indyanguy
08-07 09:08 AM
I had applied for Labor Substitution/140/485/EAD concurrently on July 2nd. If I understand the process correctly, I would receive 3 different receipt notices and 3 different approvals for LC/140/485?
I have applied in NSC. What is the approximate processing times for approving:
1. Labor Substitution
2. I 140
3. I 485.
Also, will they start processing 485 only after LC and 140 are approved?
Thanks.
I have applied in NSC. What is the approximate processing times for approving:
1. Labor Substitution
2. I 140
3. I 485.
Also, will they start processing 485 only after LC and 140 are approved?
Thanks.
wandmaker
12-18 11:41 PM
L1A visa, validity May 2008
EB 1 category
I-140 receipt date July 27, 2007 & I-485 receipt date July 27, 2007.
When and how can I excercise AC 21 portability
Do I need an EAD for this
when: after your 140 is approved and 180 days has passed since you filed AOS.
how: by notifying USCIS that you are availing AC21, use EAD to work for new employer.
EB 1 category
I-140 receipt date July 27, 2007 & I-485 receipt date July 27, 2007.
When and how can I excercise AC 21 portability
Do I need an EAD for this
when: after your 140 is approved and 180 days has passed since you filed AOS.
how: by notifying USCIS that you are availing AC21, use EAD to work for new employer.
shana04
05-15 10:51 PM
For my Spouse
2. Evidence that you maintained non immigrant status
For my spouse,
We have applied for I 485 after our visit to India.
1. First I 94 was taken at the airport and got the new one while we came back and one of the requirement is the copy of I 94
How and where can I get a copy (I never made a copy of that).
Note: Spouse passport has stamping but the requirement is copy of I 94
any help or suggestoins where can we get a copy. We have applied for states Id's in two different states where they made copies of I 94 but at that time I never though of making copies of it.
2. Evidence that you maintained non immigrant status
For my spouse,
We have applied for I 485 after our visit to India.
1. First I 94 was taken at the airport and got the new one while we came back and one of the requirement is the copy of I 94
How and where can I get a copy (I never made a copy of that).
Note: Spouse passport has stamping but the requirement is copy of I 94
any help or suggestoins where can we get a copy. We have applied for states Id's in two different states where they made copies of I 94 but at that time I never though of making copies of it.
CADude
04-07 06:30 PM
I will tell my story, if this help.
I laid-off after working 7 years with big company on March end. I am already 8th year of H1B. Company notified to USCIS and revoked the H1B, etc per company policy. I do have copy of LCA/I140, etc.
I got another job(contract) with some employer. New company lawyer applied for H1B transfer(because old company revoked stuff so to be safe side). Law firm asked ONLY copy of my I-485 Receipt Notice. I think, Attorney changed the sponsorship with H1 transfer(i.e. invoked AC21 with H1 transfer). I didn't get H1 approval so far.
To give more twist: My PD(July 2001) is current per March VB but USCIS will take addtional 90 days to assign my case to Officer. Now contest is on. Let's see if my contract will finish first or GC process. :) :D USCIS already beat me once. USCIS 1 - Me 0 :)
If you have copy of LCA/I-140 then it will better for your record but i don't think it's required to H1 transfer and invoke AC21.
my 2 cents and good luck
ok gurus here's my situation..
1) Employer A filed my green card and I140 is approved and its been more than 180 days since 485 is filed.. no issue here... recently got my 3-year H1 extension from employer A till 2011. this extension is for 7th, 8th and 9th year... so have already crossed 6 year limit.
2) got an offer and accepted the offer from employer B and employer A does not provide any info regaring labor or I-140...
3) Since H1 extension is based on my green card application, to do a transfer or renewal, copies of I140 and labor is required (according to company B's lawyer)
4) So in this case i'm forced to use EAD and company B's lawyer are evaluating if old and new job description are same or similar...
so now my question is, is it true that transfer/renew of H1 after 6 years without the copy of I140 or labor from employer other than the one filed for your green card, not allowed? is there anything that can be done in this case?
thanks guys..
I laid-off after working 7 years with big company on March end. I am already 8th year of H1B. Company notified to USCIS and revoked the H1B, etc per company policy. I do have copy of LCA/I140, etc.
I got another job(contract) with some employer. New company lawyer applied for H1B transfer(because old company revoked stuff so to be safe side). Law firm asked ONLY copy of my I-485 Receipt Notice. I think, Attorney changed the sponsorship with H1 transfer(i.e. invoked AC21 with H1 transfer). I didn't get H1 approval so far.
To give more twist: My PD(July 2001) is current per March VB but USCIS will take addtional 90 days to assign my case to Officer. Now contest is on. Let's see if my contract will finish first or GC process. :) :D USCIS already beat me once. USCIS 1 - Me 0 :)
If you have copy of LCA/I-140 then it will better for your record but i don't think it's required to H1 transfer and invoke AC21.
my 2 cents and good luck
ok gurus here's my situation..
1) Employer A filed my green card and I140 is approved and its been more than 180 days since 485 is filed.. no issue here... recently got my 3-year H1 extension from employer A till 2011. this extension is for 7th, 8th and 9th year... so have already crossed 6 year limit.
2) got an offer and accepted the offer from employer B and employer A does not provide any info regaring labor or I-140...
3) Since H1 extension is based on my green card application, to do a transfer or renewal, copies of I140 and labor is required (according to company B's lawyer)
4) So in this case i'm forced to use EAD and company B's lawyer are evaluating if old and new job description are same or similar...
so now my question is, is it true that transfer/renew of H1 after 6 years without the copy of I140 or labor from employer other than the one filed for your green card, not allowed? is there anything that can be done in this case?
thanks guys..
more...
nogc_noproblem
05-28 02:35 AM
Good thinking Mr. Jacob , being spent thousands of hard earned dollars on these applications and renewals, I agree with you 100%. However, do you think anybody (in the govt) will listen to this? I lost that confidence long back. (I just sent a check for US$ 915 for AP renewal for me and my family, by the way, this is my 3rd EAD/AP renewal process but I never used them till date).
kaushik07
10-30 02:46 PM
Hello Jsb, can you please give us more information on how to sign on for the Ombudsman's conference call for nov2nd.
more...
god_bless_you
03-17 09:23 AM
GREAT !!
Kudos!!
Kudos!!
santb1975
05-17 11:00 PM
Thanks a lot
My $100..
Paypal ID #8BB01536AL566510N
Thanks
My $100..
Paypal ID #8BB01536AL566510N
Thanks
more...
bbenhill
03-11 03:01 PM
Thank you sooo much .. this link will help me a lot .. :) I guess I can knowtry to push their insurance :)
Frequently Asked Questions about Portability of Health Coverage and HIPAA (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_consumer_hipaa.html)
Find out the reason why that "Employment Insurance" rejected the coverage.
My wife was enrolled into my employment-insurance only at 7th month (2006), she did not have 'pregnancy' coverage in her previous insurance. She was covered fully (from 7th month, I paid for the scanning, blood test etc, which was a total of around $1500 till then) for my second son.
Other options are expensive, will cost at least 10K-12K if you want to pay out of your pocket.
Frequently Asked Questions about Portability of Health Coverage and HIPAA (http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_consumer_hipaa.html)
Find out the reason why that "Employment Insurance" rejected the coverage.
My wife was enrolled into my employment-insurance only at 7th month (2006), she did not have 'pregnancy' coverage in her previous insurance. She was covered fully (from 7th month, I paid for the scanning, blood test etc, which was a total of around $1500 till then) for my second son.
Other options are expensive, will cost at least 10K-12K if you want to pay out of your pocket.
sammas
07-14 12:36 PM
Please look at the text below
If you filed a Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, on July 30, 2007, or after, and you paid the I-485 application fee required, then no fee is required to file a request for employment authorization on Form I-765. You may file the I-765 concurrently with your I-485, or you may submit the I-765 at a later date. If you file Form I-765 separately, you must also submit a copy of your Form I-797C, Notice of Action, receipt as evidence of the filing of an I-485.
If you are filing for an extension of your Employment Authorization and your Form I-485, Application for Permanent Residence, was filed before July 30, 2007, then you must pay the $340 filing fee.
Based on the above text, you are supposed to pay $340. Chances are that your EAD application might be rejected due to no filing fee.
Coming to your questions, below are the answers
1. Probably not
2. If you have the application number like SRC or LIN etc., you may be able to do this. Before doing it, please take the advice of your attorney.
3. If no application number was generated, this might be a good idea.
Hope this helps.
Note : I am not an attorney, please make sure to take legal advice.
If you filed a Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, on July 30, 2007, or after, and you paid the I-485 application fee required, then no fee is required to file a request for employment authorization on Form I-765. You may file the I-765 concurrently with your I-485, or you may submit the I-765 at a later date. If you file Form I-765 separately, you must also submit a copy of your Form I-797C, Notice of Action, receipt as evidence of the filing of an I-485.
If you are filing for an extension of your Employment Authorization and your Form I-485, Application for Permanent Residence, was filed before July 30, 2007, then you must pay the $340 filing fee.
Based on the above text, you are supposed to pay $340. Chances are that your EAD application might be rejected due to no filing fee.
Coming to your questions, below are the answers
1. Probably not
2. If you have the application number like SRC or LIN etc., you may be able to do this. Before doing it, please take the advice of your attorney.
3. If no application number was generated, this might be a good idea.
Hope this helps.
Note : I am not an attorney, please make sure to take legal advice.
more...
raysaikat
09-02 08:43 AM
You are on EAD. When you fill your I-9 form with the EAD info. your on EAD...but USCIS doesnt know about this...its up to the Employer to inform the USCIS but usually (or generally) the employer don't inform the USCIS,however I don't think its mandatory to inform USCIS. In any case its not on your shoulder to inform the USCIS.
So, what I would do, is save the I-9 form (it must have the date when you signed) and pay-stubs...just to show that you have been on EAD, should you get any RFE regarding the status.
Thanks....
This is not correct. The OP's status is not determined by what he files in the I-9 form. The determining factor is the I-94 form, the latest one that is valid. If the OP got an I-94 attached to his I-797 form (usually one does), then s/he is in H1-B from the day printed on the I-94 form regardless how long does the EAD remain valid.
AFAIK, if the OP wishes to remain on F-1 EAD, s/he can go out of the country before the H1-B I-94 starting date (Oct 1?) and reenter US on F-1 visa (i.e., the I-94 given at the port of entry would be for F-1). I do not know if there is any risk involved, or what would happen to the H1-B approval.
---------
I am not a lawyer. Use at your own risk any information given by me.
So, what I would do, is save the I-9 form (it must have the date when you signed) and pay-stubs...just to show that you have been on EAD, should you get any RFE regarding the status.
Thanks....
This is not correct. The OP's status is not determined by what he files in the I-9 form. The determining factor is the I-94 form, the latest one that is valid. If the OP got an I-94 attached to his I-797 form (usually one does), then s/he is in H1-B from the day printed on the I-94 form regardless how long does the EAD remain valid.
AFAIK, if the OP wishes to remain on F-1 EAD, s/he can go out of the country before the H1-B I-94 starting date (Oct 1?) and reenter US on F-1 visa (i.e., the I-94 given at the port of entry would be for F-1). I do not know if there is any risk involved, or what would happen to the H1-B approval.
---------
I am not a lawyer. Use at your own risk any information given by me.
kirupa
07-27 05:19 AM
Instead of ShowDialog, try using just Show. See if that fixes the issue.
more...
adibhatla
02-15 06:24 PM
Prince - If you ask me it doesn't matter coz ur back to the processing of your I-485. I heard some cases usually take longer to update.
Can you pls furnish specific details such as:
Denial notice Date:
When did you/your lawyer apply the MTR:
Other update dates such as (Soft LUD's, Hard LUD's):
MTR Approval Date:
Sorry for asking more specific details. My I-485 got denied too but for missing G-325A forms on both my wife's and my case.
Can you pls furnish specific details such as:
Denial notice Date:
When did you/your lawyer apply the MTR:
Other update dates such as (Soft LUD's, Hard LUD's):
MTR Approval Date:
Sorry for asking more specific details. My I-485 got denied too but for missing G-325A forms on both my wife's and my case.
devang77
07-06 09:49 PM
Interesting Article....
Washington (CNN) -- We're getting to the point where even good news comes wrapped in bad news.
Good news: Despite the terrible June job numbers (125,000 jobs lost as the Census finished its work), one sector continues to gain -- manufacturing.
Factories added 9,000 workers in June, for a total of 136,000 hires since December 2009.
So that's something, yes?
Maybe not. Despite millions of unemployed, despite 2 million job losses in manufacturing between the end of 2007 and the end of 2009, factory employers apparently cannot find the workers they need. Here's what the New York Times reported Friday:
"The problem, the companies say, is a mismatch between the kind of skilled workers needed and the ranks of the unemployed.
"During the recession, domestic manufacturers appear to have accelerated the long-term move toward greater automation, laying off more of their lowest-skilled workers and replacing them with cheaper labor abroad.
"Now they are looking to hire people who can operate sophisticated computerized machinery, follow complex blueprints and demonstrate higher math proficiency than was previously required of the typical assembly line worker."
It may sound like manufacturers are being too fussy. But they face a real problem.
As manufacturing work gets more taxing, manufacturers are looking at a work force that is actually becoming less literate and less skilled.
In 2007, ETS -- the people who run the country's standardized tests -- compiled a battery of scores of basic literacy conducted over the previous 15 years and arrived at a startling warning: On present trends, the country's average score on basic literacy tests will drop by 5 percent by 2030 as compared to 1992.
That's a disturbing headline. Behind the headline is even worse news.
Not everybody's scores are dropping. In fact, ETS estimates that the percentage of Americans who can read at the very highest levels will actually rise slightly by 2030 as compared to 1992 -- a special national "thank you" to all those parents who read to their kids at bedtime!
But that small rise at the top is overbalanced by a collapse of literacy at the bottom.
In 1992, 17 percent of Americans scored at the very lowest literacy level. On present trends, 27 percent of Americans will score at the very lowest level in 2030.
What's driving the deterioration? An immigration policy that favors the unskilled. Immigrants to Canada and Australia typically arrive with very high skills, including English-language competence. But the United States has taken a different course. Since 2000, the United States has received some 10 million migrants, approximately half of them illegal.
Migrants to the United States arrive with much less formal schooling than migrants to Canada and Australia and very poor English-language skills. More than 80 percent of Hispanic adult migrants to the United States score below what ETS deems a minimum level of literacy necessary for success in the U.S. labor market.
Let's put this in concrete terms. Imagine a migrant to the United States. He's hard-working, strong, energetic, determined to get ahead. He speaks almost zero English, and can barely read or write even in Spanish. He completed his last year of formal schooling at age 13 and has been working with his hands ever since.
He's an impressive, even admirable human being. Maybe he reminds some Americans of their grandfather. And had he arrived in this country in 1920, there would have been many, many jobs for him to do that would have paid him a living wage, enabling him to better himself over time -- backbreaking jobs, but jobs that did not pay too much less than what a fully literate English-speaking worker could earn.
During the debt-happy 2000s, that same worker might earn a living assembling houses or landscaping hotels and resorts. But with the Great Recession, the bottom has fallen out of his world. And even when the recession ends, we're not going to be building houses like we used to, or spending money on vacations either.
We may hope that over time the children and grandchildren of America's immigrants of the 1990s and 2000s will do better than their parents and grandparents. For now, the indicators are not good: American-born Hispanics drop out of high school at very high rates.
Over time, yes, they'll probably catch up -- by the 2060s, they'll probably be doing fine.
But over the intervening half century, we are going to face a big problem. We talk a lot about retraining workers, but we don't really know how to do it very well -- particularly workers who cannot read fluently. Our schools are not doing a brilliant job training the native-born less advantaged: even now, a half-century into the civil rights era, still one-third of black Americans read at the lowest level of literacy.
Just as we made bad decisions about physical capital in the 2000s -- overinvesting in houses, underinvesting in airports, roads, trains, and bridges -- so we also made fateful decisions about our human capital: accepting too many unskilled workers from Latin America, too few highly skilled workers from China and India.
We have been operating a human capital policy for the world of 1910, not 2010. And now the Great Recession is exposing the true costs of this malinvestment in human capital. It has wiped away the jobs that less-skilled immigrants can do, that offered them a livelihood and a future. Who knows when or if such jobs will return? Meanwhile the immigrants fitted for success in the 21st century economy were locating in Canada and Australia.
Americans do not believe in problems that cannot be quickly or easily solved. They place their faith in education and re-education. They do not like to remember that it took two and three generations for their own families to acquire the skills necessary to succeed in a technological society. They hate to imagine that their country might be less affluent, more unequal, and less globally competitive in the future because of decisions they are making now. Yet all these things are true.
We cannot predict in advance which skills precisely will be needed by the U.S. economy of a decade hence. Nor should we try, for we'll certainly guess wrong. What we can know is this: Immigrants who arrive with language and math skills, with professional or graduate degrees, will adapt better to whatever the future economy throws at them.
Even more important, their children are much more likely to find a secure footing in the ultratechnological economy of the mid-21st century. And by reducing the flow of very unskilled foreign workers into the United States, we will tighten labor supply in ways that will induce U.S. employers to recruit, train and retain the less-skilled native born, especially African-Americans -- the group hit hardest by the Great Recession of 2008-2010.
In the short term, we need policies to fight the recession. We need monetary stimulus, a cheaper dollar, and lower taxes. But none of these policies can fix the skills mismatch that occurs when an advanced industrial economy must find work for people who cannot read very well, and whose children are not reading much better.
The United States needs a human capital policy that emphasizes skilled immigration and halts unskilled immigration. It needed that policy 15 years ago, but it's not too late to start now.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Frum.
Why good jobs are going unfilled - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/06/frum.skills.mismatch/index.html?hpt=C2)
Washington (CNN) -- We're getting to the point where even good news comes wrapped in bad news.
Good news: Despite the terrible June job numbers (125,000 jobs lost as the Census finished its work), one sector continues to gain -- manufacturing.
Factories added 9,000 workers in June, for a total of 136,000 hires since December 2009.
So that's something, yes?
Maybe not. Despite millions of unemployed, despite 2 million job losses in manufacturing between the end of 2007 and the end of 2009, factory employers apparently cannot find the workers they need. Here's what the New York Times reported Friday:
"The problem, the companies say, is a mismatch between the kind of skilled workers needed and the ranks of the unemployed.
"During the recession, domestic manufacturers appear to have accelerated the long-term move toward greater automation, laying off more of their lowest-skilled workers and replacing them with cheaper labor abroad.
"Now they are looking to hire people who can operate sophisticated computerized machinery, follow complex blueprints and demonstrate higher math proficiency than was previously required of the typical assembly line worker."
It may sound like manufacturers are being too fussy. But they face a real problem.
As manufacturing work gets more taxing, manufacturers are looking at a work force that is actually becoming less literate and less skilled.
In 2007, ETS -- the people who run the country's standardized tests -- compiled a battery of scores of basic literacy conducted over the previous 15 years and arrived at a startling warning: On present trends, the country's average score on basic literacy tests will drop by 5 percent by 2030 as compared to 1992.
That's a disturbing headline. Behind the headline is even worse news.
Not everybody's scores are dropping. In fact, ETS estimates that the percentage of Americans who can read at the very highest levels will actually rise slightly by 2030 as compared to 1992 -- a special national "thank you" to all those parents who read to their kids at bedtime!
But that small rise at the top is overbalanced by a collapse of literacy at the bottom.
In 1992, 17 percent of Americans scored at the very lowest literacy level. On present trends, 27 percent of Americans will score at the very lowest level in 2030.
What's driving the deterioration? An immigration policy that favors the unskilled. Immigrants to Canada and Australia typically arrive with very high skills, including English-language competence. But the United States has taken a different course. Since 2000, the United States has received some 10 million migrants, approximately half of them illegal.
Migrants to the United States arrive with much less formal schooling than migrants to Canada and Australia and very poor English-language skills. More than 80 percent of Hispanic adult migrants to the United States score below what ETS deems a minimum level of literacy necessary for success in the U.S. labor market.
Let's put this in concrete terms. Imagine a migrant to the United States. He's hard-working, strong, energetic, determined to get ahead. He speaks almost zero English, and can barely read or write even in Spanish. He completed his last year of formal schooling at age 13 and has been working with his hands ever since.
He's an impressive, even admirable human being. Maybe he reminds some Americans of their grandfather. And had he arrived in this country in 1920, there would have been many, many jobs for him to do that would have paid him a living wage, enabling him to better himself over time -- backbreaking jobs, but jobs that did not pay too much less than what a fully literate English-speaking worker could earn.
During the debt-happy 2000s, that same worker might earn a living assembling houses or landscaping hotels and resorts. But with the Great Recession, the bottom has fallen out of his world. And even when the recession ends, we're not going to be building houses like we used to, or spending money on vacations either.
We may hope that over time the children and grandchildren of America's immigrants of the 1990s and 2000s will do better than their parents and grandparents. For now, the indicators are not good: American-born Hispanics drop out of high school at very high rates.
Over time, yes, they'll probably catch up -- by the 2060s, they'll probably be doing fine.
But over the intervening half century, we are going to face a big problem. We talk a lot about retraining workers, but we don't really know how to do it very well -- particularly workers who cannot read fluently. Our schools are not doing a brilliant job training the native-born less advantaged: even now, a half-century into the civil rights era, still one-third of black Americans read at the lowest level of literacy.
Just as we made bad decisions about physical capital in the 2000s -- overinvesting in houses, underinvesting in airports, roads, trains, and bridges -- so we also made fateful decisions about our human capital: accepting too many unskilled workers from Latin America, too few highly skilled workers from China and India.
We have been operating a human capital policy for the world of 1910, not 2010. And now the Great Recession is exposing the true costs of this malinvestment in human capital. It has wiped away the jobs that less-skilled immigrants can do, that offered them a livelihood and a future. Who knows when or if such jobs will return? Meanwhile the immigrants fitted for success in the 21st century economy were locating in Canada and Australia.
Americans do not believe in problems that cannot be quickly or easily solved. They place their faith in education and re-education. They do not like to remember that it took two and three generations for their own families to acquire the skills necessary to succeed in a technological society. They hate to imagine that their country might be less affluent, more unequal, and less globally competitive in the future because of decisions they are making now. Yet all these things are true.
We cannot predict in advance which skills precisely will be needed by the U.S. economy of a decade hence. Nor should we try, for we'll certainly guess wrong. What we can know is this: Immigrants who arrive with language and math skills, with professional or graduate degrees, will adapt better to whatever the future economy throws at them.
Even more important, their children are much more likely to find a secure footing in the ultratechnological economy of the mid-21st century. And by reducing the flow of very unskilled foreign workers into the United States, we will tighten labor supply in ways that will induce U.S. employers to recruit, train and retain the less-skilled native born, especially African-Americans -- the group hit hardest by the Great Recession of 2008-2010.
In the short term, we need policies to fight the recession. We need monetary stimulus, a cheaper dollar, and lower taxes. But none of these policies can fix the skills mismatch that occurs when an advanced industrial economy must find work for people who cannot read very well, and whose children are not reading much better.
The United States needs a human capital policy that emphasizes skilled immigration and halts unskilled immigration. It needed that policy 15 years ago, but it's not too late to start now.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Frum.
Why good jobs are going unfilled - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/07/06/frum.skills.mismatch/index.html?hpt=C2)
more...
Ven
01-19 06:46 PM
did u request a change, ex address change,..
prioritydate
08-13 12:31 AM
When India won its first Olympics individual medal, someone posted it on this site. People descended on that poor guy asking him to stick to the subject. Now where are those guys? Do I need to assume that they are not offended by this time?
more...
EndlessWait
12-06 08:01 AM
I have heard many cases where in the dependant gets their EAD faster than the prime applicant. My guess would be that USCIS is prioritizing H4 to get the EAD faster since the prime applicant already has the H1. That does not mean you won�t get your EAD ever but it looks like it is not a higher priority.
not EAD, but thanks for the reply.
not EAD, but thanks for the reply.
eb3_nepa
02-19 12:03 PM
Yes it really IS impossible to determine which will move quicker.
and Also true that EB2 is NOT DETERMINED by EMPLOYEE's skill set.
EB2 is Determined by the nature of the job and if a master's IS TRULY required. If not your application will face an audit and you will have to re-apply under Eb3 all over again (meaning re-run the ads etc and wait for that extra month). Also Eb2 PERM Approvals on average take MUCH longer than eb3 even without any audit.
and Also true that EB2 is NOT DETERMINED by EMPLOYEE's skill set.
EB2 is Determined by the nature of the job and if a master's IS TRULY required. If not your application will face an audit and you will have to re-apply under Eb3 all over again (meaning re-run the ads etc and wait for that extra month). Also Eb2 PERM Approvals on average take MUCH longer than eb3 even without any audit.
satyasrd
05-19 07:37 AM
Pappu/IV Seniors,
This sounds totally outrageous ! I mean if the company is genuine and no one is on bench etc. what was the ground for deportation ? And what is this about intimidating the immigrant ? What can we do to bring these cases to light and ask for explanations ?
Thanks.
I fear a backlash as by now ewr would have made my company to be marked for secondary scrutiny. this is how the story unfolded
CBP --who is your manager
XYZ -- Mr ABC who is based in atlanta ..
CBP. hmmm.. can i have his phone #
CBP calls Mr ABC .. we r deporting XYZ hs papaers r not in order ..
no call back # nothing ..
meanwhile XYZ is asked to sign papers ..
I know we can refuse but those people r so intimidating and I guess if you dont sign ICE agents come in and tell you that it could take months to send you back
so poor xyz has no option but to sign and get a stamp on his passport that he is being deported
Councilor access is a myth and so is trying to call and talk to the CBP officers
and this is not a small body shop .. it has atleast 500 people working on various projects across US and those people were not on bench
i can field any questions ...
This sounds totally outrageous ! I mean if the company is genuine and no one is on bench etc. what was the ground for deportation ? And what is this about intimidating the immigrant ? What can we do to bring these cases to light and ask for explanations ?
Thanks.
I fear a backlash as by now ewr would have made my company to be marked for secondary scrutiny. this is how the story unfolded
CBP --who is your manager
XYZ -- Mr ABC who is based in atlanta ..
CBP. hmmm.. can i have his phone #
CBP calls Mr ABC .. we r deporting XYZ hs papaers r not in order ..
no call back # nothing ..
meanwhile XYZ is asked to sign papers ..
I know we can refuse but those people r so intimidating and I guess if you dont sign ICE agents come in and tell you that it could take months to send you back
so poor xyz has no option but to sign and get a stamp on his passport that he is being deported
Councilor access is a myth and so is trying to call and talk to the CBP officers
and this is not a small body shop .. it has atleast 500 people working on various projects across US and those people were not on bench
i can field any questions ...
bluekayal
11-01 05:35 PM
I am hoping to file I-140 next week or so based on an approved labor with PD of 2004. Any idea if it is possible to tie my Sch A 2006 PD with this older one? Thanks for your input!
sekharan
10-14 07:23 PM
Very nice. It looks like we can get married soon!
No comments:
Post a Comment