Dakota Newfie
07-13 09:36 AM
Since the topic of giving preference to professional athletes has come up, I'd like to relay an the experience I had when I came to the U.S. for a job interview in August of '01; when going through U.S. customs at Logan Airport (this was pre 9/11), I was arbitrarily "singled out for interrogation" for TWO HOURS! During that time, a customs official made some small talk with me while we waited for the supervisor to arrive and he asked me if I was a hockey player (since I am Canadian) to which I replied "no"; he then informed me that was too bad because otherwise I would pass through without any problems or questions! Too bad they didn't "single out" Atta and the boys the same way two weeks later- or maybe they went through as hockey players!
wallpaper Women With Fine Hair Short
arnab221
01-25 02:46 PM
When it is piecemeal people say we want comprehensive reform.
When it is comprehensive reform they say it is too broad to pass .
When it is summer they say Immigration Bill be introduced as early as Winter .
When it is winter they say it immigration bill will be introduced as early as summer .
When it is between spring(between winter and summer) they say now there is not adequate support for the bill.
This is a clear motive of hanging immigration reform like a bone in front of the dog and making him run around it and pay taxes .
When it is comprehensive reform they say it is too broad to pass .
When it is summer they say Immigration Bill be introduced as early as Winter .
When it is winter they say it immigration bill will be introduced as early as summer .
When it is between spring(between winter and summer) they say now there is not adequate support for the bill.
This is a clear motive of hanging immigration reform like a bone in front of the dog and making him run around it and pay taxes .
techie.dude
03-16 04:02 PM
thanks guys.. thats informative riva2005.. The intention is not to screw with her application, but understanding the intricacies so that I can expedite my seperation. It is indeed a pain, with no kid, us both being independent, however with a townhome, with both our names on it. I am hoping and planning for an amicable settlement and one of the things that was debated as the gray area was this whole immigration - GC/485 derivative status that I had to reply - "please verify with an attorney" . The hold up is because of the want for an amicable settlement and agreement of terms, which I guess I will never have in entirerity.
2011 bob hairstyles for fine hair
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.
more...
sandeep77
03-20 05:53 PM
bump
sundeep14
09-08 11:14 AM
On the website it says...
* Calls to Access numbers will be charge by local operator.
Any ideas what these charges are?
* Calls to Access numbers will be charge by local operator.
Any ideas what these charges are?
more...
loudoggs
07-30 01:14 PM
Congrats!!!
I guess timing really matters......and you were at the right place at the right time....
I have got my case approved as well. I also received my GC cards. Thanks for all the info and Best of Luck,
I guess timing really matters......and you were at the right place at the right time....
I have got my case approved as well. I also received my GC cards. Thanks for all the info and Best of Luck,
2010 gray hair styles for women
karanp25
06-16 05:33 PM
Start off your infopass with the following question.
I am really desperate....would you help me, pretty please? ........
And then proceed with the other questions you have on your list.
After you are done with all your questions and assuming USCIS hasn't kicked you out of their office, make it clear that you want USCIS to look at your application before others ahead of you in the queue. If they don't, "you will be back" for another infopass.
I am really desperate....would you help me, pretty please? ........
And then proceed with the other questions you have on your list.
After you are done with all your questions and assuming USCIS hasn't kicked you out of their office, make it clear that you want USCIS to look at your application before others ahead of you in the queue. If they don't, "you will be back" for another infopass.
more...
terpcurt
January 6th, 2005, 08:07 PM
Simple technique:-
Add a duplicate layer
Desaturate the top layer, make it the shade you like etc etc
select the eraser tool
make sure it's flowing 100% and you're viewing the picture at 100%
erase the area you want coloured and the colour from the bottom layer will come through.
flatten
bingo!!!
Like this??
Thanks for the quick lesson............... just another weapon in digital ...........
Add a duplicate layer
Desaturate the top layer, make it the shade you like etc etc
select the eraser tool
make sure it's flowing 100% and you're viewing the picture at 100%
erase the area you want coloured and the colour from the bottom layer will come through.
flatten
bingo!!!
Like this??
Thanks for the quick lesson............... just another weapon in digital ...........
hair short hair styles for women
sammyb
03-28 04:35 PM
Do they entertain such request - any positive (or negative) experience ... appreciate ... will be in India during May and planning to go for stamping ... mine is a 2006 job change/extension case and was wondering if the I129 made it to the PIMS or not :confused:...
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
more...
pitha
07-05 12:41 PM
by now everybody might have heard stories about how USCIS pulled staff and worked overtime and weekends to utilize the 60k visas in one month to prevent the july 485 filings.
What I am wondering is why did they do it. One obvious reason is the incresed fee comming into effect from July 30 2007. In addition to it what are the other reasons.
Is there any agenda within USCIS to prevent people from getting EAD and ac21 benefits?
Is USCIS filled with anti immgrant mentality who have takem upon themselves to make our lives difficult?
What I am wondering is why did they do it. One obvious reason is the incresed fee comming into effect from July 30 2007. In addition to it what are the other reasons.
Is there any agenda within USCIS to prevent people from getting EAD and ac21 benefits?
Is USCIS filled with anti immgrant mentality who have takem upon themselves to make our lives difficult?
hot quot;new hair styles baby fine
ksvreg
02-25 09:55 AM
I started talking to new employer about my joining and I requested for preparing PERM stuff before I join. This is the only this I want the new employer to do on behalf me before I join with him. The employer said Prevailing Wage determination takes 2 months. And the new employer mentioned that he can not do Prevailing Wage determination without joining. Is this right?
more...
house hair styles for fine hair
Jaime
08-06 12:12 PM
Yeah, why not? As long as Legals ALSO get green cards!
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
tattoo Hairstyle Men Fine Hair
mach1343
05-13 11:36 PM
I am in the similar situation. Attended for visa interview at Toronto US Consulate on May 6. VO just kept I129 (All the annexures), Client/vendor letters. Informed you will get replay within 1-2wks. Its already been a week, I didnt get any response back. Consulate called client on the same day. No updates after that.
Appreciate if someone could let us know, usually how long it takes to get any status update ? I have been working with the same Employer/Client for last 4 years.
Are you working for a consulting company or a direct to your employer?
Appreciate if someone could let us know, usually how long it takes to get any status update ? I have been working with the same Employer/Client for last 4 years.
Are you working for a consulting company or a direct to your employer?
more...
pictures haircuts for fine hair women pictures. MENS HAIRSTYLES FOR FINE HAIR
rameshvaid
05-26 11:50 AM
I showed my 485 Receipt notice as evidence and renewed my licence. You don't have to always produce EAD (then every 2 year you have to renew the licence).
If your 485 is pending for long, You can contact USCIS over phone and create service request. USCIS will send you a letter saying that your case is pending because of so and so reason. You can take that along with you, if the BMV is asking why your 485 is pending for long.
Which DMV did you go to? My wife and son's H4's are expiring on June 4th and have pending I 485 since July 2007. They are not renewing the DL's based on the pending receipt of I 485 which they claim to be too old and need a new one.. Tried contacting USCIS but could not get through.. Can you pls. let me know which DMV did you go? How old is your pending I 485 and did you have to get a letter from USCIS? If yes, then how did u reach them and if you have any phone number for them..
Pls. advise..
Best...
If your 485 is pending for long, You can contact USCIS over phone and create service request. USCIS will send you a letter saying that your case is pending because of so and so reason. You can take that along with you, if the BMV is asking why your 485 is pending for long.
Which DMV did you go to? My wife and son's H4's are expiring on June 4th and have pending I 485 since July 2007. They are not renewing the DL's based on the pending receipt of I 485 which they claim to be too old and need a new one.. Tried contacting USCIS but could not get through.. Can you pls. let me know which DMV did you go? How old is your pending I 485 and did you have to get a letter from USCIS? If yes, then how did u reach them and if you have any phone number for them..
Pls. advise..
Best...
dresses haircuts for fine hair women
sac-r-ten
03-22 11:03 AM
Thanks Sac-e-ten,
My husband will talk to lawyer soon ....but he's very depressed and me too...what are the options do we have ...do we need to file appeal through lawyer ...my company is not showing any interests. Sir ..please advise..ur help will be highly appreciated...
Yes, i think you have to appeal through a lawyer.
1. BTW what questions were asked to you during interview?
2. Also the denial says " the petetioner does not appear to be either able or willing to provide qualifying employemnt for the principle applicant in the united states in accordance with a appropriate laws and regulations". Do they mention what law? Does it mention employee-employer relationship?
If employer is not showing interest, then you have to talk to the employer about hiring your own lawyer and filing appeal and/or new h4 petition for you.
Also, there is free-attorney sessions every 1st 3 thursdays of the month here on IV. check with ivcoordinator@gmail.com for that.
Also, don't call anybody Sir out here. we are all in diff sections of the same boat called Immigration sailing against tide called USCIS.
Hope things get resolved for you.Good luck.
My husband will talk to lawyer soon ....but he's very depressed and me too...what are the options do we have ...do we need to file appeal through lawyer ...my company is not showing any interests. Sir ..please advise..ur help will be highly appreciated...
Yes, i think you have to appeal through a lawyer.
1. BTW what questions were asked to you during interview?
2. Also the denial says " the petetioner does not appear to be either able or willing to provide qualifying employemnt for the principle applicant in the united states in accordance with a appropriate laws and regulations". Do they mention what law? Does it mention employee-employer relationship?
If employer is not showing interest, then you have to talk to the employer about hiring your own lawyer and filing appeal and/or new h4 petition for you.
Also, there is free-attorney sessions every 1st 3 thursdays of the month here on IV. check with ivcoordinator@gmail.com for that.
Also, don't call anybody Sir out here. we are all in diff sections of the same boat called Immigration sailing against tide called USCIS.
Hope things get resolved for you.Good luck.
more...
makeup short hair styles for fine
glus
02-19 11:38 AM
not really, but close.
i-94 expire 10/01/2007. married 09/12/2007. i-485 received by uscis on 11/26/2007.
Surge:
Your authorized period of stay ended on 10/1. Your marriage does not matter. The only reason you MAY be able to adjust status in your situation is the fact that you married a U.S. citizen. It is VERY risky to leave the United States before your I485 gets approved. Please consult an attorney before doing so. AP does not guarantee re-admittance especially when one was EVER out of status.
i-94 expire 10/01/2007. married 09/12/2007. i-485 received by uscis on 11/26/2007.
Surge:
Your authorized period of stay ended on 10/1. Your marriage does not matter. The only reason you MAY be able to adjust status in your situation is the fact that you married a U.S. citizen. It is VERY risky to leave the United States before your I485 gets approved. Please consult an attorney before doing so. AP does not guarantee re-admittance especially when one was EVER out of status.
girlfriend short hairstyles for fine hair
somma
10-25 03:41 PM
My EAD status shows "card production ordered" and my spouse is showing as pending. This has been like this for the past 4 days.
Looks like they don't want to update the secondary information online.
:confused:
Looks like they don't want to update the secondary information online.
:confused:
hairstyles short hair styles for women
miguy
04-18 08:37 AM
Are companies hiring people on H1b for permanent jobs? I seem to have a tough time finding companies that sponsor H1b. I thought the Big 5 Consulting firms did not sponsor H1b or GC? But, it seems from this post that I was wrong. Can someone tell me what companies (Fortune 500) companies sponsor H1b/GC or is there a list I can get from somewhere.
thanks,
thanks,
chanduv23
12-21 08:01 AM
What I am saying his employer process pay roll for $5800, he gets in hand after tax deduction.
You guys should understand one thing if your base salary is $1000/k, company should process $8333/pm on a pay roll then pay roll will decide about tax withholdings. There is no way company can show gimmicks and run pay roll for less. I have been working for the past 8 years, all the time companies divided annual salary by biweekly and deposited rest will be taken care by pay roll processing.
Bottom line pay slip should show 8333 not even single penny less for 100k it means you are employer is cheating you.
Try to sort it out with the employer. If employer does not explain, you can change employers, gettiing jobs is not difficult these days. If you think employer has cheated you on wages, contact DOL. But if the wage he mentioned on h1b petition and offer letter is what he is paying to you right now, but he orally agreed to pay you what you think he is paying, then he has conned you. Just be smart and move on, as the employer does not have ethics and "tells lies" to consultants on their salaries, he will face problems in future.
You guys should understand one thing if your base salary is $1000/k, company should process $8333/pm on a pay roll then pay roll will decide about tax withholdings. There is no way company can show gimmicks and run pay roll for less. I have been working for the past 8 years, all the time companies divided annual salary by biweekly and deposited rest will be taken care by pay roll processing.
Bottom line pay slip should show 8333 not even single penny less for 100k it means you are employer is cheating you.
Try to sort it out with the employer. If employer does not explain, you can change employers, gettiing jobs is not difficult these days. If you think employer has cheated you on wages, contact DOL. But if the wage he mentioned on h1b petition and offer letter is what he is paying to you right now, but he orally agreed to pay you what you think he is paying, then he has conned you. Just be smart and move on, as the employer does not have ethics and "tells lies" to consultants on their salaries, he will face problems in future.
willigetagc
08-15 09:06 AM
Hi,
If I am working with X company & Y company is ready to file GC.
(Assuming Y has no objections even if I do not join the company at all)
Is it mandatory for the candidate to join company Y at certain stage which has file GC?
I would appreciate your comments.
Regards,
Sanjeev.
Yes and no. Yes it is mandatory by definition. No because there are ways around. You could go join a school to get higher education. You could ask Y to terminate your employment.
Better still. AFter your GC is approved, get a letter from Y that "unfortunately the position is no longer available. You are most welcome to try for jobs in other areas". Then submit your resume and go for an interview or two, if called. Keep all records, emails. Then you are completely off the hook!!!
If I am working with X company & Y company is ready to file GC.
(Assuming Y has no objections even if I do not join the company at all)
Is it mandatory for the candidate to join company Y at certain stage which has file GC?
I would appreciate your comments.
Regards,
Sanjeev.
Yes and no. Yes it is mandatory by definition. No because there are ways around. You could go join a school to get higher education. You could ask Y to terminate your employment.
Better still. AFter your GC is approved, get a letter from Y that "unfortunately the position is no longer available. You are most welcome to try for jobs in other areas". Then submit your resume and go for an interview or two, if called. Keep all records, emails. Then you are completely off the hook!!!