chanduv23
05-21 01:14 PM
Thanks guys. I am going to Lake George by NY-Canada border and this seems like good info. But I am from NJ and we have the new tamper proof Drivers licenses which show immigration status and you need to produce all immigration papers to get one. Isn't that enough??
Carry ur passport and h1b ddocument - DL is not enough
Carry ur passport and h1b ddocument - DL is not enough
wallpaper ronaldo cristiano girlfriend
sanju_dba
01-04 12:12 PM
i would prefer to be a documentary instead of a feature film!
franklin
07-20 08:43 PM
To my knowledge, neither paystubs, W2s nor tax returns are required for filing.
However, some attorneys (mine included) requested my tax returns for the last few years. I think this is so they are prepared just in case of RFE on something?
To answer the original question with a quote from my grandmother whenever I whined, "but that's not fair" as a kid, "Life never is"
The law is the law. We abide by them. We can lobby for changes to said law if we believe they are incorrect, but we don't break them before they are changed.
However, some attorneys (mine included) requested my tax returns for the last few years. I think this is so they are prepared just in case of RFE on something?
To answer the original question with a quote from my grandmother whenever I whined, "but that's not fair" as a kid, "Life never is"
The law is the law. We abide by them. We can lobby for changes to said law if we believe they are incorrect, but we don't break them before they are changed.
2011 Cristiano Ronaldo Girlfriend
baleraosreedhar
01-08 12:53 PM
My wife had recently changed her status from H4 to H1 and had applied her SSN and got it.
So i dont think there's any new rule.
if you have a valid I94 then it should not cause any issue
So i dont think there's any new rule.
if you have a valid I94 then it should not cause any issue
more...
morchu
07-26 04:36 AM
Check the labor laws. Sometimes the 60 days notice requirement maybe voided by law. Also check the exact terminology in the job contract. Binding you to an employment via any kind of contract is not authorized.
Anyway, even if you send the AC21 letter after this 60 days, it still should be OK. You may not even get an intention to denial letter, because revocation of 140 takes time as well. Even if you get the letter, you can reply to it mentioning your job change, and ac21 invocation, and it should be OK.
In the worst case scenario, you can always file a new LC and 140 with your new employer and still keep the old priority date (even after revocation of old 140, just keep the copy of old 140 approval letter). That way you will be in same exact state in less than a year (PERM takes around 3....4 months, 140 premiumprocess takes less than 2 weeks, and most probably you may not be too far from current, and can file 485).
As a whole, my suggestion would be that, don't let a pending green card process stop your career growth. You never know how LONG you might stay in halt state in your career, if you do that, especially because of the whole GC processe's ultimate uncertainty.
There is always ways out (AC21, newGC process but same priority date etc.)
And in the worst case it may get a bit delay for your final GC approval. But I tend to think, that is OK when compared with a steady career growth.
If you tend to stuck with the same employer, in halt state of your career growth, merely because of GC process, in the end, after getting the GC approval, you will realize that it was foolishness and getting GC a bit earlier was not that important.
Well the above is my personal opinion. Ultimately it is your choice.
-Morchu
My question is:
My I-485 is pending for more than 180 days and I have I-140 approval as well.
I am planning to change job as soon as possible but I have to give 60 days notice before I resign my Job as per our Employment terms and conditions.
If they withdraw my approval I-140 status between 60 days, what is going to happen my I-485 Status? Still is valid my I-140 and Can I use Ac 21 as per UCCIS memos.
�Do I need to send AC 21 first before opting by the New Employer?
Thank you.
Anyway, even if you send the AC21 letter after this 60 days, it still should be OK. You may not even get an intention to denial letter, because revocation of 140 takes time as well. Even if you get the letter, you can reply to it mentioning your job change, and ac21 invocation, and it should be OK.
In the worst case scenario, you can always file a new LC and 140 with your new employer and still keep the old priority date (even after revocation of old 140, just keep the copy of old 140 approval letter). That way you will be in same exact state in less than a year (PERM takes around 3....4 months, 140 premiumprocess takes less than 2 weeks, and most probably you may not be too far from current, and can file 485).
As a whole, my suggestion would be that, don't let a pending green card process stop your career growth. You never know how LONG you might stay in halt state in your career, if you do that, especially because of the whole GC processe's ultimate uncertainty.
There is always ways out (AC21, newGC process but same priority date etc.)
And in the worst case it may get a bit delay for your final GC approval. But I tend to think, that is OK when compared with a steady career growth.
If you tend to stuck with the same employer, in halt state of your career growth, merely because of GC process, in the end, after getting the GC approval, you will realize that it was foolishness and getting GC a bit earlier was not that important.
Well the above is my personal opinion. Ultimately it is your choice.
-Morchu
My question is:
My I-485 is pending for more than 180 days and I have I-140 approval as well.
I am planning to change job as soon as possible but I have to give 60 days notice before I resign my Job as per our Employment terms and conditions.
If they withdraw my approval I-140 status between 60 days, what is going to happen my I-485 Status? Still is valid my I-140 and Can I use Ac 21 as per UCCIS memos.
�Do I need to send AC 21 first before opting by the New Employer?
Thank you.
satishku_2000
05-24 10:07 AM
Here is my case:
MS (computer engg) in US
US IT experience more than 6 years
No TOEFEL ( what native english speaker??)
Worked in high growth technology/employer (I assume)
come under STEM
How many points will i get??
you may get 100 points it does not matter, We are still going to have country caps ...
MS (computer engg) in US
US IT experience more than 6 years
No TOEFEL ( what native english speaker??)
Worked in high growth technology/employer (I assume)
come under STEM
How many points will i get??
you may get 100 points it does not matter, We are still going to have country caps ...
more...
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
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 physical 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 ensue. 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.
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 physical 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 ensue. 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.
2010 Girlfriend , cristiano ronaldo
willgetgc2005
03-28 01:39 AM
Hello,
My PERM ad was placed and the lawyer said there are responses and company will have to take recruitment steps before he can file.
Company say he has done recruitment and sent report to lawyer. Lawyer says no, I have not received recruitment report. What is this recruitment report ? Is the PERM application not strong if there are responses.
I am really struggling between lawyer and company. Any thoughts. They seem to be dodging me after taking money. If i have some details from experinced gurus, I can talk to them. Else, they just delay after taking legal fee.
Please help
My PERM ad was placed and the lawyer said there are responses and company will have to take recruitment steps before he can file.
Company say he has done recruitment and sent report to lawyer. Lawyer says no, I have not received recruitment report. What is this recruitment report ? Is the PERM application not strong if there are responses.
I am really struggling between lawyer and company. Any thoughts. They seem to be dodging me after taking money. If i have some details from experinced gurus, I can talk to them. Else, they just delay after taking legal fee.
Please help
more...
rockstart
01-08 12:27 PM
this may help also :-
Alternate Document (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/alternate_document.htm)
Birth Affidavit (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_affidavit.htm)
Birth Certificate (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_cert.htm)
Birth Certificates Green Card Permanent Residency (http://www.usabal.com/permres/AOS/birth_cert_info.html)
Thanks patiently_waiting, These are really good links. I have posted these links to IV Wiki as well for future reference. Please add information to Wiki as it can be really useful to folks who are need this info. When you get an RFE you do not have luxory of time and all this info in one place really helps. Thanks once again
Alternate Document (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/alternate_document.htm)
Birth Affidavit (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_affidavit.htm)
Birth Certificate (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/birth_cert.htm)
Birth Certificates Green Card Permanent Residency (http://www.usabal.com/permres/AOS/birth_cert_info.html)
Thanks patiently_waiting, These are really good links. I have posted these links to IV Wiki as well for future reference. Please add information to Wiki as it can be really useful to folks who are need this info. When you get an RFE you do not have luxory of time and all this info in one place really helps. Thanks once again
hair ronaldo cristiano girlfriend name. ronaldo cristiano 2011.
h1techSlave
07-17 11:24 AM
It is difficult to arrive at hard numbers using these kinds of analysis.
For example you say "Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%".
In reality there are no such human being exist. When a person comes here, he/she does contribute to the society. The person may not be in any official pay roll, but he buys stuff, he does work (in the house at least), he consumes services etc. Now such behavior by the hypothetically low skilled person has a positive contribution to the economy. May be the person took care of the house hold chorus of a young family, enabling the mom to take a Masters in computer science. Fast forward two years, the couple starts a successful software company which employs dozens of Americans.
The story line that you give is the same argument that NumbersUSA gives, which is that an additional person is just a job stealer; but I disagree.
Hello All,
I want to start an interesting discussion - not sure whether a thread already exists or a similar discussion has already taken place.
We all know about the current state of the economy and current unfortunate unemployment rate. We all also know that majority jobs lost are in construction, manufacturing etc. We also know that some people (who have no other choice) are targetting legal EB community as if they are responsible for all this mess.
I want people to discuss the other things like DV Lottery, Chain Family Migration or any other popular programs from labor/unemployment point of view. Please no intent to discuss it from any other angle at all.
These forms of migration bring a lot of uneducated (or less educated), unskilled (or low skilled) population/labor into the country which contribute higher for the unemployment rate (for both numerator and denomenator - rate = # unemployed/# total).
example: suppose in a hypothetical community of 10000000, 300000 are unemployed. They have 3% of unemployement rate.
Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%
This can be bad example but it was just to put a point forward.
Are there any statistics (again?) available about the effect of DV, chain family migration or any such program in the last 10-15 years towards the unemployment rate today? A lot of unskilled (or low skilled) labor was added to the economy which was OK during upward economy but cannot sustain at all in down economy like this.
Thanks,
M.
For example you say "Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%".
In reality there are no such human being exist. When a person comes here, he/she does contribute to the society. The person may not be in any official pay roll, but he buys stuff, he does work (in the house at least), he consumes services etc. Now such behavior by the hypothetically low skilled person has a positive contribution to the economy. May be the person took care of the house hold chorus of a young family, enabling the mom to take a Masters in computer science. Fast forward two years, the couple starts a successful software company which employs dozens of Americans.
The story line that you give is the same argument that NumbersUSA gives, which is that an additional person is just a job stealer; but I disagree.
Hello All,
I want to start an interesting discussion - not sure whether a thread already exists or a similar discussion has already taken place.
We all know about the current state of the economy and current unfortunate unemployment rate. We all also know that majority jobs lost are in construction, manufacturing etc. We also know that some people (who have no other choice) are targetting legal EB community as if they are responsible for all this mess.
I want people to discuss the other things like DV Lottery, Chain Family Migration or any other popular programs from labor/unemployment point of view. Please no intent to discuss it from any other angle at all.
These forms of migration bring a lot of uneducated (or less educated), unskilled (or low skilled) population/labor into the country which contribute higher for the unemployment rate (for both numerator and denomenator - rate = # unemployed/# total).
example: suppose in a hypothetical community of 10000000, 300000 are unemployed. They have 3% of unemployement rate.
Supposed 30K unskilled (or low skilled) labor is added (which neither creates jobs nor are employed). Now if they are added, the rate becomes 330000/10030000 or ~ 3.3%
This can be bad example but it was just to put a point forward.
Are there any statistics (again?) available about the effect of DV, chain family migration or any such program in the last 10-15 years towards the unemployment rate today? A lot of unskilled (or low skilled) labor was added to the economy which was OK during upward economy but cannot sustain at all in down economy like this.
Thanks,
M.
more...
ita
01-16 11:13 AM
Thank you so much vin13.
So in the case of company C's H1 it will be part of yearly quota and so will have to go through lottery system right?
So there will be a chance of H1 not going through the lottery(no matter even if the applicant was on H1 before)?
Thank you again.
Lets say , you move out of H1-b (company A)and start using your EAD (at Company B). Now after a few weeks you find another employer (company C) who is willing to do your H1-B. Then this is subject to the yearly Quota because you lost your H1-B status immediately after you started using your EAD (at Company B).
You can now move to Company C using your EAD and then apply under the new quota for H1-B in April for a start date of October (new fiscal year). Company C may not be reluctant or hesitant in your case because you can keep working for them from Day 1 and you continue on your EAD even if you do not get H1-B.
Company C will be hesitant only if you do not have EAD and you need to wait for the approval before you can work.
So in the case of company C's H1 it will be part of yearly quota and so will have to go through lottery system right?
So there will be a chance of H1 not going through the lottery(no matter even if the applicant was on H1 before)?
Thank you again.
Lets say , you move out of H1-b (company A)and start using your EAD (at Company B). Now after a few weeks you find another employer (company C) who is willing to do your H1-B. Then this is subject to the yearly Quota because you lost your H1-B status immediately after you started using your EAD (at Company B).
You can now move to Company C using your EAD and then apply under the new quota for H1-B in April for a start date of October (new fiscal year). Company C may not be reluctant or hesitant in your case because you can keep working for them from Day 1 and you continue on your EAD even if you do not get H1-B.
Company C will be hesitant only if you do not have EAD and you need to wait for the approval before you can work.
hot house ronaldo cristiano 2011.
supers789
07-11 04:12 PM
As most of you know USCIS is auditing all PERM applications filed by Fragomen. My application filed on April 20th 2008 also received audit (as filed by fragomen). I was wondering how long is it taking to get the response back for these audits? Anyone receilved response for their audits filed by Fragomen?
This is mainly important for me since with PD moved to June 2006, my PD is current (carrying over from old employer), but since PERM is in Audit I cannot file for 485.
Thanks!
This is mainly important for me since with PD moved to June 2006, my PD is current (carrying over from old employer), but since PERM is in Audit I cannot file for 485.
Thanks!
more...
house Ronaldo#39;#39;s girlfriend shows
illusions
04-11 03:27 PM
it seems like the IV tracker doesn't update immidiately... i've made a change to my PD as i had put a slightly wrong date... but the update hasn't kicked in as yet.
tattoo Cristiano ronaldo ex-
Dipika
03-28 09:41 AM
guys, Murthy says EB2 will move forward in May 2008 bulletine. Reason is getting leftover visa from EB1 India's category.
http://murthy.com/bulletin.html
hoping big forward move.:D
http://murthy.com/bulletin.html
hoping big forward move.:D
more...
pictures ronaldo cristiano girlfriend
ak_manu
09-29 01:36 PM
We had a bitter experience when we took OUR gold while traveling to india for attending a wedding. Customs officers never listened when we said it was OUR gold and we are taking it to wear for wedding. They demanded 1000$ dollars as bribe even though I said I can offer 400$ for my carrying my OWN gold. After lot of arguing, I was fed up and told that I will leave gold with them and take it with me when we go back. Finally, one officer intervened and he let us go without taking any money as he sensed that issue is going too far and we might end up complaining.
My suggestion, try to wear as much as gold you can as that is considered ok if it on your body. Take minimal if possible.
My suggestion, try to wear as much as gold you can as that is considered ok if it on your body. Take minimal if possible.
dresses Cristiano Ronaldo#39;s Girlfriend
zigma
04-06 07:21 AM
With this bill, if the thought is that about half of the illegals (<5yrs) will have to leave the country and return, and that too without any guarantees, they are not going to do it unless the consequences are drastic. Some, even then may decide that staying illegally is a better option than going back.
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
more...
makeup ronaldo cristiano girlfriend
IAMINQ
03-18 05:19 AM
Dear Friend,
We don't know what was your understanding between you and your ex-employer, It seems to me that you voluntarily paid money when you are not supposed to. I am also not sure how you got an H1 transfer without getting paid... Lot of question marks ??? Its better you talk to a qualified attorney and get their opinion. You can definetly go after the ex-employer for not paying you which they are legally bound too.. You will get all your $$$$.
We don't know what was your understanding between you and your ex-employer, It seems to me that you voluntarily paid money when you are not supposed to. I am also not sure how you got an H1 transfer without getting paid... Lot of question marks ??? Its better you talk to a qualified attorney and get their opinion. You can definetly go after the ex-employer for not paying you which they are legally bound too.. You will get all your $$$$.
girlfriend ronaldo cristiano girlfriend
cagedcactus
05-04 06:57 AM
As I said it was work of a fellow member. But I dont see why you cant use the same letter. If you think this is a good format, please go ahead and use it.
thanks.....
thanks.....
hairstyles dresses, Ronaldo
vts31
10-20 10:08 PM
correct...and holy crap u have a lot of posts!
LookingForGC
01-14 06:33 PM
Congratulation. Enjoy your freedom.
DesiTech
06-01 06:25 PM
hi viewers,
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario