GCDelay
11-30 03:21 PM
xxx
wallpaper 2012 Volkswagen Beetle
michael_trs
05-14 04:48 PM
Ok. I understand that if I state Master's + 3 or 5 years experience for Software Engineer position I need to answer NO to H14 "requirements normal for the occupation?" because it exceeds SVP. Agree?
Now the question is does it automatically lead to audit?
Now the question is does it automatically lead to audit?
brav
07-31 11:20 AM
After going through all this , now we are hearing discussions that it is safe to maintain a H1B, (just) in case the 485 gets denied.
I for one would take my chances and switch from H1B to EAD.
I for one would take my chances and switch from H1B to EAD.
2011 2012 Volkswagen New Beetle
freedom4ever
04-20 07:12 AM
I filed on March 10 2011 at texas service center, check was cashed on 3/15. Hope that helps.
more...
.jpg "vw beetle 2012 convertible")
Siboo
08-03 11:21 PM
My wife's case is still Pending.
July 2 filer.
PERM
EB2 - India
PD : 08/2005
July 2 filer.
PERM
EB2 - India
PD : 08/2005
tejonidhi
11-27 10:35 AM
Hi,
one of my friend is working for a desi consuting firm. Due to emergency at his place he has to leave to India dusring the labor substition process. Now the consuting firm is saying that they have substituted a labor for him. They did not apply for I140 for him. Please let me know if there is a way to find weather his labor is substituted or not.
Thank you
one of my friend is working for a desi consuting firm. Due to emergency at his place he has to leave to India dusring the labor substition process. Now the consuting firm is saying that they have substituted a labor for him. They did not apply for I140 for him. Please let me know if there is a way to find weather his labor is substituted or not.
Thank you
more...
new2gc
03-31 11:52 AM
Yahoooooooooooooo......We (Me and my wife) received welcome notice today . Our 485 is approved on 25 th March.
no updates online just received postal mail from USCIS today .
I guess end of long wait , been in country from 2001 .
I wish you all the best and hang in there if your PD is current you can expect the notice any time so keep checking your postal mail box .
FYI - I dont know if my back ground check is clear or not , I guess it is .
Congratulations and take a big vacation and ....enjoy!!!
no updates online just received postal mail from USCIS today .
I guess end of long wait , been in country from 2001 .
I wish you all the best and hang in there if your PD is current you can expect the notice any time so keep checking your postal mail box .
FYI - I dont know if my back ground check is clear or not , I guess it is .
Congratulations and take a big vacation and ....enjoy!!!
2010 Cute Car New 2012 VW Beetle
amitjoey
05-31 04:27 PM
100.00 - Google Order #601837695595056
also post in the funding drive.
also post in the funding drive.
more...
paskal
06-03 04:26 PM
numbers are critical to lawmakers and so...
don't think of this as spam!
if it was useless orgs like AILA, ALIPAC and NumbersUSA would not be bothering with webfaxes to lawmakers.
the legislative staff bunch them together and gauge the numbers of people interested in a particular provision or specific relief. therefore the emalils and the webfaxes, even though they have standard language are critical.
As for including every single provision and relief in the webfax, this would not work. It has to be concise and specific with some core issues highlighted- remember iv works with major lobbying firms and certainly has input from people with a lot of experience. Webfaxes and e mails do buy access though for our core team and lobbyists and highlight our issue. Once that is achieved we have a much better chance of getting friendly amendments with various different kinds of relief- including things not specifically mentioned in the webfax itself.
Having said this, it does not stop members from ALSO writing individual e mails to lawmakers highlighting our problems in your own language. I have done so myself and had very encouraging success in getting specific personal responses from the staff of some lawmakers. You all know who friendly senators are, write to them specifically by all means highlighting your individual problems, end my mentioning iv and it's work for skilled immigrants. I even posted the iv message at the end of my personalized e mails.
Please send the iv web fax and e mails and do make the additional efforts as well. and don't forget to contribute...
don't think of this as spam!
if it was useless orgs like AILA, ALIPAC and NumbersUSA would not be bothering with webfaxes to lawmakers.
the legislative staff bunch them together and gauge the numbers of people interested in a particular provision or specific relief. therefore the emalils and the webfaxes, even though they have standard language are critical.
As for including every single provision and relief in the webfax, this would not work. It has to be concise and specific with some core issues highlighted- remember iv works with major lobbying firms and certainly has input from people with a lot of experience. Webfaxes and e mails do buy access though for our core team and lobbyists and highlight our issue. Once that is achieved we have a much better chance of getting friendly amendments with various different kinds of relief- including things not specifically mentioned in the webfax itself.
Having said this, it does not stop members from ALSO writing individual e mails to lawmakers highlighting our problems in your own language. I have done so myself and had very encouraging success in getting specific personal responses from the staff of some lawmakers. You all know who friendly senators are, write to them specifically by all means highlighting your individual problems, end my mentioning iv and it's work for skilled immigrants. I even posted the iv message at the end of my personalized e mails.
Please send the iv web fax and e mails and do make the additional efforts as well. and don't forget to contribute...
hair volkswagen beetle 2012 models.
pappu
12-31 01:35 PM
My case is not complicated (i believe) but transfered from Texas to Vermont.
May be not many adjudicators over there who can handle 485's or lot of workload.
My case is not complicated (i believe) but transfered from Texas to Vermont.
(Hope not many adjudicators over there who can handle 485's or lot of workload. )
[QUOTE or has multiple applications?
Family of three.
It maybe a case of load balancing between service centers, but sending to Vermont is odd after they started bi-specialization. Generally I have heard between Texas or Nebraska and in some cases to Local offices. Did the transfer notice say... we are transferring to speed up your case....?
May be not many adjudicators over there who can handle 485's or lot of workload.
My case is not complicated (i believe) but transfered from Texas to Vermont.
(Hope not many adjudicators over there who can handle 485's or lot of workload. )
[QUOTE or has multiple applications?
Family of three.
It maybe a case of load balancing between service centers, but sending to Vermont is odd after they started bi-specialization. Generally I have heard between Texas or Nebraska and in some cases to Local offices. Did the transfer notice say... we are transferring to speed up your case....?
more...
longq
03-27 02:02 PM
sorry to hear. your education (degree and specilization) must meet the education requirement for the job as mentioned in the labor certification. In general, MS and MBA is not related, unless your lc states that any master degree acceptable for your job. it is a mistake of your lawyer.
hot vw beetle 2012 convertible
xbohdpukc
03-05 08:53 PM
Fine by me if they do offer some SLA. That's always been missing. Thats what I exactly pointed out in my comment. If they were to return my money back if they do not meet their SLA, no one will have issues. or just have PP for almost everything and give equal importance to people who either value time or money.
The truth is that the intent of the Congress was for the fees to cover USCIS business expenses. If USCIS is able to show the Congress that their expenses at the current level are not covered in full by the current fees, new fees will be justified even without improved service quality according to the law. The problem is that the public doesn't know how much of USCIS expenses are going uncovered by the current fees structure. Had they disclosed that piece of information we probably wouldn't have had this discussion in the first place.
The truth is that the intent of the Congress was for the fees to cover USCIS business expenses. If USCIS is able to show the Congress that their expenses at the current level are not covered in full by the current fees, new fees will be justified even without improved service quality according to the law. The problem is that the public doesn't know how much of USCIS expenses are going uncovered by the current fees structure. Had they disclosed that piece of information we probably wouldn't have had this discussion in the first place.
more...
house new volkswagen beetle 2012
chanduv23
03-04 11:04 AM
Dear IV Lawyers,
First of all a big thanks for all the help to the community. There is a new issue cooking up and is happening more frequently these days and the issue is with aceptance of EAD for employment.
We have been hearing cases where jobs offers are rescinded, because company deicded not to hire EAD holders or the first question a company representative asks is what kind of work authorization do you have? if someone says EAD, then the process never even goes further and doors are shut.
i - 9 form clearly says that one cannot discriminate against EAD.
At the most an employer has to verify if it is 180 days past filing 485 and if the job is similar ( which is in 99.99% of cases which is why the candidate applies for the job). After that, all an employer has to provide is a employment verification letter in case of an RFE/NOID/Wrongful denial - which means that employer does not really sponsor the Green card or transfer the process. Employer does not even have to fill out any forms or do any labor market formalities nor has to file any fees.
A simple employment verification letter is given for a lot of reasons like home mortgage, loans, bank, DMV and veriety of reasons and this is also a reason.
My question is - how do we tackle the question if work status is EAD or GC because most times it is asked as a casual question before the interview or during the interview or after the interview.
My hiring manager who was helping me with my RFE EVL (few years back) told me that in future he wont entertain such things and will make sure he does not hire anyone with such issues. I guess thats is what is happening everywhere because of the RFEs or wrongful denials and with the tough job market, it is a good way to filter out people.
Your suggestions and comments are appreciated.
First of all a big thanks for all the help to the community. There is a new issue cooking up and is happening more frequently these days and the issue is with aceptance of EAD for employment.
We have been hearing cases where jobs offers are rescinded, because company deicded not to hire EAD holders or the first question a company representative asks is what kind of work authorization do you have? if someone says EAD, then the process never even goes further and doors are shut.
i - 9 form clearly says that one cannot discriminate against EAD.
At the most an employer has to verify if it is 180 days past filing 485 and if the job is similar ( which is in 99.99% of cases which is why the candidate applies for the job). After that, all an employer has to provide is a employment verification letter in case of an RFE/NOID/Wrongful denial - which means that employer does not really sponsor the Green card or transfer the process. Employer does not even have to fill out any forms or do any labor market formalities nor has to file any fees.
A simple employment verification letter is given for a lot of reasons like home mortgage, loans, bank, DMV and veriety of reasons and this is also a reason.
My question is - how do we tackle the question if work status is EAD or GC because most times it is asked as a casual question before the interview or during the interview or after the interview.
My hiring manager who was helping me with my RFE EVL (few years back) told me that in future he wont entertain such things and will make sure he does not hire anyone with such issues. I guess thats is what is happening everywhere because of the RFEs or wrongful denials and with the tough job market, it is a good way to filter out people.
Your suggestions and comments are appreciated.
tattoo new volkswagen beetle 2012
sathweb
01-21 12:57 PM
Dil ko khush rakhne ke leye, Ghalib yeh khyal be aacha hain. :rolleyes:
(Atleast his thought is good, to keep your mind at peace)
I agree, thought or wish is good. If it is a thought/wish it would start with "I wish" , "I believe" or �I think� etc. His sentence starts with a rumor. Starting a rumor with the intension of misleading people is not good. His/her intensions are very clear.
(Atleast his thought is good, to keep your mind at peace)
I agree, thought or wish is good. If it is a thought/wish it would start with "I wish" , "I believe" or �I think� etc. His sentence starts with a rumor. Starting a rumor with the intension of misleading people is not good. His/her intensions are very clear.
more...
pictures volkswagen beetle 2012 picture
go_guy123
01-11 09:47 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
dresses 2012 volkswagen beetle - new
sagar_nyc
02-10 05:31 PM
My I 140 got approved in 2006. And my lawyer got approval notice. He also gave me copy of it. I just registered my I 140 case number on USCIS site. I was stunned to find out the status that
Current Status: Notice Returned as Undeliverable.
On September 19, 2006, the post office returned the notice we last sent you on this case I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER as undeliverable. This may have serious effects on processing this case. Please call 1-800-375-5283 to update your mailing address for this notice to be re-sent.
I immediately contacted my lawyer. He said that Since He have original approved copy of I140 , I should not worry about it.
I tried even contacting IO. But IO told me that regarding I140 only employer or attorney can call to discuss further. She didn't give me any answers.
Gurus what you think?
Current Status: Notice Returned as Undeliverable.
On September 19, 2006, the post office returned the notice we last sent you on this case I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER as undeliverable. This may have serious effects on processing this case. Please call 1-800-375-5283 to update your mailing address for this notice to be re-sent.
I immediately contacted my lawyer. He said that Since He have original approved copy of I140 , I should not worry about it.
I tried even contacting IO. But IO told me that regarding I140 only employer or attorney can call to discuss further. She didn't give me any answers.
Gurus what you think?
more...
makeup vw beetle 2012 convertible.
Hinglish
01-07 09:21 PM
Hello miss neha ,
Based on your post ....somehow I seriously doubt that you even got accepted into a premium university for MBA in the US of A ... are you sure its really premium? ... How the hell did a premium university accept an essay with such dastardly atrocious english???
your question is interesting .... and a premium university MBA person should be able to decipher the basic H1B regulations ....
The short answer ... yes if you already have a H1B visa and started work on it , you will be "cap-exempt" for subsequent "transfers" ...
Regards
Hinglish
I did my MBA in one of the premium university in USA.
My OPT was ending in May 2008, However since I was in cap-gap, I got a new I-20 from my school till 30-Sep-2008 and I continued working on my I-20 with my previous employer.
I applied for H1-B in FY 2008 under master quota from a small consulting company B.
My case went into RFE so I left USA on 30-Sep-2008.
I got a approved petition on 23-Nov 2008 . I went to New Delhi consulate for H1-B stamping. However I got a Blue 221 G slip. I never submitted any document as the consultant who applied for my visa , needs lots of time to process the documents. In the mean time I got another offer from one of the fortune 500 companies in USA. I am just exploring the possibility of H1-B transfer in this case. Ofcourse they will file a new H1-B application but would I be cap-exempt in this case?
Thanks,
Neha
Based on your post ....somehow I seriously doubt that you even got accepted into a premium university for MBA in the US of A ... are you sure its really premium? ... How the hell did a premium university accept an essay with such dastardly atrocious english???
your question is interesting .... and a premium university MBA person should be able to decipher the basic H1B regulations ....
The short answer ... yes if you already have a H1B visa and started work on it , you will be "cap-exempt" for subsequent "transfers" ...
Regards
Hinglish
I did my MBA in one of the premium university in USA.
My OPT was ending in May 2008, However since I was in cap-gap, I got a new I-20 from my school till 30-Sep-2008 and I continued working on my I-20 with my previous employer.
I applied for H1-B in FY 2008 under master quota from a small consulting company B.
My case went into RFE so I left USA on 30-Sep-2008.
I got a approved petition on 23-Nov 2008 . I went to New Delhi consulate for H1-B stamping. However I got a Blue 221 G slip. I never submitted any document as the consultant who applied for my visa , needs lots of time to process the documents. In the mean time I got another offer from one of the fortune 500 companies in USA. I am just exploring the possibility of H1-B transfer in this case. Ofcourse they will file a new H1-B application but would I be cap-exempt in this case?
Thanks,
Neha
girlfriend Volkswagen+eetle+2012+
leslie535
02-27 11:43 AM
Hi all
I am a green card holder. I received my green card through an application filed by a former employer, and received it in September 2004. I got married in Arpil 2006, my wife is from my home country, she had been in the US previously on an F-1 status which has since ran out. She became pregnant soon after we were married. She came up to the US last September on a B visa. She was given 6 months stay on her I-94; and had the baby here in January of 2007. Her expiration date on the I-94 is in 3 weeks and she is going to leave (with the baby) to maintain good status standing.
I filed for her (I-130) last July. Our plan at this time is for her to go to grad school, apply for a new F-1 to come back here. We are presently waiting for a decsion on the grad school application from the school she applied to.
I hope this isnt too confusing, but can anyone offer any suggestions or help with our situation? In terms of what options are out there for my wife to be here with me if things dont work out with grad school/ F-1 visa? As I mentioned I did file for her, but as I am not a citizen it will take longer. Also our newborn baby is a US citizen as she was born here.
Thank you!!
I am a green card holder. I received my green card through an application filed by a former employer, and received it in September 2004. I got married in Arpil 2006, my wife is from my home country, she had been in the US previously on an F-1 status which has since ran out. She became pregnant soon after we were married. She came up to the US last September on a B visa. She was given 6 months stay on her I-94; and had the baby here in January of 2007. Her expiration date on the I-94 is in 3 weeks and she is going to leave (with the baby) to maintain good status standing.
I filed for her (I-130) last July. Our plan at this time is for her to go to grad school, apply for a new F-1 to come back here. We are presently waiting for a decsion on the grad school application from the school she applied to.
I hope this isnt too confusing, but can anyone offer any suggestions or help with our situation? In terms of what options are out there for my wife to be here with me if things dont work out with grad school/ F-1 visa? As I mentioned I did file for her, but as I am not a citizen it will take longer. Also our newborn baby is a US citizen as she was born here.
Thank you!!
hairstyles [source: VW, Car and Driver
Bogdan
06-03 11:51 PM
Thank you, guys! It is not clear whether Statistics is a STEM major, but I think it is reasonable that it is, since Statistics is a branh of Math. Some universities have Statistics departments and others have Statistics as a concentration in a Math graduate program.
eb2_485_mess
08-29 06:45 PM
did you ask them if the processing date on the website includes applications received on July 2 also? I know it is not clear... but maybe if you had asked them...?
qplearn
12-20 08:45 PM
Undocumented amount 33% taken out from monthly compensation then pay roll tax withhold amount went to federal, state tax, social tax and Medicare.
My point is how can employer deduct tax with is not shown on pay slip.
What would be take home for 100k base? He should deposit $8333/pm not $5835/pm then pay roll processing department will deduct appropriate amount not he deducts 33% then sends to pay roll.
I am sorry to hear this, and I hope your friend is able to get out of the mess. I have heard of something similar, although the logistics were slightly different in that case, from a friend. Unfortunately, such things happen.
My point is how can employer deduct tax with is not shown on pay slip.
What would be take home for 100k base? He should deposit $8333/pm not $5835/pm then pay roll processing department will deduct appropriate amount not he deducts 33% then sends to pay roll.
I am sorry to hear this, and I hope your friend is able to get out of the mess. I have heard of something similar, although the logistics were slightly different in that case, from a friend. Unfortunately, such things happen.
No comments:
Post a Comment