thomachan72
11-08 03:03 PM
regarding carrying older LCAs;
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
clif
06-07 10:03 AM
You can change jobs. Make sure you (or your attorney) send the AC21 letter to USCIS before your employer revokes the approved I-140. If you do that, the revokation won't have much effect, otherwise you may get NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny).
optimystic
03-31 04:13 PM
This isn't correct Ronnie. Your non-immigrant status does determine whether you are a Resident alien or a non-resident alien for tax purposes.
Classic example is that while you are on F1 /OPT you don't have to pay social security and medicare.
I am taking a guess that what Ronnie meant to say was that, Tax filing (whether or not you file jointly) has no implications on your immigration process... which is true.
If you filed 'married filing separately' does not mean that you dont want to support your spouse anymore as a derivative of your I-485 !
Classic example is that while you are on F1 /OPT you don't have to pay social security and medicare.
I am taking a guess that what Ronnie meant to say was that, Tax filing (whether or not you file jointly) has no implications on your immigration process... which is true.
If you filed 'married filing separately' does not mean that you dont want to support your spouse anymore as a derivative of your I-485 !
dyekek12
12-13 02:15 PM
I'm thinking about pursuing maser degree of Biostatistics.
I heard the job market demand is high and
most jobs require master degree at least.
As a research assistance, biostatistician, research analyst..
Could I apply as EB2 ?
Am I qualifed?
I heard the job market demand is high and
most jobs require master degree at least.
As a research assistance, biostatistician, research analyst..
Could I apply as EB2 ?
Am I qualifed?
more...
gsc999
01-19 12:48 AM
Thanks to the members for volunteering. We have a decent number of people to put this event in place now.
Dhundhun
03-17 03:14 PM
Thanks. I'll try SSN based on AOS. If they refuse, I'll get EAD for my wife.
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.
looneytunezez
04-20 06:07 PM
Just got my passport renewed at SF.
Applied in person and opted to get it back in the mail.
Got it in hand exactly in a week from application date...(pretty smooth)....
And i used 2X2 in photo instead of 3.5X3.5 cms....both are ok.
They will adjust it properly in your passport for you...
All the best.
Thanks for your responses.
One last question.
After printing the application form, I see that the photograph size is 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms that the consulate requires. But when I check for the passport size photo in walgreens it is 2 inches * 2 inches. Is it fine if I send 2 inches * 2 inches photo or should I cut exactly 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms and paste one in the form and send the other 2 ?
Thanks.
Applied in person and opted to get it back in the mail.
Got it in hand exactly in a week from application date...(pretty smooth)....
And i used 2X2 in photo instead of 3.5X3.5 cms....both are ok.
They will adjust it properly in your passport for you...
All the best.
Thanks for your responses.
One last question.
After printing the application form, I see that the photograph size is 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms that the consulate requires. But when I check for the passport size photo in walgreens it is 2 inches * 2 inches. Is it fine if I send 2 inches * 2 inches photo or should I cut exactly 3.5 cms * 3.5 cms and paste one in the form and send the other 2 ?
Thanks.
more...
syzygy
06-17 01:37 AM
I am in same boat. Very concerned what will happen. Do you have interaction / advise from any lawyer?
I wanted to ask IV if there is anything we are doing for people like me.
After frustrated with the consultant company I joined a full time job. and now am 5'th year of H1B. The LC will be applied after 1 to 3 month(big company and there laws as you have to complete 1 year and then adv etc etc)
So If the bill passes I even can't apply for LC and so force to go back after 6 years.
Now as everybody is ready to file for 485 nobody cares about this CIR bill but me only.
Are there ANY people left like me?
I wanted to ask IV if there is anything we are doing for people like me.
After frustrated with the consultant company I joined a full time job. and now am 5'th year of H1B. The LC will be applied after 1 to 3 month(big company and there laws as you have to complete 1 year and then adv etc etc)
So If the bill passes I even can't apply for LC and so force to go back after 6 years.
Now as everybody is ready to file for 485 nobody cares about this CIR bill but me only.
Are there ANY people left like me?
manand24
09-28 08:02 AM
EAD - Card production ordered for me and my wife on 09/27/2007.
See signature for details:
PD 04/2006 EB2 INDIA
I-140 NSC AP 10/2006
SELF:
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/17/2007 via USPS Mail at home
I-131 (Travel Document) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/17/2007 via USPS Mail at home
I-765 (EAD) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007; Card production ordered on 09/27/2007
BioMetrics Appointment - ND - 09/18/07, Appointment Date 10/05/07 9:00AM
WIFE
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/17/2007 via USPS Mail at home
I-131 (Travel Document) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/18/2007 via USPS Mail at Lawyer's office
I-765 (EAD) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007; Card production ordered on 09/27/2007
BioMetrics Appointment - ND - 09/18/07, Appointment Date 10/05/07 8:00AM
See signature for details:
PD 04/2006 EB2 INDIA
I-140 NSC AP 10/2006
SELF:
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/17/2007 via USPS Mail at home
I-131 (Travel Document) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/17/2007 via USPS Mail at home
I-765 (EAD) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007; Card production ordered on 09/27/2007
BioMetrics Appointment - ND - 09/18/07, Appointment Date 10/05/07 9:00AM
WIFE
I-485 NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/17/2007 via USPS Mail at home
I-131 (Travel Document) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007 - Receipt Notice recieved from NSC (LIN-XXX) on 09/18/2007 via USPS Mail at Lawyer's office
I-765 (EAD) NSC RD 07/02/07 ND 09/10/2007; Card production ordered on 09/27/2007
BioMetrics Appointment - ND - 09/18/07, Appointment Date 10/05/07 8:00AM
more...
EkAurAaya
03-19 06:43 PM
no ones ever sold a house on H1B or EAD? :confused:
gcformeornot
04-08 01:32 PM
what to use as current immigration status?
Item# 15
Item# 15
more...
GCHope2011
03-23 09:45 AM
smuggymba,
Old I-94 expiration date was January 3, 2010, and new I-94 started from October 18, 2010.
You risk of being barred from entry is very real as you have accumulated more than 180 days of illegal presence in the US.
Your lawyer is right - and although there are some chances that some people are not barred, such info is mostly anecdotal and should not be used as a basis for making definitive plans.
Old I-94 expiration date was January 3, 2010, and new I-94 started from October 18, 2010.
You risk of being barred from entry is very real as you have accumulated more than 180 days of illegal presence in the US.
Your lawyer is right - and although there are some chances that some people are not barred, such info is mostly anecdotal and should not be used as a basis for making definitive plans.
lostinbeta
10-20 04:02 PM
Ah, so painter is really the best if you have a tablet, but if you don't have one, then you shouldn't bother????
more...
485Mbe4001
03-04 04:07 PM
What about the thousands who lost 2-4 years because they were stuck in namecheck, now the name check is cleared but the dates will not move..frigging idiots..too little too late
Before giving the blue/green/red dots, think about this. they created a traffic jam and now they are suddenly releasing it. There were about 150-300k stuck in name check, now all of them are waiting for their PD to be current. (i am one of them too). Think how this will affect the overall queue.
Before giving the blue/green/red dots, think about this. they created a traffic jam and now they are suddenly releasing it. There were about 150-300k stuck in name check, now all of them are waiting for their PD to be current. (i am one of them too). Think how this will affect the overall queue.
chanduv23
10-09 05:40 PM
I am in.
Welcome Amma :), please help "needhelp" - she is really in need of help :)
Welcome Amma :), please help "needhelp" - she is really in need of help :)
more...
ganeshpv
05-01 01:26 PM
Yeah.. I realized that. And I think I can qualify for emergency appt. BUT that wasn't my question. My question was do I HAVE to go to Chennai or can I get it done in Bangalore (they have an office that seems to have drop box like feature).
petersebastian
03-31 05:49 PM
Your 180 days start from the day your I-94 expired. And yes, 2 weeks or 4 weeks over stay will make a difference. Next time when you enter the country or at the Visa office they might ask you the reason.
You did nit clarify if your partner is a US citizen, PR or visa holder. That might help in giving you some additional advise.
He's American. I am aware that they will ask about that but I just want to make it clear that I'm facing a 3 year ban after overstaying the 180 days after my I94 expiration date (so the end of July in my case).
You did nit clarify if your partner is a US citizen, PR or visa holder. That might help in giving you some additional advise.
He's American. I am aware that they will ask about that but I just want to make it clear that I'm facing a 3 year ban after overstaying the 180 days after my I94 expiration date (so the end of July in my case).
Karthikthiru
06-15 01:47 PM
Tell the previously employer EXPLICITY that it is only a employment verification letter NOT A REFERENCE letter. Because by default lot of them assume it is a reference letter. Aslo by law they have to provide the experience letter
Thanks
Karthik
Thanks
Karthik
TheColonial
04-24 12:18 AM
Search SDL its a nice way to learn graphics and moving imges and such.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_DirectMedia_Layer
Whoa! The guy says he wants to learn Win32 and you point him at SDL? Interesting! :)
Everything that you want to do can be achieved without touching DirectX or OpenGL (and hence SDL), and using them will only confuse you if you're looking to learn to write Windows code.
I'd recommend attempting your problem using nothing but Win32 and the core C++ functionality - IMHO, you should avoid muddying the waters with other APIs.
Just my $0.02.
OJ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_DirectMedia_Layer
Whoa! The guy says he wants to learn Win32 and you point him at SDL? Interesting! :)
Everything that you want to do can be achieved without touching DirectX or OpenGL (and hence SDL), and using them will only confuse you if you're looking to learn to write Windows code.
I'd recommend attempting your problem using nothing but Win32 and the core C++ functionality - IMHO, you should avoid muddying the waters with other APIs.
Just my $0.02.
OJ
xu1
08-08 09:56 PM
...of meaningless "predictions."
:).. Just like I tune to Bloomberg radio everyday, listening to all those economists, money managers, bond traders pondering how every other month the Fed makes its move on the interest rate... I'm sick and tired of them predicting what's about to happen must happen by the rule of economics. But I tune in nonetheless every day when I drive to work.:D
It's probably fun, and meaningless.
:).. Just like I tune to Bloomberg radio everyday, listening to all those economists, money managers, bond traders pondering how every other month the Fed makes its move on the interest rate... I'm sick and tired of them predicting what's about to happen must happen by the rule of economics. But I tune in nonetheless every day when I drive to work.:D
It's probably fun, and meaningless.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario