent interview that in a recently released Government Accountability Office report on H-1Bs noting that in just 2005, there were 306,927 H-1B labor condition applications approved.
I am quoting him verbatim as per the report- "Now, consider the fact that in the entire 2000-2005 period, there were only 2,737 employees due back wages [as a penalty to errant employers who broke the rules and underpaid a H-1B employee]. That is not even one percent of just one year's applications — forget about five years worth of applications," .
IV does not support the increase of H1B visa quota before the EB immigrant visa mess is cleared. Also, IV has comdemned every single abuse of of H1B by small consulting firms or the 'fly by night operators' who abuse the system by not paying the prevailing wages to employees or not paying them at all while the consultant is on bench.
One of the IV core members pointed out in a recent interview that in a recently released Government Accountability Office report on H-1Bs noting that in just 2005, there were 306,927 H-1B labor condition applications approved.
I am quoting him verbatim as per the report- "Now, consider the fact that in the entire 2000-2005 period, there were only 2,737 employees due back wages [as a penalty to errant employers who broke the rules and underpaid a H-1B employee]. That is not even one percent of just one year's applications — forget about five years worth of applications," .
goel_ar
12-18 06:05 PM
Hi All,
SSN office finally responded but they rejected the application. The reason specified is "department of homeland securiy is unable to verify my document. and you should contact the agency to clarify my current immigration status".
I can't start working until I get SSN as it is small company. I am their first H1 employee.
The law firm told my company that my payroll can be run using my ITIN but payroll company refused to run payroll using ITIN & asked for SSN instead.
Any suggestions , asap, will be greatly apprciated.
I am not sure who am I suppose to contact. Please help...
I am really afraid & depressed.
Thanks,
LG
SSN office finally responded but they rejected the application. The reason specified is "department of homeland securiy is unable to verify my document. and you should contact the agency to clarify my current immigration status".
I can't start working until I get SSN as it is small company. I am their first H1 employee.
The law firm told my company that my payroll can be run using my ITIN but payroll company refused to run payroll using ITIN & asked for SSN instead.
Any suggestions , asap, will be greatly apprciated.
I am not sure who am I suppose to contact. Please help...
I am really afraid & depressed.
Thanks,
LG
2011 American Idol icon William
abhijitp
07-08 07:48 PM
I was wondering if we have approached "Consulate General of India" and Ministry for Immigrant Indians (Aapravasi Bhartiya Mantralaya) and check if they can help us in this visa fiasco. Indian statesman and good enough in visiting America to get foreign investment at the state or central level, but where do they stand when the same disapora need their help to find injustice they face on the foreign land. Any thoughts?
May be we can get their help to gather support from pro India congressmen and senators
Sounds like a good idea.
May be we can get their help to gather support from pro India congressmen and senators
Sounds like a good idea.
more...
mhtanim
09-15 02:05 PM
I can see it. Refresh your browser
Thanks inskrish for the news.
Anyway, the Proc. dates are a heap of bull shit. The NSC Proc date for I-485 says July 08 2007. We all know the dates were 'U' and noone could have filed a I-485 between July 2 - July 17th (July 2 fiasco). So how can the oldest application that the NSC is blocked on can be dated July 08 2007 !!!
Even if they came across ineligible applications like that, wouldn't they just outright reject them and quickly move on to some other application that they can process??? Why would they consider themselves blocked on such application(s) and issue the processing date to reflect such transient status ???
Some people actually did file during July 2 through July 17 and I am one of them. My law firm (one of the top immigration law firms) was actively involved with the AILF to file the lawsuit against DOS at that time. The law firm recommended all their clients to file I-485 even after July 1st as they though AILF has really good chances of winning the lawsuit.
Thanks inskrish for the news.
Anyway, the Proc. dates are a heap of bull shit. The NSC Proc date for I-485 says July 08 2007. We all know the dates were 'U' and noone could have filed a I-485 between July 2 - July 17th (July 2 fiasco). So how can the oldest application that the NSC is blocked on can be dated July 08 2007 !!!
Even if they came across ineligible applications like that, wouldn't they just outright reject them and quickly move on to some other application that they can process??? Why would they consider themselves blocked on such application(s) and issue the processing date to reflect such transient status ???
Some people actually did file during July 2 through July 17 and I am one of them. My law firm (one of the top immigration law firms) was actively involved with the AILF to file the lawsuit against DOS at that time. The law firm recommended all their clients to file I-485 even after July 1st as they though AILF has really good chances of winning the lawsuit.
help43
09-10 10:12 PM
H1-B amendment how many days it will take because my opt is going to expire in the month of december.
To get the h-1b appoval i have waited like 6 months.So how many days it will take for h1-b amendment?
If it got rejected while processing under h1-b amendment then what do i need to do to stay in the usa?
To get the h-1b appoval i have waited like 6 months.So how many days it will take for h1-b amendment?
If it got rejected while processing under h1-b amendment then what do i need to do to stay in the usa?
more...
rogerdepena
08-01 10:17 PM
i guess they are already issuing receipt number for I485 received aug. 1, 2007. so where is mine????
Receipt Number: lin07223500XX
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On August 1, 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 when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
EAD:
Receipt Number: lin0722353XXX
Application Type: I765, APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On August 1, 2007, we received this I765 APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION, 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 when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
Receipt Number: lin07223500XX
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On August 1, 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 when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
EAD:
Receipt Number: lin0722353XXX
Application Type: I765, APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On August 1, 2007, we received this I765 APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION, 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 when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
2010 Junior Icon goggle age
raysaikat
05-30 10:40 PM
Thanks a lot for the information.
I am just concerned about the fact that I do not have a job and have been unemployed for more than the 90 day OPT period. I'm not sure what my status is,given such a scenario.
Thanks!
You are allowed a maximum of 90 days of unemployment during the 12 month OPT period. After that, you are accumulating out of status days. I do not know what is the penalty for out of status days --- typically more than 180 days of out of status days are bad.
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-7427.htm
2. Periods of Unemployment During OPT
DHS regulations currently define the period of an F-1 student's
status as the time the student is pursuing a full course of study at an
SEVP-certified school or engaging in authorized post-completion OPT. 8
CFR 214.2(f)(5). They do not specify how much time the student may be
unemployed, making it difficult to determine when an unemployed student
on post-completion OPT violates the requirements for remaining in F-1
status. As status during OPT is based on the premise that the F-1
student is working, there must be a limit on unemployment, just as the
F-1 student's period in school is based on the premise that he is
actually pursuing a full-time course of study, and there are limits on
how often the student can reduce his course load. An F-1 student who
drops out of school or does not pursue a full-time course of study
loses status; an F-1 student with OPT who is unemployed for a
significant period should similarly put his status in jeopardy.
Therefore, this rule specifies an aggregate maximum allowed period of
unemployment of 90 days for students on 12-month OPT. This maximum
period increases by 30 days for F-1 students who have an approved 17-
month OPT period. In addition to clarifying the student's status, this
measure allows time for job searches or a break when switching
employers.
http://www.ice.gov/sevis/updates_postcompletion_opt.htm#_Toc174419546
4.9. Unemployment time
The time spent without a qualifying job during post-completion OPT. Except as noted in the section on what counts as time unemployed, each day that the student is not employed in a qualifying job, is counted toward the limit on unemployment time. The limit is 90 days for students on post-completion OPT including those with a cap gap extension, except that students with a STEM OPT extension are given an additional 30 days of unemployment time for a maximum of 120 days.
I am just concerned about the fact that I do not have a job and have been unemployed for more than the 90 day OPT period. I'm not sure what my status is,given such a scenario.
Thanks!
You are allowed a maximum of 90 days of unemployment during the 12 month OPT period. After that, you are accumulating out of status days. I do not know what is the penalty for out of status days --- typically more than 180 days of out of status days are bad.
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-7427.htm
2. Periods of Unemployment During OPT
DHS regulations currently define the period of an F-1 student's
status as the time the student is pursuing a full course of study at an
SEVP-certified school or engaging in authorized post-completion OPT. 8
CFR 214.2(f)(5). They do not specify how much time the student may be
unemployed, making it difficult to determine when an unemployed student
on post-completion OPT violates the requirements for remaining in F-1
status. As status during OPT is based on the premise that the F-1
student is working, there must be a limit on unemployment, just as the
F-1 student's period in school is based on the premise that he is
actually pursuing a full-time course of study, and there are limits on
how often the student can reduce his course load. An F-1 student who
drops out of school or does not pursue a full-time course of study
loses status; an F-1 student with OPT who is unemployed for a
significant period should similarly put his status in jeopardy.
Therefore, this rule specifies an aggregate maximum allowed period of
unemployment of 90 days for students on 12-month OPT. This maximum
period increases by 30 days for F-1 students who have an approved 17-
month OPT period. In addition to clarifying the student's status, this
measure allows time for job searches or a break when switching
employers.
http://www.ice.gov/sevis/updates_postcompletion_opt.htm#_Toc174419546
4.9. Unemployment time
The time spent without a qualifying job during post-completion OPT. Except as noted in the section on what counts as time unemployed, each day that the student is not employed in a qualifying job, is counted toward the limit on unemployment time. The limit is 90 days for students on post-completion OPT including those with a cap gap extension, except that students with a STEM OPT extension are given an additional 30 days of unemployment time for a maximum of 120 days.
more...
signin241
07-24 08:39 PM
Problem is that Affidavits and the Birth certificate has their names in 1 way and that is different when compared to the passport. That's the problem.
hair rose, icon,
needhelp!
08-30 05:33 PM
As IV grows up, we should have a hall of fame for folks like you who have shown continued support to the cause. I am here now because I am affected, but to be here after its all said and done, is greatness.
more...
ranahosur
07-15 07:39 PM
I got an offer from a company, it is not a consulting company. In the offer letter it is mentioned that in case I leave the company or they terminate my employment (there is no time limit for this clause), I will have to pay back H1 cost. (The word H1 cost is mentioned).
I would like to know if this is something I will have to be scared about? I know that it is illegal to ask for H1 cost.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
R
I would like to know if this is something I will have to be scared about? I know that it is illegal to ask for H1 cost.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks
R
hot Hand-Drawn Social Media Icon
indio0617
09-28 05:04 PM
I am sure USCIS will break this law on numerous counts on Oct 1st as all the July 2nd filers will have past 90 days on that day.
They have already got around it. They ARE NOT receipting the applications on the actual date they receive them. They are stamping the received dates only when they 'enter' it into their system.
They have already got around it. They ARE NOT receipting the applications on the actual date they receive them. They are stamping the received dates only when they 'enter' it into their system.
more...
house Icon Fill Zip Basic - $50.00
Anders �stberg
May 1st, 2005, 12:22 PM
Tried taking some motocross pictures at a local practice track, I hope to do this more. I didn't have time for more angles, I'd like to try a hairpin for some gravel spray at accelleration too. Had some problems with the timing as this is my first time with this sport, lots of cut off heads and feet. :)
Something I notice myself is that maybe I should try shooting with a longer shutter time (how long?) to get some movement in the wheels? I'd appreciate any tips!
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8291.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8320.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8256.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8264.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8313.jpg
Something I notice myself is that maybe I should try shooting with a longer shutter time (how long?) to get some movement in the wheels? I'd appreciate any tips!
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8291.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8320.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8256.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8264.jpg
http://www.andersostberg.com/fotogalleri/albums/Motocross_2005-05-01/JH5Q8313.jpg
tattoo Icon Rose Jewelry Gift
vgc
07-26 10:37 AM
SA 2428. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 2638, making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated to employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
[Page: S9966] GPO's PDF ``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. EMPLOYMENT-BASED VISAS.
(a) Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas.--Section 106(d) of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-313; 8 U.S.C. 1153 note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by inserting ``1994, 1996, 1997, 1998,'' after ``available in fiscal year'';
(B) by striking ``or 2004'' and inserting ``2004, or 2006''; and
(C) by striking ``be available'' and all that follows and inserting the following: ``be available only to--
``(A) employment-based immigrants under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(b));
``(B) the family members accompanying or following to join such employment-based immigrants under section 203(d) of such Act; and
``(C) those immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor.''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1999 through 2004'' and inserting ``1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by amending clause (ii) to read as follows:
``(ii) DISTRIBUTION OF VISAS.--The total number of visas made available under paragraph (1) from unused visas from fiscal years 1994, 1996 through 1998, 2001 through 2004, and 2006 shall be distributed as follows:
``(I) The total number of visas made available for immigrant workers who had petitions approved based on Schedule A, Group I under section 656.5 of title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, as promulgated by the Secretary of Labor shall be 61,000.
``(II) The visas remaining from the total made available under subclause (I) shall be allocated to employment-based immigrants with approved petitions under paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of section 203(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (and their family members accompanying or following to join).''.
(b) H-1B Visa Availability.--Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended--
(1) in clause (vi), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) by redesignating clause (vii) as clause (ix); and
(3) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
[Page: S9966] GPO's PDF ``(vii) 65,000 in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2007;
``(viii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2008; and''.
more...
pictures AVA logo
simplistik
03-07 08:42 AM
I was the first to show my site, then paddy, then dark and then fern so i really dont see any influence may it be progressive or negative...Hmmm.... I thought paddy was first. Regaurdless that's just my opinion... I mean techincally you were all influenced by the sony site :P. But end dates on things like these types of compitetions are important, what you do is you give a specified time to have them linked up. Give somethin like a 6ish hr gap to have them up or post the link... then close it if they aren't up.
Anywho... gj guys... but I shall not say who I voted for :krazy: don't go tellin on me you silly Mods you. :p:
Anywho... gj guys... but I shall not say who I voted for :krazy: don't go tellin on me you silly Mods you. :p:
dresses rose icon sizes are stored
GCard_Dream
06-29 03:58 PM
It is a shady practice. The main reason an employer wouldn't give you a copy of a I-140 is that if you were to leave company A and company B sponsors you for GC, you can keep your old priority date. But that is only possible if you can furnish a copy of approved I-140 to INS. It is such a stupid practice on part of INS to request the petitioner to provide a copy of something (like I-140) that they themselves approved and should already have a record of. But I don't think anyone expects any better from INS anyway.
I agree that it is a employer driven petition but the employer purposely holds the information back so that they have more control over the employees decision making ( specially if the employee is thinking about leaving the company).
This is not a shady practice. The employer had petitioned for a labor certification earlier to sponsor GC for an employee who might have left the company. Now they filled the position with you, so its perfectly alright to use the same petition for you.
As far as the documents are concerned, they are employer centric and they have no reason to give them to you. You will have nothing to do with those even if you get them. If the only purpose you want to solve is to know whether or not your labor and I40 were infact approved as your employer says, you should request your employer to show you a copy.
The copies are wothless to you if you leave the company anyways, before you get an EAD.
Don't heed the advise of people who ask you to find a better employer. Such people are only trying to get their own GCs faster, since there will be one less person with an earlier priority date.
I agree that it is a employer driven petition but the employer purposely holds the information back so that they have more control over the employees decision making ( specially if the employee is thinking about leaving the company).
This is not a shady practice. The employer had petitioned for a labor certification earlier to sponsor GC for an employee who might have left the company. Now they filled the position with you, so its perfectly alright to use the same petition for you.
As far as the documents are concerned, they are employer centric and they have no reason to give them to you. You will have nothing to do with those even if you get them. If the only purpose you want to solve is to know whether or not your labor and I40 were infact approved as your employer says, you should request your employer to show you a copy.
The copies are wothless to you if you leave the company anyways, before you get an EAD.
Don't heed the advise of people who ask you to find a better employer. Such people are only trying to get their own GCs faster, since there will be one less person with an earlier priority date.
more...
makeup Safari rose Icon
sparky_jones
09-15 12:52 PM
Any ideas? (My wife and son are in india now).
Anyway, I will support IV wholeheartedly going forward. Of course, I got benefitted from it. I am a long timer, 2001, EB3.
Congrats. Good to see an EB3-I approval. This is something we get to see rarely here. Hope you are able to celebrate with your family soon!
Anyway, I will support IV wholeheartedly going forward. Of course, I got benefitted from it. I am a long timer, 2001, EB3.
Congrats. Good to see an EB3-I approval. This is something we get to see rarely here. Hope you are able to celebrate with your family soon!
girlfriend vector : rose flower icon
optimist578
11-24 08:02 PM
I forgot to mention that I also have a valid h1b visa. I don't intend to use my EAD. So in that case if I go back to f1, what will happen to my PD and 485 application?
or is it better to fall back on EAD and continue with education? Please advice!
Optimist578 - can you please let us know what you find out from your attorney?
thanks a lotsxk
I am planning to pursue my studies part-time, while working fulltime on H1B or EAD. If you move to F1 visa, you will have to forego your immigration application. To apply for immigration later will require you to start all over again. It is unbelievable !! :mad:
So, depending upon your age and other factors, you should consider studying part-time or wait till you get your GC.
------------------------
EB3 March 2003
AOS RD: June 22 '07
EAD, AP Received
or is it better to fall back on EAD and continue with education? Please advice!
Optimist578 - can you please let us know what you find out from your attorney?
thanks a lotsxk
I am planning to pursue my studies part-time, while working fulltime on H1B or EAD. If you move to F1 visa, you will have to forego your immigration application. To apply for immigration later will require you to start all over again. It is unbelievable !! :mad:
So, depending upon your age and other factors, you should consider studying part-time or wait till you get your GC.
------------------------
EB3 March 2003
AOS RD: June 22 '07
EAD, AP Received
hairstyles Rose Tag Icons include 12
lvinaykumar
07-02 02:16 PM
all i can say is they are taking us for granted. If we don't do anything about it they will continue to do this again and again. We should fight back. Put a lawsuit. I have take a vacation to get the documents done and also pay for my medical exam. Which costed me lot of money. I don't mind spending few more to fight for what was taken away from me..
I am going to contribute as soon as i get my pay check this month.....Lets fight.
I am going to contribute as soon as i get my pay check this month.....Lets fight.
GCNirvana007
10-08 04:14 PM
I got my green card from Company A. During my labor process i renewed my H1B from Company B which expired last month.
Right now who is my employer Company A or B or none of the above?.
Right now who is my employer Company A or B or none of the above?.
yagw
07-11 06:35 PM
Beware...read this:
http://www.usimmigration.net/images/7-8-08_Debarment_of_a_Software_Co_from_PERM_filings_fo r_3_yrs.pdf
Just an FYI, this company is the one that develops SW to help attorneys in filing the PERM. Looks like they used the USCIS website as a testing place for their SW and hence the debarment. Should not be a problem for most of the companies (wonder any?) out there.
From the announcement:
"..
LawLogix submitted more than 100 applications
using the permanent program�s online filing system in the last year, apparently for the
sole purpose of testing the parameters of the department�s electronic processing system.
...
"
http://www.usimmigration.net/images/7-8-08_Debarment_of_a_Software_Co_from_PERM_filings_fo r_3_yrs.pdf
Just an FYI, this company is the one that develops SW to help attorneys in filing the PERM. Looks like they used the USCIS website as a testing place for their SW and hence the debarment. Should not be a problem for most of the companies (wonder any?) out there.
From the announcement:
"..
LawLogix submitted more than 100 applications
using the permanent program�s online filing system in the last year, apparently for the
sole purpose of testing the parameters of the department�s electronic processing system.
...
"
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire