zxc1251
02-03 02:46 PM
Just curious...WHAT CULTURE R U TALKING ABOUT?
1. 2G scam --- Our culture
2. CWG scam --- Our culture
3. Adarsh Housing society scam --- Our culture
4. Land acquisition in states like K'taka and Andhra --- Our culture
5. Gang rapes in Delhi --- Our culture
6. IPL scams --- Our culture
7. Not allowed to hoist our flag in our own country (Kashmir) --- Our culture
8. Chinese can claim Arunachal and issue stapled visas - its OK. Pakis violate ceasefire - Not OK --- Our culture
9. North Indians treated as aliens in Mumbai --- Our culture
10. Hordes of muslims killed in Gujarat --- Our culture
11. Celebrities like Salman, Sanjay Dutt can kill ppl on road, possess AK 47s and still get away with it --- Our culture
12. Mining scam in K'taka and Andhra --- Our culture
The list is never ending brother...CHEATING PPL OF THEIR HARD EARNED TAX MONEY IS THE CHEATERS' CULTURE and GETTING CHEATED BY SUCH CHEATERS IS THE COMMON MAN's CULTURE.
Ofcourse, there's corruption and sickos everywhere. But relatively what is better??? When u have an option what do u want to embrace???
Just speaking 100 languages and celebrating 100 festivals and females not mingling with males thus keeping away from social life etc...is not culture. Ur every day news is culture as well. Wake up to reality and make the choice when u have the liberty to make it.
All said, its ur choice end of the day. Weighing b/w the good and bad and if ur tax money is put to good use or what? I think the writing on the wall is clear and can easily make out the differences b/w white and black. But again thats just me. 5 fingers are not the same.
I think you got culture and problems mixed up......
What you have listed are problems our country is facing right now.....
While speaking 100 languages, celebrating 100 festivals and learning same values that we, our parents and their parents believed in is really a culture......
1. 2G scam --- Our culture
2. CWG scam --- Our culture
3. Adarsh Housing society scam --- Our culture
4. Land acquisition in states like K'taka and Andhra --- Our culture
5. Gang rapes in Delhi --- Our culture
6. IPL scams --- Our culture
7. Not allowed to hoist our flag in our own country (Kashmir) --- Our culture
8. Chinese can claim Arunachal and issue stapled visas - its OK. Pakis violate ceasefire - Not OK --- Our culture
9. North Indians treated as aliens in Mumbai --- Our culture
10. Hordes of muslims killed in Gujarat --- Our culture
11. Celebrities like Salman, Sanjay Dutt can kill ppl on road, possess AK 47s and still get away with it --- Our culture
12. Mining scam in K'taka and Andhra --- Our culture
The list is never ending brother...CHEATING PPL OF THEIR HARD EARNED TAX MONEY IS THE CHEATERS' CULTURE and GETTING CHEATED BY SUCH CHEATERS IS THE COMMON MAN's CULTURE.
Ofcourse, there's corruption and sickos everywhere. But relatively what is better??? When u have an option what do u want to embrace???
Just speaking 100 languages and celebrating 100 festivals and females not mingling with males thus keeping away from social life etc...is not culture. Ur every day news is culture as well. Wake up to reality and make the choice when u have the liberty to make it.
All said, its ur choice end of the day. Weighing b/w the good and bad and if ur tax money is put to good use or what? I think the writing on the wall is clear and can easily make out the differences b/w white and black. But again thats just me. 5 fingers are not the same.
I think you got culture and problems mixed up......
What you have listed are problems our country is facing right now.....
While speaking 100 languages, celebrating 100 festivals and learning same values that we, our parents and their parents believed in is really a culture......
wallpaper Emma Watson
Humhongekamyab
05-05 04:39 PM
So will the June 2008 bulletin be out this Friday or next. I can't wait for the new numbers.
danu2007
07-09 06:50 PM
mcuban@hd.net,
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
wnelson@hd.net,
nytnews@nytimes.com,
news-tips@nytimes.com,
washington@nytimes.com,
AmericasNewsroom@foxnews.com,
satya.prakash@hindustantimes.com,
pmagazine@hindustantimes.com,
aditya.ghosh@hindustantimes.com,
Fatherjonathan@foxnews.com,
Drmanny@foxnews.com,
Beltway@foxnews.com,
Myword@foxnews.com,
Bigstory-weekend@foxnews.com,
Bigstoryweekend@foxnews.com,
Bullsandbears@foxnews.com,
Cash@foxnews.com,
Cavuto@foxnews.com,
Fncimag@foxnews.com,
Forbes@foxnews.com,
Friends@foxnews.com,
Feedback@foxnews.com,
Jamie@foxnews.com,
Fncspecials@foxnews.com,
FNS@foxnews.com,
Newswatch@foxnews.com,
Foxreport@foxnews.com,
Atlarge@foxnews.com,
Heartland@foxnews.com,
JER@foxnews.com,
Lineup@foxnews.com,
Ontherecord@foxnews.com,
Oreilly@foxnews.com,
Redeye@foxnews.com,
Special@foxnews.com,
Studiob@foxnews.com,
Hemmer@foxnews.com,
Colonelscorner@foxnews.com,
Housecall@foxnews.com,
Hannity@foxnews.com,
Colmes@foxnews.com,
Letters@newsweek.com,
Customer.Care@newsweek.com,
viewerservices@msnbc.com,
today@nbc.com,
wt@nbc.com,
mtp@nbc.com,
abc.news.magazines@abc.com,
letters@msnbc.com
2011 Emma Watson#39;s New Pixie
niraja74
04-09 05:05 AM
I searched my case on FLC data center and found following for my LC approval
Employer_Job_Title = Computer Project Manager
Prevailing_Wage_Job_Title = Computer Project Manager
Prevailing_Wage_Level = Level II
Prevailing_Wage_SOC_CODE = 11-9041.00
Prevailing_Wage_SOC_Title = Engineering Managers
Prevailing_Wage_Source = OES
While I work as senior software/application developer in my current role with the same employer who filed my LC and GC.
Now I am getting an offer from another employer with same title "Senior Software Engineer".
Is it advisable to change job as my job code (job description) might be different from the one that was mentioned in LC?
Thanks in advance for your inputs and thoughts.
Employer_Job_Title = Computer Project Manager
Prevailing_Wage_Job_Title = Computer Project Manager
Prevailing_Wage_Level = Level II
Prevailing_Wage_SOC_CODE = 11-9041.00
Prevailing_Wage_SOC_Title = Engineering Managers
Prevailing_Wage_Source = OES
While I work as senior software/application developer in my current role with the same employer who filed my LC and GC.
Now I am getting an offer from another employer with same title "Senior Software Engineer".
Is it advisable to change job as my job code (job description) might be different from the one that was mentioned in LC?
Thanks in advance for your inputs and thoughts.
more...
Lasantha
02-05 10:30 AM
I only took Bank Statements. In my case they did not even ask to see those.
As proof of funds for landing, do we need to carry cashiers-checks etc or just a plain printout of bank-statement (INGDirect) is good enough?
Thanks.
As proof of funds for landing, do we need to carry cashiers-checks etc or just a plain printout of bank-statement (INGDirect) is good enough?
Thanks.
imneedy
08-30 08:36 AM
Ha ha Congrats....
Story of my life. I complain about delay with my application. Someone joins me and tells me they are in the same boat and the very next day that someone leaves the boat and jumps into "greener" pastures. Everyone is leaving the boat and I seem to be left out :(
Who else are in my boat? (Application with an officer for over 2 weeks and still status = "Initial Review")
me too in same boat. :) In my case USCIS have wrong priority date on my case. On their records it somehow shows Jan 2006, while it should be Jul 2003. I have tried to get it resolved but they haven't done anything about it [had tried Ombudsman (7001), Senator, congressman, SR etc]. Funny thing is even the incorrect priority date is current now. And still waiting for GC for over a month :mad:
Story of my life. I complain about delay with my application. Someone joins me and tells me they are in the same boat and the very next day that someone leaves the boat and jumps into "greener" pastures. Everyone is leaving the boat and I seem to be left out :(
Who else are in my boat? (Application with an officer for over 2 weeks and still status = "Initial Review")
me too in same boat. :) In my case USCIS have wrong priority date on my case. On their records it somehow shows Jan 2006, while it should be Jul 2003. I have tried to get it resolved but they haven't done anything about it [had tried Ombudsman (7001), Senator, congressman, SR etc]. Funny thing is even the incorrect priority date is current now. And still waiting for GC for over a month :mad:
more...
phillyag
08-25 06:38 AM
The Last updated date for my I -485 application is showing as 8/24/2010 now.
What does that mean ?
What does that mean ?
2010 emma watson short haircut
vbkris77
05-04 10:52 PM
(d) Treatment of Family Members. - A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (E) of section 101(b)(1) shall, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection (a), (b), or (c), be entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent.
This basically tells me that they need to be given the same status only if they can't given immigrant visa in other category. But if they can be, why should they be used in this category? As someone said earlier, FB for Family is actually better than EB2. So this basically rules out their rational on giving EB2, EB3 dependents on this VISA.
I am not talking about EB1 here.
Naveen, I haven't given you any Reds. I feel sorry for your situation. Guys, lets discuss and analyze in a constructive way and don't go personal. None of us here will get GC twice by chasing someone's moral down..
This basically tells me that they need to be given the same status only if they can't given immigrant visa in other category. But if they can be, why should they be used in this category? As someone said earlier, FB for Family is actually better than EB2. So this basically rules out their rational on giving EB2, EB3 dependents on this VISA.
I am not talking about EB1 here.
Naveen, I haven't given you any Reds. I feel sorry for your situation. Guys, lets discuss and analyze in a constructive way and don't go personal. None of us here will get GC twice by chasing someone's moral down..
more...
BharatPremi
03-26 09:15 AM
Just curious
EB2-India with May 2005 PD and before : All will be out before May 2010 with some residuals in NC. One thing I am sure, EB2/3-India with PD 2006 and afterwards should not start working on EAD and will have to hold on to H1.
PDs with 2006 and onwards - both for EB2/3 - Unpredictable and scary assuming no change in current immigration policies.
EB2-India with May 2005 PD and before : All will be out before May 2010 with some residuals in NC. One thing I am sure, EB2/3-India with PD 2006 and afterwards should not start working on EAD and will have to hold on to H1.
PDs with 2006 and onwards - both for EB2/3 - Unpredictable and scary assuming no change in current immigration policies.
hair Emma Watson
shreekarthik
10-08 06:40 PM
First I-485 is triggered by an act of the applicant (he has to apply). So USCIS is never going to know whether an earlier applicant is still out there trying to file his application or not. In fact I would blame the entire retrogression on USCIS' attempt at FIFO which is scientifically impossible. It only results in wastage of visa numbers. In 2004 USCIS wasted 47000 visa numbers, in 2006 it wasted 10000 visa numbers. What USCIS could think of doing is just approve whoever is approvable. So the visa bulletin has only 2 possible values "C" and "U". If an earlier I485 applicant is stuck in name check then he should take appropriate action (writing to senators, FL, GWB or file WoM) and get his case adjudicated.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
There are a lot of misconceptions about AoS. Let me write it here.
1. A visa number is not needed to get AoS adjudicated. A visa number is only required to file the application. But USCIS' stand is that visa number is required both while filing and adjudicating. This according to the statutes and regulations is not true and valid. If USCIS screwed up and delayed adjudicating your application that is their problem. According to statutes and regulations a visa number is only required at the time the application is filed.
2. Neither Statutes nor regulations call for any fbi name check. Remember FBI name check is different from criminal back ground check or finger print check. The name check is an arbitrary decision by FBI and USCIS and will not stand in any court of law.
3. An FBI name check was never called for by USCIS on AoS applicants. It was only required for naturalization applicants. FBI screwed up by sending every one's name through this dreaded name check and now claims that it has too many names to check.
4. If your AoS application is pending for more than a year file a law suit against USCIS because USCIS violated regulations 103.2(b)(18). According to this regulation if an investigation is pending for 6 months district director should review it. At the end of 1 year he should again review it. After that it has to be escalated to higher authorities. Trust me this never happens. Violation of regulations is a serious offense.
So FIFO will never happen because USCIS cannot control who will apply when. Second FIFO is really bad because USCIS then has to keep shuffling its visa numbers around. Instead if it just approves anyone who is approvable atleast visa numbers would get used.
more...
delax
07-27 08:01 PM
Earlier it was like this:
EB2 ROW --> EB3 ROW
If any left over after that then remaining numbers were equally divided between EB2-I/C and EB3-I/C so both EB2-I and EB3-I were getting equal share of spillover. Thats the way it should be.
If that were to be the case then EBROW should never have been retrogressed. E3ROW has been retrogressed for the last 20 months now.
EB2 ROW --> EB3 ROW
If any left over after that then remaining numbers were equally divided between EB2-I/C and EB3-I/C so both EB2-I and EB3-I were getting equal share of spillover. Thats the way it should be.
If that were to be the case then EBROW should never have been retrogressed. E3ROW has been retrogressed for the last 20 months now.
hot Pixie Haircuts 2011-2012
delhiguy
07-08 05:54 PM
No onde denies that we cannot vote. But we have the basic rights, like being treated "equally and fairly". For example, if some employer violates labor law and did not pay you for your work, I am sure you can sue, even though you are not a citizen. There are some basic rights that everyone has, esp. if you hold good fainth and are damaged. Statement that you do not have any rights as you are not a citizen is just wrong. I am wondering how this will impact people's (esp. people from other countries) perception about this. :confused:
Sir,
What i said are my views after reading through the internet, I may be wrong.
We would now have to wait for the lawsuite judgement , to know where we stand.
I planned to sue my previous employer and i called a labor lawyer , when i told him i am on h1b , he said that i need to call some lawyers who specialize in h1b labor law, as his expertise is in labor law specific to us citizens..
Sir,
What i said are my views after reading through the internet, I may be wrong.
We would now have to wait for the lawsuite judgement , to know where we stand.
I planned to sue my previous employer and i called a labor lawyer , when i told him i am on h1b , he said that i need to call some lawyers who specialize in h1b labor law, as his expertise is in labor law specific to us citizens..
more...
house How lovelythe pixie haircut
oguinan
07-09 01:04 AM
For some postal destinations the USPS offers guaranteed 2 day service. I recently mailed a package where this service was offered. The postal worker explained that if the package was mailed on a Friday, it would be delivered on Sunday. San Francisco, CA is one of the destinations where this service is offered and the package in question was, indeed, delivered on a Sunday.
You should check whether the postal service offers the 2-day service to the USCIS office.
United states postal service. My lawyer sent it on june 29 and to this day it's a mestry to me how it was delivered at 10:10 pm at night. I did not think anybody would accept it. BUt if they were working on 25000 in 48 hours. The only reason i think they took it is to finish the number of visa available.
still It does not mean anything ... they can reject it.
You should check whether the postal service offers the 2-day service to the USCIS office.
United states postal service. My lawyer sent it on june 29 and to this day it's a mestry to me how it was delivered at 10:10 pm at night. I did not think anybody would accept it. BUt if they were working on 25000 in 48 hours. The only reason i think they took it is to finish the number of visa available.
still It does not mean anything ... they can reject it.
tattoo Hollywood Loves Pixie Cuts!
gc4me
04-23 02:50 PM
This guy is a deshi employer. He is on H1 so he is a silent partner & that why scratching his head.
There are attorneys who will charge only after recovering money. The stupid employer can be sued for lost wages along with civil penalties from which the attorney's fee will be paid.
I just read first page of this thread and would advice that don't follow most of reply because they are lawyers or they have not gone through the experience you are going through. $4000 may not be big amount compared to hassle of law suite , piece of mind or the amount of increase you may have received by switching employer. I know a close person who had gone through exactly same situation in NJ and had to pay 12,000 to settle the case. I have seen bunch of people in same situation and my friend always adviced them to stay away from law suite. If your current employer is not big then there are greater chances that it will turn away from you in case of law suite.
If you are not working with same client that you were working when you were in company A then non-compete may not hold against you.
Also can you get in writing from you current employer that they will support you in case of law suite?
There are attorneys who will charge only after recovering money. The stupid employer can be sued for lost wages along with civil penalties from which the attorney's fee will be paid.
I just read first page of this thread and would advice that don't follow most of reply because they are lawyers or they have not gone through the experience you are going through. $4000 may not be big amount compared to hassle of law suite , piece of mind or the amount of increase you may have received by switching employer. I know a close person who had gone through exactly same situation in NJ and had to pay 12,000 to settle the case. I have seen bunch of people in same situation and my friend always adviced them to stay away from law suite. If your current employer is not big then there are greater chances that it will turn away from you in case of law suite.
If you are not working with same client that you were working when you were in company A then non-compete may not hold against you.
Also can you get in writing from you current employer that they will support you in case of law suite?
more...
pictures cute pixie haircut. Emma
JulyFiler
10-08 06:43 PM
I'm currently on my 4th EAD & AP, and I used AC21 twice so far to switch jobs (similar job descriptions, including the specific technologies I worked on). On both occasions, I have not informed USCIS. My attorney said one is not legally required to do so, and that we could respond if there is any RFE.
But I also know that there are lot of attorneys out there who recommend informing USCIS about the job change. I don't personally know of anyone who have used AC21 and went on to get the green card, so I can't really tell which approach is better. In either case, make sure to have all relevant paper work with you - specifically the experience letters from old employers with proper job descriptions.
As for the salary increases when changing jobs, I did talk to more than one attorney about this. And what I heard consistently was that higher salary is not as much of a problem as lower salary could be. In my case, I had salary increases of more than 30% each time I changed jobs, and I am doing fine so far. Whether that becomes a problem for me or not, I will deal with it when it happens.
I traveled out of the country a couple of times using AP. On my return to US, at the port of entry (SFO), I was asked if I still worked for the company that originally sponsored my GC application. I told them I changed employers using AC21, and that I was not legally required to inform USCIS about the job change. And they let me go without causing any trouble. Not sure if anyone else had different experiences in such case, but the immigration officers at SFO seem to be somewhat easier to deal with (assuming you haven't done anything wrong, of course).
I did have trouble with AC21 once. I ended up having a gap between my 2nd and 3rd EADs (so did my wife too), as we tried to do too much 'optimization' of EADs. Well, we learned the hard way that 'optimization' effort is bad, as both of us had to stop working during the gap. It's not a very pleasant feeling having to explain our respective employers that we had such issue. We lost money too, as we couldn't be legally paid during the gap - in addition to the unnecessary stress. I wish USCIS issues EADs with longer validity period - something like 3 years (but I once heard Aman say that they couldn't do so due to a software glitch in their system!!). In any case, we are now filing for EAD renewals well in advance of the current one's expiry.
Other issues with AC21 that we faced are things like having to pay for EAD and AP renewals every year, which is quite expensive. I guess you could negotiate this with your new employer when changing jobs. And the sheer inability to change your job roles or take on more responsibilities (on paper too!) is frustrating, but that is more of a lengthy GC processing symptom than an AC21 issue.
All things considered, I think AC21 is good. It's got it's set of issues, especially if you don't use it wisely, but it at least lets you have some kind of progress in your careers. The way I see it, if there is no career progress, I can at least make more money. You got to gain something over years of waiting to keep you going!
Let me ask you a question.
When you renew EAD what will be the start date. For example:
Lets say current EAD Expires 12/31/2007.
I apply for renewal in July say 07/01/2007.
When I get the new EAD would it start from 12/31/2007 to 12/31/2008 or sometime in July/August/September when it gets approved?
Basically would the renewal date start from where the current one is expiring or from the dat it got approved?
Thanks
But I also know that there are lot of attorneys out there who recommend informing USCIS about the job change. I don't personally know of anyone who have used AC21 and went on to get the green card, so I can't really tell which approach is better. In either case, make sure to have all relevant paper work with you - specifically the experience letters from old employers with proper job descriptions.
As for the salary increases when changing jobs, I did talk to more than one attorney about this. And what I heard consistently was that higher salary is not as much of a problem as lower salary could be. In my case, I had salary increases of more than 30% each time I changed jobs, and I am doing fine so far. Whether that becomes a problem for me or not, I will deal with it when it happens.
I traveled out of the country a couple of times using AP. On my return to US, at the port of entry (SFO), I was asked if I still worked for the company that originally sponsored my GC application. I told them I changed employers using AC21, and that I was not legally required to inform USCIS about the job change. And they let me go without causing any trouble. Not sure if anyone else had different experiences in such case, but the immigration officers at SFO seem to be somewhat easier to deal with (assuming you haven't done anything wrong, of course).
I did have trouble with AC21 once. I ended up having a gap between my 2nd and 3rd EADs (so did my wife too), as we tried to do too much 'optimization' of EADs. Well, we learned the hard way that 'optimization' effort is bad, as both of us had to stop working during the gap. It's not a very pleasant feeling having to explain our respective employers that we had such issue. We lost money too, as we couldn't be legally paid during the gap - in addition to the unnecessary stress. I wish USCIS issues EADs with longer validity period - something like 3 years (but I once heard Aman say that they couldn't do so due to a software glitch in their system!!). In any case, we are now filing for EAD renewals well in advance of the current one's expiry.
Other issues with AC21 that we faced are things like having to pay for EAD and AP renewals every year, which is quite expensive. I guess you could negotiate this with your new employer when changing jobs. And the sheer inability to change your job roles or take on more responsibilities (on paper too!) is frustrating, but that is more of a lengthy GC processing symptom than an AC21 issue.
All things considered, I think AC21 is good. It's got it's set of issues, especially if you don't use it wisely, but it at least lets you have some kind of progress in your careers. The way I see it, if there is no career progress, I can at least make more money. You got to gain something over years of waiting to keep you going!
Let me ask you a question.
When you renew EAD what will be the start date. For example:
Lets say current EAD Expires 12/31/2007.
I apply for renewal in July say 07/01/2007.
When I get the new EAD would it start from 12/31/2007 to 12/31/2008 or sometime in July/August/September when it gets approved?
Basically would the renewal date start from where the current one is expiring or from the dat it got approved?
Thanks
dresses Emma Watson rocking the pixie
sankap
07-10 09:52 PM
@Ramba:
Nice assumptions...but we need evidence. Do any USCIS documents say they would need proof of a *running* income? (After all, you don't have paystubs for a future job in same/similar occupation.) Since GC is for *future* job, why can't self-employment in same/similar occupation, under AC21 and with *projected* revenues, be enough? Do they ask for paystubs and proof of long-term commitments/contracts in EVL-RFE?
Re wages, here's Yates memo verbiage:
Question 5. Should service centers or district officers use a difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification and initial I-140, and the new employment as basis for denial in adjustment portability cases?
Answer: No. As noted above the relevant inquiry is if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification to the alien’s I-140 employment. A difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification, initial I-140 and the new employment cannot be used as a basis of a denial. However, a substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage may be taken into consideration as a factor in determining if the new employment is “same or similar.”
Pls note that with current recession/depression, the "prevailing wages" for same/similar occupations have gone down--drastically in some cases (esp. IT). Also, you could open/register your LLC (by spending $400) for your self-employment to sound more "legitimate"--but that's certainly not a requirement.
USCIS may not buy if no income shown thro the bussiness. One may have a simple bussiness model. However, they should be in a position to show documentary evidence that they are making similar money as per 140, and importantly they are doing same kind of work when self employed, and they have a long term commitment/contract for their bussiness. Then only they may belief that you are doing legitimate bussiness thro self employment. Just writing EVL in a letter head will not serve the purpose.
Nice assumptions...but we need evidence. Do any USCIS documents say they would need proof of a *running* income? (After all, you don't have paystubs for a future job in same/similar occupation.) Since GC is for *future* job, why can't self-employment in same/similar occupation, under AC21 and with *projected* revenues, be enough? Do they ask for paystubs and proof of long-term commitments/contracts in EVL-RFE?
Re wages, here's Yates memo verbiage:
Question 5. Should service centers or district officers use a difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification and initial I-140, and the new employment as basis for denial in adjustment portability cases?
Answer: No. As noted above the relevant inquiry is if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification to the alien’s I-140 employment. A difference in the wage offered on the approved labor certification, initial I-140 and the new employment cannot be used as a basis of a denial. However, a substantial discrepancy between the previous and the new wage may be taken into consideration as a factor in determining if the new employment is “same or similar.”
Pls note that with current recession/depression, the "prevailing wages" for same/similar occupations have gone down--drastically in some cases (esp. IT). Also, you could open/register your LLC (by spending $400) for your self-employment to sound more "legitimate"--but that's certainly not a requirement.
USCIS may not buy if no income shown thro the bussiness. One may have a simple bussiness model. However, they should be in a position to show documentary evidence that they are making similar money as per 140, and importantly they are doing same kind of work when self employed, and they have a long term commitment/contract for their bussiness. Then only they may belief that you are doing legitimate bussiness thro self employment. Just writing EVL in a letter head will not serve the purpose.
more...
makeup Emma Watson#39;s new hairstyle!
Leo07
11-17 03:23 PM
and BUMP...
Thanks for the initiative
Done!!!
Thanks for the initiative
Done!!!
girlfriend emma watson pic ap 963376794
bkarnik
05-05 11:13 AM
In continuation of the post from Nenneo, I had the chance to see Newt Gingrich, ex-speaker of the house and who is currently testing the waters for a possible 2008 Pres. nomination from the GOP. His response, I think, speaks volumes about the type of people the GOP would like to see here.
He indicated that he is totally against illegal immigration and pro legal immigration. But, when it came to students who were pursuing higher education in the US, according to Newt, "is a no-brainer, we get them here, we train and teach them, it does not make sense to let them go. These students should be given a visa as soon as they find a job, as long as they have not committed any felony and especially since the students have been in the US for 2+years it is sufficient time to get to know them and their backgrounds and for them to be assimilated in the US way of life."
My 2-cents to clarify the thinking behind giving more preference to US educated students vs non-US educated ones. This coming from a senior GOP leader.
He indicated that he is totally against illegal immigration and pro legal immigration. But, when it came to students who were pursuing higher education in the US, according to Newt, "is a no-brainer, we get them here, we train and teach them, it does not make sense to let them go. These students should be given a visa as soon as they find a job, as long as they have not committed any felony and especially since the students have been in the US for 2+years it is sufficient time to get to know them and their backgrounds and for them to be assimilated in the US way of life."
My 2-cents to clarify the thinking behind giving more preference to US educated students vs non-US educated ones. This coming from a senior GOP leader.
hairstyles emma watson haircut pictures.
nogreen4decade
08-25 12:08 PM
I never had a soft LUD on my 485 because of EAD renewal.... But one time I saw it, but my lawyers filed AC21 around the same time.... So I would think it was because of AC21.... So I was always under the impression that EAD renewal has no LUD's on 485, based on my experience
My wife got a soft LUD on 8/21. She has PD of Dec 2005 EB2 (I). I wa shappy to see some activity but then i saw the following thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599851-ead-renewal-but-i-485-update.html#post1981520) . It looks like some got the soft LUD on their 485 but their EAD was in process and same is the case wiht my wife. She applied for EAD renewal last month.
My wife got a soft LUD on 8/21. She has PD of Dec 2005 EB2 (I). I wa shappy to see some activity but then i saw the following thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum5-all-other-green-card-issues/1599851-ead-renewal-but-i-485-update.html#post1981520) . It looks like some got the soft LUD on their 485 but their EAD was in process and same is the case wiht my wife. She applied for EAD renewal last month.
ArunAntonio
07-06 05:21 PM
to generate more support, I live in Bay area and I am very willing to participate.but cant at such short notice. we need to generate some media awareness before we organize a rally so that we get coverage.. any idea who is organizing this?
sanjay
03-15 10:07 PM
My friend suggested this forum. Looks to be very good site and seems to be active. I am EB# from India.
Can you tell me why EB3 is lagging so much
Can you tell me why EB3 is lagging so much
I hope I had got answer to this question ? I am still searching and been doing for last 2 1/2 years from the time I joined IV.
Can you tell me why EB3 is lagging so much
Can you tell me why EB3 is lagging so much
I hope I had got answer to this question ? I am still searching and been doing for last 2 1/2 years from the time I joined IV.
No comments:
Post a Comment