sk.aggarwal
04-05 04:05 PM
Thanks, just got a call from HR. They have got PWD for me.
wallpaper dresses Foggy Forest Wallpaper
psaxena
10-07 03:18 PM
Forget all the middle vendor and lawsuit , nobody will do anything.. In CA if you not aware, there is no legally binding contract that can restrict and employee to work for any employer. Non compete agreements also do not work there, these are just fear tactics. I left my employer and joined the client , and did this 2 times and also that too not even in CA , in other states. Noone did nothing, because it cost time and money and unless there is a 100% chance for the other party to win , they will not get into the lawsuit and stuff as it cost a lot of time and money.
So forget him and also save the middle vendor's number on your phone so next time you can avoid his call.
hi ,
Here is my situation.
(employer) -> (middle vendor ) -> prime vendor -> (End client ).
I am working to a client in california in the above mentioned order. After 1 year we got rid of middle vendor and prime vendor is working with my employer directly . Now middle vendor is threatning me that he can sue me for breaking the line of contract .
i dont understand ho can even its possible as i never signed any document with middle vendor and he is not even my employer . He is just acting as middle layer by showing prime vendor that i am his employee which is wrong. now we removed him from line of contract and he is saying that he will sue all of us for doing this.
is there any way that he can even do this ?
- Thanks in advance.
So forget him and also save the middle vendor's number on your phone so next time you can avoid his call.
hi ,
Here is my situation.
(employer) -> (middle vendor ) -> prime vendor -> (End client ).
I am working to a client in california in the above mentioned order. After 1 year we got rid of middle vendor and prime vendor is working with my employer directly . Now middle vendor is threatning me that he can sue me for breaking the line of contract .
i dont understand ho can even its possible as i never signed any document with middle vendor and he is not even my employer . He is just acting as middle layer by showing prime vendor that i am his employee which is wrong. now we removed him from line of contract and he is saying that he will sue all of us for doing this.
is there any way that he can even do this ?
- Thanks in advance.
koti
10-28 01:52 AM
- Pre-approved labor dated 03/2004
- Filed 140 in 04/2007 and filed 485 in 08/2007. Got EADs as well
- RFE on 140 after 2 years waiting (in fact it was on the last day of 2nd year. In between, it was passed thru all the 4 centers and came back to same place where it was filed). Education mismatch and other stuff. Employer responded in 21 days
- 2nd RFE on 140 after 30 days - Education mismatch - Again responded
- There was no response even after 60 days, so we called and created a service request.
- Finally the 140 has been denied today. I did not get the notice yet. I'm thinking, it is because of Education mismatch
The labor was for 4years degree and I have 3 years degree + 1 year post graduate diploma with 8 years experience by the time filing 140. And I did my masters in US, but I got this after couple of months of I filed my 140.
Please advice what are options available for me.
- Filed 140 in 04/2007 and filed 485 in 08/2007. Got EADs as well
- RFE on 140 after 2 years waiting (in fact it was on the last day of 2nd year. In between, it was passed thru all the 4 centers and came back to same place where it was filed). Education mismatch and other stuff. Employer responded in 21 days
- 2nd RFE on 140 after 30 days - Education mismatch - Again responded
- There was no response even after 60 days, so we called and created a service request.
- Finally the 140 has been denied today. I did not get the notice yet. I'm thinking, it is because of Education mismatch
The labor was for 4years degree and I have 3 years degree + 1 year post graduate diploma with 8 years experience by the time filing 140. And I did my masters in US, but I got this after couple of months of I filed my 140.
Please advice what are options available for me.
2011 Mystical Forest wallpaper
Googler
02-14 05:22 PM
Great ruling. The analysis is totally applicable to AOS. Moreover, the government admitted that it was wrong in recent memo.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
Good point about the recent memo -- happily there are multiple pdfs of it floating around so they can't make that language disappear -- and and immigration judge granting AOS. Those two points should do.
About "name check" nowhere found in laws -- i.e no language in some obscure subsection -- I just want to make sure that the interpretation is ironclad for AOS, we know it is for naturalization.
Yep, I *love* the "unlikely event" part.
"In the context of removal proceedings, ICE has determined that FBI fingerprint checks and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) checks are the required checks for purposes of the applicable regulations."
Wait a minute, isn't immigration judge able to grant AOS in removal proceedings? It means that the DHS acknowledges that it wrongfully interpreted regulations for all these years and that name check is not required by law (at least for AOS) as we were saying all along!
I love also this part: "in the unlikely event that FBI name checks reveal actionable information".
As judge Baylson pointed out, "name check" is nowhere to found in laws and regs.
Good point about the recent memo -- happily there are multiple pdfs of it floating around so they can't make that language disappear -- and and immigration judge granting AOS. Those two points should do.
About "name check" nowhere found in laws -- i.e no language in some obscure subsection -- I just want to make sure that the interpretation is ironclad for AOS, we know it is for naturalization.
Yep, I *love* the "unlikely event" part.
more...
Blog Feeds
02-10 08:50 PM
Most lawyers that are versed in the H1B visa process, are getting busier and busier these days. As we are nearing the April 1, 2010 filing deadline for the H1B visa. Many speculations out there as to when will the Cap be reached this year. The economy is still in recovery mode, and employers are careful before hiring. Yet, many Immigration experts feel the Cap will be met early this year, but when is the big question.
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
JazzByTheBay
09-14 06:26 PM
Or rather, a business meeting (got) scheduled itself with a customer... so it works out!
I was planning on attending even without that happening - now I'm busy rescheduling flights and hotel... :)
http://morejazzbythebay.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/sanjoserallybnr4-2.jpg
SAN JOSE WAS THE BEGINNING, DC WILL BE A HUGE MILESTONE!
(San Jose rally pictures and videos, and Aman's messages from Milpitas, CA meeting can be found at http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com (http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/))
http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/20/99/22609920.jpg
cheers, and see ya'll in DC!
jazz
To attend the rally:
1- I canceled a business meeting - employer didn't like it
2- I moved business travel around the rally, my boss also had to reschedule
3- I am flying in from Texas
Those of us near Washington, it will be so much easier than this for you to make it! Just get in your car or the train and go to DC for the day!
WE REALLY REALLY NEED YOU!!! THIS IS NO JOKE GUYS!!!! PLEASE MAKE UP YOUR MIND AND ATTEND, YOU WILL BE SO GLAD YOU DID! ALREADY WE HAVE SOME GOOD PRESS BUZZ AND ARE BACKED BY HIGHER-UPS LIKE THE GOVERNORS AND SEN. CORNYN WITH HIS LATEST LEGISLATION. NOW ALL WE NEED IS YOU!!!!! PLEASE JOIN US!!!! YOU WILL BE GLAD YOU DID AND WE WILL SUCCEED TOGETHER!!! LET'S GO GUYS! THIS WILL BE HISTORIC!!!!
I was planning on attending even without that happening - now I'm busy rescheduling flights and hotel... :)
http://morejazzbythebay.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/sanjoserallybnr4-2.jpg
SAN JOSE WAS THE BEGINNING, DC WILL BE A HUGE MILESTONE!
(San Jose rally pictures and videos, and Aman's messages from Milpitas, CA meeting can be found at http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com (http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/))
http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/20/99/22609920.jpg
cheers, and see ya'll in DC!
jazz
To attend the rally:
1- I canceled a business meeting - employer didn't like it
2- I moved business travel around the rally, my boss also had to reschedule
3- I am flying in from Texas
Those of us near Washington, it will be so much easier than this for you to make it! Just get in your car or the train and go to DC for the day!
WE REALLY REALLY NEED YOU!!! THIS IS NO JOKE GUYS!!!! PLEASE MAKE UP YOUR MIND AND ATTEND, YOU WILL BE SO GLAD YOU DID! ALREADY WE HAVE SOME GOOD PRESS BUZZ AND ARE BACKED BY HIGHER-UPS LIKE THE GOVERNORS AND SEN. CORNYN WITH HIS LATEST LEGISLATION. NOW ALL WE NEED IS YOU!!!!! PLEASE JOIN US!!!! YOU WILL BE GLAD YOU DID AND WE WILL SUCCEED TOGETHER!!! LET'S GO GUYS! THIS WILL BE HISTORIC!!!!
more...
jasmin45
08-02 04:27 PM
I have been reading posts on here and I think I am more confused than ever now. People are talking about 180 days? 180 days from what and for what? I have a call in to my lawyer but hes hard to reach.... So maybe you guys can clarify for me? I have an approved labor cert w/ priority date of July 06. Sent my app and my husbands app to the NSC on June 27th for our 485 & 765 (the work authorization for both). So what now? I will get a receipt date, then eventually a notice for fingerprints and then my work authorization? And then what - we eventually will get our green card? When does your change in status occur? once you get the green card? or once my 485 is pending? Thank you for your help in advance, Lisa
Status changes after your I-485 is approved. Not when your 485 is pending.once they approve your AOS application (I-485), your G card will be ordered for printing and eventually will get ship to you.
Status changes after your I-485 is approved. Not when your 485 is pending.once they approve your AOS application (I-485), your G card will be ordered for printing and eventually will get ship to you.
2010 winter Forest wallpaper
perm2gc
06-30 01:03 AM
I was listing to NPR Diane Rim show. Not sure who guests were. But When Diana asked if there is any chance that bill might come back.. He said, no bill won't come back but there is chance that some pieces of immigration may come in seperate pieces in around sep. He did say some bill might come for High skilled.. He gave example of Bill Clinton's health care immigration bill.
Anybody got chance to hear to NPR today?
i heard it
Anybody got chance to hear to NPR today?
i heard it
more...
crystal
09-17 12:49 PM
This will be a problem for all the people whose cases gets transfered from other centers to NSC or TSC. May be it is just the receipt date of transfer notice... Not the actual 485 application ? A clarification from USCIS would help
hair mossy forest wallpapers
mena
11-26 03:03 PM
I asked my Lawyer and she told me it's
NSEERS is the official name of the special registration program
and I have to show the proof that I registered during special registration. It's something started back in 2001. I think I didn't send my old I-94 and passport copies on which there is a stamp that I did went for that registeration.
So have provided that information to my Lawyer. I hope it covers what USCIS is asking for.
Thanks
NSEERS is the official name of the special registration program
and I have to show the proof that I registered during special registration. It's something started back in 2001. I think I didn't send my old I-94 and passport copies on which there is a stamp that I did went for that registeration.
So have provided that information to my Lawyer. I hope it covers what USCIS is asking for.
Thanks
more...
.jpg "Forest Nature Wallpapers")
webm
02-28 01:36 PM
Dear friends,
I am not fully clear on this..
Are they going to be seperate FP notices one for 485 and one for 765??
So far I have received only one FP notice..So does this effect EAD renewals??
Any one on the same boat??
Thanks!
I am not fully clear on this..
Are they going to be seperate FP notices one for 485 and one for 765??
So far I have received only one FP notice..So does this effect EAD renewals??
Any one on the same boat??
Thanks!
hot forest elf woods Wallpaper
waitin_toolong
08-16 05:57 PM
you dont need to have ssn in hand to start work only EAD. Apply for SSn and the employer will be handed over docs of application, it takes 4-6 weeks to get the card.
if she already has TIN then do inform irs of the change and paprfile tax returns next year
if she already has TIN then do inform irs of the change and paprfile tax returns next year
more...
house Forest Wallpapers. Download
sdrk
07-09 07:34 AM
Reached on July 2nd, 9.01 AM through FedEx, mailed on June 29th
tattoo For MYSTICAL FOREST WALLPAPER
painful_GC
05-05 01:32 PM
Hi ..Many thanks for the response..i am planning to apply for COS to L2 as my H1 is still pending for a while..could you please confirm me the requirements/documents need to be attached..
1) My H1 reciept copy
2) L1 B of primary reciept/approval notice
3) Employment letter from primary..
could you please shed some light on this ??
1) My H1 reciept copy
2) L1 B of primary reciept/approval notice
3) Employment letter from primary..
could you please shed some light on this ??
more...
pictures Everything in this forest is
sush
07-30 07:48 PM
EAD is based on pending I-485 and for filing 485, you just need 140 received. So you are OK. My uunderstanding is you can also use AC21 portability after 180 days to change employers as long as your employer doesn't revoke your I-140. So there is that risk with I-140 not approved.
P.S my I-140 app is pending with TSC from May 2006. Almost 425 days plus and still no update/no RFE. Even upgraded it to PP on Jun 18th 2007 but still nothing.
P.S my I-140 app is pending with TSC from May 2006. Almost 425 days plus and still no update/no RFE. Even upgraded it to PP on Jun 18th 2007 but still nothing.
dresses Majestic Forest Wallpaper
mrajatish
06-18 05:55 PM
Exactly the same as mine (except that I needed to copy whole passport)
more...
makeup Dense Forest wallpaper
Chris Rock
08-12 12:21 PM
thanks
girlfriend Rain Forest Tropic Wallpaper
eyeswe
12-18 09:54 PM
I am not able to get into chat?
There is a minimum number of posts and points needed to enter chat
There is a minimum number of posts and points needed to enter chat
hairstyles Forest Nature Wallpapers
dkupadhyay
02-03 10:55 AM
My I-485 application finally got denied on 02/02/10. I just got e-mail update. Don't have any details as of now.
rahul2699
05-19 11:13 AM
My H1B expired, and they are now just working on the labor certification process, so I have left the country and working outside the US. Someone did tell me that after I have been out for a 12 month period they may get me back under a new H1B. Is this correct? Reason I ask is that I have been out of the US for 4 months, and they seem to be working very slow on my Labor Cert, and I know once the this is submitted I have to wait a further 12 months, so wanted to see if it is viable to get a new H1B. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Yes if you live out of US for at least a year after the full H-1B term, you can apply for a new H-1B. If i were you, i'll keep the labor process going while applying for a new H-1 because GC is for future employment and if anything you can retain the priority date...
Yes if you live out of US for at least a year after the full H-1B term, you can apply for a new H-1B. If i were you, i'll keep the labor process going while applying for a new H-1 because GC is for future employment and if anything you can retain the priority date...
vallabhu
06-15 09:06 AM
Hi Guys lets count number of people getting temporary benefit of filing 485 at this time, after we get our our EAD's how much are we ready to spend for lobbying to get our GC's soon.
How much are you going to contribute to IV.
How much are you going to contribute to IV.
No comments:
Post a Comment