gemini23
07-02 03:12 PM
Srikondoji,
you can repeat something that is already said. first you said "step back". if you want to repeat, it should be "step back"..not "step aside". Simple logic. enjoy.:cool:
Originally Posted by srikondoji
Please step back. You need to grow up to know what is racism and you need to listen/read with some context in the background.
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
Please step back. You need to grow up to know what is racism and you need to listen/read with some context in the background.
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
you can repeat something that is already said. first you said "step back". if you want to repeat, it should be "step back"..not "step aside". Simple logic. enjoy.:cool:
Originally Posted by srikondoji
Please step back. You need to grow up to know what is racism and you need to listen/read with some context in the background.
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
Please step back. You need to grow up to know what is racism and you need to listen/read with some context in the background.
Plain reading is injurious to health and community.
I repeat "please step aside".
claudio
01-13 08:06 PM
Nice contest K, i haven't coded in a while but i'll see if I can get some spare time to participate :)
md2003
03-14 09:41 AM
If i140 is revoke by earlier employer , will it possible to port PD to new employer?.
abhi_jais
01-31 10:38 AM
Here is the Text of Bill:
Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - S.6 - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:6:./temp/~bdl3Rj::|/bss/|)
Bill Summary & Status - 112th Congress (2011 - 2012) - S.6 - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d112:6:./temp/~bdl3Rj::|/bss/|)
more...
beautifulMind
08-24 12:14 PM
yes my date is eb3 jan 2007...I think this is part of the whole pre approval thing
I work for University since 2002 with very straightforward case hence suprised
ok..here is part 2.
Employer was able to speak to USICIS officer. He asked
whethere
1) I was contractor
2) from when I was employed
3) Work timings
4) exact office Location
my supervisor asked why all these questions about location and timing they said they will do a site visit
I feel if my app can trigger this than any other app could...
The USICs is just getting crazy with all the bueracacy crap
I work for University since 2002 with very straightforward case hence suprised
ok..here is part 2.
Employer was able to speak to USICIS officer. He asked
whethere
1) I was contractor
2) from when I was employed
3) Work timings
4) exact office Location
my supervisor asked why all these questions about location and timing they said they will do a site visit
I feel if my app can trigger this than any other app could...
The USICs is just getting crazy with all the bueracacy crap
haifromsk@yahoo.com
10-15 02:49 PM
I-9 is a USCIS document so i would guess it goes to uscis
more...
ramaonline
09-27 09:46 PM
approved i140 only allows h1 extensions for self and h4 extn for spouse. spouse must independently qualify for h1 extension beyond 6 years -pl confirm with an immig attny
dhirajs98
01-13 09:51 AM
We received the RFE letter on my pending I-140.
I am not sure what they are looking for. We had submitted letters of experience prior to Dec 2004 that added up to 1 year. Basically, I worked with 2 companies during that time.
Initially I had sent:
a. 1 letter from Company A
States my title, skills dates
b. 2 letters from Company B.
1 generic letter from HR stating dates, no skills
1 letter from colleague stating title, skills, dates
Here's the RFE details. The lawyer is not sure what to do. He says we will simply resend the letters. I don't know if that's a good idea. Can anyone please help?
=====
Submit evidence the beneficiary obtained the required one year experience in the job offerred, or in software consulting, software development, or a closely related field before December 25, 2004. Evidence of experience must be in the form of letters from current or former employers giving the name, address and the title of the employer and a description of the experience of the beneficiary including specific dates of employment or duties.
Please note that the petitioners statement of the beneficiarys prior employment is insufficient evidence. A letter of reference must be written by the employer from whom the beneficiary was employed and obtained experience in the job offered prior to December 25, 2004. Such references must be submitted to cover twelve months.
====
Hey indyanguy,
I don't know who is your current alawyer but if you are not sure about him then why don't you talk to one of the experienced lawyer's like Sila Murthy ot Rajiv Khanna. They might have experienced these kind of cases and probably provide you better and full proof course of action.
my 2 cents.
btw what was your receipt date on uscis website?
I am not sure what they are looking for. We had submitted letters of experience prior to Dec 2004 that added up to 1 year. Basically, I worked with 2 companies during that time.
Initially I had sent:
a. 1 letter from Company A
States my title, skills dates
b. 2 letters from Company B.
1 generic letter from HR stating dates, no skills
1 letter from colleague stating title, skills, dates
Here's the RFE details. The lawyer is not sure what to do. He says we will simply resend the letters. I don't know if that's a good idea. Can anyone please help?
=====
Submit evidence the beneficiary obtained the required one year experience in the job offerred, or in software consulting, software development, or a closely related field before December 25, 2004. Evidence of experience must be in the form of letters from current or former employers giving the name, address and the title of the employer and a description of the experience of the beneficiary including specific dates of employment or duties.
Please note that the petitioners statement of the beneficiarys prior employment is insufficient evidence. A letter of reference must be written by the employer from whom the beneficiary was employed and obtained experience in the job offered prior to December 25, 2004. Such references must be submitted to cover twelve months.
====
Hey indyanguy,
I don't know who is your current alawyer but if you are not sure about him then why don't you talk to one of the experienced lawyer's like Sila Murthy ot Rajiv Khanna. They might have experienced these kind of cases and probably provide you better and full proof course of action.
my 2 cents.
btw what was your receipt date on uscis website?
more...
sky7
07-28 10:02 AM
I was reading some latest info about I140 & I140 Premium Processing at
http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html
it stated
In order to be eligible for the three-year extension, the H1B worker must be the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition and the case must be subject to retrogression (nonavailability of visa numbers).
So say I got approved I140, but since i am as of now..not subject to retrogression (I am not from India/China, my EB2 is current - PD 9/2002), then I won't be eligible for 3-yr H1B extension???? :eek:
Anyone knows?
Thanks..
http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html
it stated
In order to be eligible for the three-year extension, the H1B worker must be the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition and the case must be subject to retrogression (nonavailability of visa numbers).
So say I got approved I140, but since i am as of now..not subject to retrogression (I am not from India/China, my EB2 is current - PD 9/2002), then I won't be eligible for 3-yr H1B extension???? :eek:
Anyone knows?
Thanks..
maddila
09-16 04:03 PM
I'm also on the same boat. I cannot go back to company A as they are shutting down the shop.
more...
eb3_nepa
03-24 03:20 PM
I had called NumbersUSA once. They will take the Absolute worst case scenario and project it as an everyday happening. The guy had mentioned to me that EB3 ppl promote chain migration and some get upto 80 (Yes 80) family members here. I tried arguing that it is TOTALLY impossible to bring more than five (i mean common u, ur wife and 3 kids = 5). You cant get ur parents etc., until you are a Citizen, but he wud not listen.
These guys are out to prove that immigration is a bad thing, and they will do their damndest to prove that point. They will not skew the facts, but they will present it in such a way that it looks a LOT worse than it actually is.
These guys are out to prove that immigration is a bad thing, and they will do their damndest to prove that point. They will not skew the facts, but they will present it in such a way that it looks a LOT worse than it actually is.
loudoggs
07-31 06:51 PM
My lawyer also did not file EAD/AP along with the AOS application. The USCIS FAQ 2 says that you can file without the I-485 receipt but you do need proof of delivery. Has the lawyer given you the FedEx / UPS delivery receipt?
In my case, my HR told me that the lawyer flew in a guy to physically hand over the AOS cases on July 2. Don't know how true that is.:confused:
My I-485(with G-28) was filed by our company lawyer and company did not let us file EAD. I'm filing EAD on my own after USCIS made it clear with FAQ2 that they will accept EAD applications without the I-485 Receipt notice.
My questions is, Can I be sure the receipt notice for the EAD will come to me and not to the lawyer by any chance? I don't have any intention of using EAD but don't want my employer/lawyer know that I have filed it.
Thanks
In my case, my HR told me that the lawyer flew in a guy to physically hand over the AOS cases on July 2. Don't know how true that is.:confused:
My I-485(with G-28) was filed by our company lawyer and company did not let us file EAD. I'm filing EAD on my own after USCIS made it clear with FAQ2 that they will accept EAD applications without the I-485 Receipt notice.
My questions is, Can I be sure the receipt notice for the EAD will come to me and not to the lawyer by any chance? I don't have any intention of using EAD but don't want my employer/lawyer know that I have filed it.
Thanks
more...
frostrated
09-23 01:28 PM
tell them she is in legal status, like that of a H4. also, you might say that she is not going to study as a full time student and therefore does not need a student visa. how many courses she takes up after getting admission is totally different.
rockstart
04-23 04:17 PM
Thanks for the response guys. I think it is better to change address because address forwarding does not work with USCIS letters. I have seen the trouble my friend had to go through to get his GC.
more...
mdcowboy
02-11 03:10 PM
Hi Folks,
What is the fastest and perhaps a little economic way to get documents over to chennai (Tamil Nadu) or Calicut (Kerala) from here in San Jose, ca.
USPS has this service called Express Mail ($27.95) or Priority Mail ($12.95)
I guess USPS is claiming 6-10 days (guess no gurantee) to india.
Other couriers seems to be $70+ (FedEx, UPS, DHL)..
Anyone has had good luck with USPS ? or do you suggest the couriers mentioned above ?
Need to get docs for an interview for parents on Feb 26th in Chennai...
Thanks in Advance for your reply !!
I had no issues with USPS. Used them thrice to send docs to Chennai. It goes within 7-10 days. They give you a tracking number also, but as one of the other members pointed out, its difficult for you to track it.
What is the fastest and perhaps a little economic way to get documents over to chennai (Tamil Nadu) or Calicut (Kerala) from here in San Jose, ca.
USPS has this service called Express Mail ($27.95) or Priority Mail ($12.95)
I guess USPS is claiming 6-10 days (guess no gurantee) to india.
Other couriers seems to be $70+ (FedEx, UPS, DHL)..
Anyone has had good luck with USPS ? or do you suggest the couriers mentioned above ?
Need to get docs for an interview for parents on Feb 26th in Chennai...
Thanks in Advance for your reply !!
I had no issues with USPS. Used them thrice to send docs to Chennai. It goes within 7-10 days. They give you a tracking number also, but as one of the other members pointed out, its difficult for you to track it.
axp817
06-16 12:21 PM
They say we (includes me and my wife) were missing G325A (boigraphic information sheets).
And that caused a denial? Wow.
Anyway, IV might be able to help. Please consider participating in this action item.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=354157#post354157
And that caused a denial? Wow.
Anyway, IV might be able to help. Please consider participating in this action item.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=354157#post354157
more...
bsbawa10
12-10 04:50 PM
I insist that the name of the person who used profane language on IV website be revealed. It is a serious and urgent issue. Such people must be exposed for the public good.
I fully think that if IV is serious for the dignity of its members and wants this not to happen again, then the person should be revealed and banned. I know this has happened in the past also but not taking this kind of action has given courage to such kind of people to attempt it again.
I fully think that if IV is serious for the dignity of its members and wants this not to happen again, then the person should be revealed and banned. I know this has happened in the past also but not taking this kind of action has given courage to such kind of people to attempt it again.
alex77
10-07 04:55 PM
Folks, Please let me know if anyone knows where to send G-28 form if one wants to revoke attorney and be one's own representative?
hiralal
05-11 09:18 AM
no comments on the above ..or a different / better idea ??
msyedy
01-12 06:57 PM
I understand this topic has been discussed ad nauseam, so I'm not raising this issue per se. I do not know where we stand on the likelihood of this provision getting passed by Feb 15th, but I do know that the Core group must be trying their best to get some provisions along these lines.
But just in case the "AOS without current PD" is seen as too big a change by the law makers or its sponsors in the undustry, I think it might be worthwhile to consider some of its watered-down alternatives. The law makers themselves may have a perception of this provision "creating a log jam at the AOS stage", not unlike the (mis)perception of some of IV members themselves!
Some alternatives are:
(a) Ability to file I-485 if the I-140 has been approved for X years, or if the I-140 has been pending for Y years (this is similar the provision of the ability to file H1 extensions beyond 6 years if a labor is pending). The advantage of this provision is that this will sound familiar with an already existing law; and will let the floodgates to AOS slowly and in a more controlled manner.
(b) Ability to file I-485 if the PD is within N years of the published PD in the Visa Bulletin. For example, assuming N = 2 years, India EB3 with PD 5/11/03 and India EB2 01/08/05 can file. Again this has the advantage of a more controlled entry via the Visa Bulletin, but at least it'll start clearing the queue and people can get their EAD, FBI name check, while waiting for the visa numbers to be available.
(c) If an Labor has been approved for X years
(d) If the alien has been on H1 for Y years
or a combination of any of the above
Please understand that I whole heartedly support the "AOS without current PD" provision; it's just that it would be wise to be ready with some alternatives should the need arise.
Why are you making it more complicated. People here want to get things done faster and relief for everyone.
According to your statement .(New formulas). people with I-140 approved for x years can file I-485 and so on......
If we are fighting for something nice, why not fight and say that we need everyone to be able to file I-485 like it was earlier. Reducing jam in USCIS is not a simple issue.By decreasing the number of I-485 filing the amount of time cannot be accuratly estimated that would take it to clear a case. USCIS can increase filling fees which they are thinking of doing to handle the current log jam they have, so I think we stick to and follow IV core.
But just in case the "AOS without current PD" is seen as too big a change by the law makers or its sponsors in the undustry, I think it might be worthwhile to consider some of its watered-down alternatives. The law makers themselves may have a perception of this provision "creating a log jam at the AOS stage", not unlike the (mis)perception of some of IV members themselves!
Some alternatives are:
(a) Ability to file I-485 if the I-140 has been approved for X years, or if the I-140 has been pending for Y years (this is similar the provision of the ability to file H1 extensions beyond 6 years if a labor is pending). The advantage of this provision is that this will sound familiar with an already existing law; and will let the floodgates to AOS slowly and in a more controlled manner.
(b) Ability to file I-485 if the PD is within N years of the published PD in the Visa Bulletin. For example, assuming N = 2 years, India EB3 with PD 5/11/03 and India EB2 01/08/05 can file. Again this has the advantage of a more controlled entry via the Visa Bulletin, but at least it'll start clearing the queue and people can get their EAD, FBI name check, while waiting for the visa numbers to be available.
(c) If an Labor has been approved for X years
(d) If the alien has been on H1 for Y years
or a combination of any of the above
Please understand that I whole heartedly support the "AOS without current PD" provision; it's just that it would be wise to be ready with some alternatives should the need arise.
Why are you making it more complicated. People here want to get things done faster and relief for everyone.
According to your statement .(New formulas). people with I-140 approved for x years can file I-485 and so on......
If we are fighting for something nice, why not fight and say that we need everyone to be able to file I-485 like it was earlier. Reducing jam in USCIS is not a simple issue.By decreasing the number of I-485 filing the amount of time cannot be accuratly estimated that would take it to clear a case. USCIS can increase filling fees which they are thinking of doing to handle the current log jam they have, so I think we stick to and follow IV core.
s416504
12-04 09:40 AM
Thanks Ashkam & Sledge_hammer for sharing valuable information
No comments:
Post a Comment