nixstor
07-11 11:09 AM
Why not? USCIS already approved 60K 485 applications in 2 weeks time. How come they cannot do the same with some extra money (i.e. premium processing). They can do anything if want to do.
:mad:
Premium processing does not necessarily mean that it should be done in 15 days. It depends on the complexity of the application. We all know how complex 485 is because of the name check.
The premium processing can cost 1000-1500/more for 485 and should be done in 6 months. They can use the PP money to expedite their name checks. I am not sure what kind of issues USCIS will have implementing this
:mad:
Premium processing does not necessarily mean that it should be done in 15 days. It depends on the complexity of the application. We all know how complex 485 is because of the name check.
The premium processing can cost 1000-1500/more for 485 and should be done in 6 months. They can use the PP money to expedite their name checks. I am not sure what kind of issues USCIS will have implementing this
wallpaper cute friend quotes for picnik.
Mohit_Malkani
10-08 11:13 AM
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
kannan
07-28 10:25 PM
I too got the same two mails. First mail on 20 th and last mail on 22 nd.Mine is approved from Texas on JAN 2006.My PD is Nov 2005,but I used only PD to apply I-485.My current AOS is from another company.Did you or your lawyer get any postal mail?
2011 cute friend quotes for picnik.
rvendra
05-25 01:55 PM
My case transferred to USCIS local office and below is the case status:
EB 2 Dec 15 2003 - No updates so far
This case has been sent to another office for processing and on September 18, 2009 we sent you a notice explaining this action. Please follow any instructions on this notice. You will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something from you. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283.
EB 2 Dec 15 2003 - No updates so far
This case has been sent to another office for processing and on September 18, 2009 we sent you a notice explaining this action. Please follow any instructions on this notice. You will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something from you. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address or call our customer service center at 1-800-375-5283.
more...
rally
09-17 06:07 PM
Congrats on getting ur recepit!
Did your apps get transferred to Texas/Cal service centres? Does your recepit have LIN/SRC/WAC prefixes?
Thanks a lot!
Did your apps get transferred to Texas/Cal service centres? Does your recepit have LIN/SRC/WAC prefixes?
Thanks a lot!
delax
08-03 09:39 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
Not only July 2nd but probably 1000s of 2004 PDs with July 2 as RD are waiting......Its great to see 2006 approvals - at least USCIS is working......but FIFO does not exist in their dictionary.....Its probably LIFO....
Not only July 2nd but probably 1000s of 2004 PDs with July 2 as RD are waiting......Its great to see 2006 approvals - at least USCIS is working......but FIFO does not exist in their dictionary.....Its probably LIFO....
more...
TexDBoy
11-10 02:29 PM
I did in SFO with an expired visa but with an valid H1B 797 document and they gave an 10 year validity passport.
Seems weird in your case ...
Seems weird in your case ...
2010 cute friend quotes for picnik.
pansworld
07-07 04:26 PM
But at least they will be alerted to a problem. Maybe someone will take notice. Maybe they wont. If not we will figure something else out...my two cents
more...
Anders �stberg
June 4th, 2004, 02:24 PM
:D :D
That's funny!
And, I don't mind at all. :)
That's funny!
And, I don't mind at all. :)
hair cute quotes for picnik
eb3retro
07-16 01:27 PM
Thanks Raj. I am sure this will be helpful to many other people here too. Appreciate your time to write it as points.
The porting of PD is during I-140 filing. So there isn't any day limits as to when you can join the new company. If you leave your current company the only thing that you can carry over is the PD from your approved I-140. So this is what you should do.
1. Join the new company (the client of your current company)
2. Have them file labor certification.
3. Once labor approved while filing new I-140 your attorney need to request port of PD from your previously approved I-140.
That is all it takes. This is a standard process.
Make sure to get a legible copy of the approved I-140, not the courtesy copy, you need the actual I-140 approval. On Courtesy copy they clearly say that, using that copy you cannot claim it as a proof of approval/any benefit out of that. So that is important.
Also get all your experience letters. The new attorney might ask for it at the stage of filing labor itself.
Hope this clears your hold up.
PM me if you need further clarification.
Good luck on your new job.
-Raj:)
The porting of PD is during I-140 filing. So there isn't any day limits as to when you can join the new company. If you leave your current company the only thing that you can carry over is the PD from your approved I-140. So this is what you should do.
1. Join the new company (the client of your current company)
2. Have them file labor certification.
3. Once labor approved while filing new I-140 your attorney need to request port of PD from your previously approved I-140.
That is all it takes. This is a standard process.
Make sure to get a legible copy of the approved I-140, not the courtesy copy, you need the actual I-140 approval. On Courtesy copy they clearly say that, using that copy you cannot claim it as a proof of approval/any benefit out of that. So that is important.
Also get all your experience letters. The new attorney might ask for it at the stage of filing labor itself.
Hope this clears your hold up.
PM me if you need further clarification.
Good luck on your new job.
-Raj:)
more...
Redeye
12-12 04:12 PM
I know one of my friend is EB2 PD 1999, stuck in namecheck.
Thanks
Thanks
hot Picnik Quotes Of knowing what
gotgc?
02-03 10:45 AM
Hi All,
I am planning to travel to India via London, UK. I am trying to see if it requires a transit Visa.
I am on H1B/AOS status but without valid visa stamp and travelling with Advance Parole. I have checked the UK Consulate page UK Border Agency | Who is exempt from having to hold a direct airside transit visa? (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/travellingtotheuk/transitthroughtheuk/transitdocuments/exempt/) it mentions that Indian passport holders needs a transit visa but with following exemptions;
one of them is a a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002; Since I hold canadian permanent resident card, is it ok I can travel without UK transit Visa through UK? Based on this page, I thought so, but my travel agent said to double check eventhough I have a canadian permanent resident card, I am travelling to and from USA. Has any one done this before - travelled with canadian PR to/from USA through UK? Whom should I confirm with?
Passengers exempt from the DATV requirement
Holders of certain documents are, regardless of nationality, exempt from the requirement to hold a Direct Airside Transit Visa when transiting the UK.
A transit passenger is not required to hold a transit visa if he holds, or a person with whom he arrives in the United Kingdom holds on his behalf:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country for which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country for which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which they last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a valid visa for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998; or a U.S Visa Foil endorsed, "NOT A VISA. FOIL PREPARED AT DHS REQUEST" does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (for example, a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (for example, Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
I am planning to travel to India via London, UK. I am trying to see if it requires a transit Visa.
I am on H1B/AOS status but without valid visa stamp and travelling with Advance Parole. I have checked the UK Consulate page UK Border Agency | Who is exempt from having to hold a direct airside transit visa? (http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/travellingtotheuk/transitthroughtheuk/transitdocuments/exempt/) it mentions that Indian passport holders needs a transit visa but with following exemptions;
one of them is a a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002; Since I hold canadian permanent resident card, is it ok I can travel without UK transit Visa through UK? Based on this page, I thought so, but my travel agent said to double check eventhough I have a canadian permanent resident card, I am travelling to and from USA. Has any one done this before - travelled with canadian PR to/from USA through UK? Whom should I confirm with?
Passengers exempt from the DATV requirement
Holders of certain documents are, regardless of nationality, exempt from the requirement to hold a Direct Airside Transit Visa when transiting the UK.
A transit passenger is not required to hold a transit visa if he holds, or a person with whom he arrives in the United Kingdom holds on his behalf:
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from another country or territory to the country for which the visa is held;
a valid visa for entry to Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America and a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from the country for which the visa is held to another country or territory;
a valid airline ticket for travel via the United Kingdom as part of a journey from Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America to another country or territory, provided that the transit passenger does not seek to transit the United Kingdom on a date more than six months from the date on which they last entered Australia, Canada, New Zealand or the United States of America with a valid visa for entry to that country;
a valid USA I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21st April 1998;
a valid Canadian Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 28th June 2002;
a valid common format Category D visa for entry to an EEA State;
a valid common format residence permit issued by an EEA State pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) No. 1030/2002;
a diplomatic or service passport issued by the People�s Republic of China; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by India; or
a diplomatic or official passport issued by Vietnam.
Notes:
A valid U.S. immigrant visa packet (form 155A/155B) is a valid visa for DATV exemption purposes.
An expired I-551 Permanent Resident Card issued on or after 21 April 1998 when accompanied by an I-797 letter issued by the Bureau of Citizenship authorising its extension, exempts the holder from the DATV requirement.
Holding either an I-512 Parole letter or an I-797C (Notice of Action) instead of a valid U.S. visa; or a Transportation Letter instead of a valid U.S. Permanent Residence Card issued on or after 21 April 1998; or a U.S Visa Foil endorsed, "NOT A VISA. FOIL PREPARED AT DHS REQUEST" does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Holding a valid travel document with a U.S. ADIT stamp worded � �Processed for I-551. TEMPORARY EVIDENCE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE VALID UNTIL�. EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZED� does NOT qualify for exemption from the DAT visa requirement.
Whether holders of non-national (including refugee travel documents) require a DATV depends on their nationality and whether they qualify for one of the exemptions listed above. So, for instance, the holder of a non-national travel document (for example, a refugee travel document) who is a national or a citizen of one of the countries listed on the DATV list (for example, Afghanistan) will require a direct airside transit visa if they are travelling to the UK to transit on to a third country.
more...
house cute quotes for picnik
simple1
06-18 06:22 PM
I know that is a problem. We all are aware of EB3@U.
My question was Is there any problem specific to ROW that is not faced by non-ROW ?
I don�t want to carry this (ROW non-ROW) conversation forward.
Letus focus on, What is in CIR for legal immigration ?
Last time I checked EB3 for ROW was "U". Did you somehow get "U" confused with "C" or have you stopped looking at visa bulletins?
Just so you know, EB3-ROW has the exact same issue at the EB3-India; they are both unavailable. Is that not a problem? Don't take my word for it, just look at the recent visa bulletins.
Having said that, if you don't know what all the problems are with different preference categories for ROW or non-ROW then may be you need to spend some time educating yourself before making statements suggesting that ROW does't need any relief or only Indians are suffering through the EB mess.
My question was Is there any problem specific to ROW that is not faced by non-ROW ?
I don�t want to carry this (ROW non-ROW) conversation forward.
Letus focus on, What is in CIR for legal immigration ?
Last time I checked EB3 for ROW was "U". Did you somehow get "U" confused with "C" or have you stopped looking at visa bulletins?
Just so you know, EB3-ROW has the exact same issue at the EB3-India; they are both unavailable. Is that not a problem? Don't take my word for it, just look at the recent visa bulletins.
Having said that, if you don't know what all the problems are with different preference categories for ROW or non-ROW then may be you need to spend some time educating yourself before making statements suggesting that ROW does't need any relief or only Indians are suffering through the EB mess.
tattoo cute quotes for picnik
GCBy3000
09-15 05:03 PM
My argument is it better to take a side on immigration issue or not. Maintaining status quo is better than including some releif for legal immigrants. I bet people in US like legal immigrants to legal immigrants, but how many people is ?. Will this favor any politicians to garner some votes or will it back fire? No one knows and that is why I said at this time of election period, it is better for them to maintain status quo than favoring legal immigrants.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
I am not sure if this is entirely true. Yes we can't vote but folks who are pro-immigrant can and they will decide if legal immigration is good for this country or not. Trust me, if everyone was against legal immigration in this country then none of us would be here in the first place. Everyone knows that there is a shortage of labor and migrants are needed to fill the jobs. ............
.
If they pass something for legal immigrants for sure they are going to lose some votes who are favoring illegal immigrants which is bigger number than people favoring legals. So I dont think they will take a risk at this time to favor legal immigrants in any bills if at all there is one before the election.
I am not sure if this is entirely true. Yes we can't vote but folks who are pro-immigrant can and they will decide if legal immigration is good for this country or not. Trust me, if everyone was against legal immigration in this country then none of us would be here in the first place. Everyone knows that there is a shortage of labor and migrants are needed to fill the jobs. ............
.
more...
pictures Picnik Quotes Of knowing what
monkeyman
10-17 01:51 PM
Do women have to fill in the DS 157?
It shows up as a required to fill form for my wife?
Yes - now its based on age. You do not require DS-157 for children and seniors. Everyone else requires that.
It shows up as a required to fill form for my wife?
Yes - now its based on age. You do not require DS-157 for children and seniors. Everyone else requires that.
dresses Cute Quotes For Pictures Of
johnamit
07-18 09:47 AM
this window of opportunity to file 485 till August 17th will provide some interim benefits to most of us but we are destined to see long long wait before 485 approval. So I suggest we keep doing our efforts to get achieve other goals like recapture of unused visa number and things of that nature. We need a course of action to raise our voice which could include interaction with congresswoman, rally, letters from Hitech industry leaders and other things of this nature. I am hoping Core will come up with a plan soon.
more...
makeup friendship sayings for picnik.
admin
05-08 07:09 AM
I would like to know, can I get my H-1B at 6.0 year of my H-4 with my spouse�s approved I-140 (affected by EB-3 retrogression)?
As per an article in murthy.com - http://murthy.com/news/n_h1bnew.html - USCIS might soon introduce a memo that would decouple the 6 year limit for H1b from the limit for H4. If that is the case, once can be on H4 for 6 years and then 6 years on H1B.
As per an article in murthy.com - http://murthy.com/news/n_h1bnew.html - USCIS might soon introduce a memo that would decouple the 6 year limit for H1b from the limit for H4. If that is the case, once can be on H4 for 6 years and then 6 years on H1B.
girlfriend Cute+picnik+quotes
Canadian_Dream
11-30 05:51 PM
Document mailed for I-131 means actual Advance Parole document is mailed.For I-485 it could be RFE, based on what is written below the status. Like we have requested additional evidence etc.
Canadian_Dream
Does the status 'Document mailed to applicant' mean a RFE?.:eek:
Canadian_Dream
Does the status 'Document mailed to applicant' mean a RFE?.:eek:
hairstyles cute friend quotes for picnik.
conundrum
03-28 10:01 AM
Great for us...aren't are Indian PHD's in the US are as scholarly and motivated as before? lol To think that there are left over visas in this category beats me ! :D
Having a PhD alone doesn't put you in EB1. Everything depends on the job requirement. You can have a PhD and still be in EB3 if the job that you are working doesn't require an advanced degree.
Having a PhD alone doesn't put you in EB1. Everything depends on the job requirement. You can have a PhD and still be in EB3 if the job that you are working doesn't require an advanced degree.
atlgc
11-09 09:32 AM
the attroney preparing with masters plus 7 years experience
he says not every application get audited but there are chances
per him its not post masters years ,its over all experience
he says not every application get audited but there are chances
per him its not post masters years ,its over all experience
espoir
07-07 12:33 PM
I just gave 5 stars
No comments:
Post a Comment