kk_123
09-29 11:23 AM
--------------------------------------------------------
How to add spouse to my green card
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe, USCIS website was updated on Sep 21st 2009.
My Priority date is Jun 2006 and applied in EB3 category.
I got an email on Sep 22nd 2009 from USCIS saying "Document mailed to applicant". When I see online status, it is "Document production or Oath Ceremony".
I called twice USCIS to confirm it. But they are saying "According to online status the document was already sent to your current address".
I am in a situation to beleive it or not? to celebrate it or not.... :-( .....
And one more thing is "I got EAD before my marriage and I haven't added my wife to I485"?
If I get GC, how to add my wife to GC? is it possible? what is her status right now?
Thanks in advance... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
my brother has also seeing the same status message for his case.
IF you got your card, Pls update it.It will help others too..
How to add spouse to my green card
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I believe, USCIS website was updated on Sep 21st 2009.
My Priority date is Jun 2006 and applied in EB3 category.
I got an email on Sep 22nd 2009 from USCIS saying "Document mailed to applicant". When I see online status, it is "Document production or Oath Ceremony".
I called twice USCIS to confirm it. But they are saying "According to online status the document was already sent to your current address".
I am in a situation to beleive it or not? to celebrate it or not.... :-( .....
And one more thing is "I got EAD before my marriage and I haven't added my wife to I485"?
If I get GC, how to add my wife to GC? is it possible? what is her status right now?
Thanks in advance... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
my brother has also seeing the same status message for his case.
IF you got your card, Pls update it.It will help others too..
wallpaper The new Audi A6 Allroad
gaz
02-04 01:11 AM
I just got the H1 Approval for 1 year and 2 months (1 year H1 Extension and 2 months recapture time). I am currently in Malaysia and need to apply for a visa at US Consulate in Malaysia. Since I am on the H1 visa, I have to show the proof that I will return back to Malaysia after the end of my work period in US. Accordingly, I would need to purchase the round trip ticket. The issue is that the plane ticket only valid for the maximum of 1 year, but my visa valid for 1 year and 2 months. Please advise if one way plane ticket would be sufficient for the visa interview or need to be a round trip plane ticket. If it is not, what should I do? Also, I wonder if the application package including I-129 submitted to USCIS need to be stamped �Certified True Copy� with the original signature of the lawyer or employer for the visa interview. Can I use the copy one that is stamped �Certified True Copy� with the non-original signatures of my lawyer or employer? Anybody pls help. Thank you very much.
I'm not an attorney - so please treat this as my opinion, and not a definitive statement of fact. Based on my personal experience in India, the one year ticket should be fine - you can always postpone the date of the ticket whenever needed (some airlines charge a fee for it). The proof of return is more like an intent to return.
As for the I129 - my lawyer added no such stamps or certification.
Please do check with your lawyer also. Also, try calling the US consulate.
Good luck.
I'm not an attorney - so please treat this as my opinion, and not a definitive statement of fact. Based on my personal experience in India, the one year ticket should be fine - you can always postpone the date of the ticket whenever needed (some airlines charge a fee for it). The proof of return is more like an intent to return.
As for the I129 - my lawyer added no such stamps or certification.
Please do check with your lawyer also. Also, try calling the US consulate.
Good luck.
trueguy
08-28 02:09 PM
Yes, I can profess a guess, but that does not account for the statement about "A formal decision determination of the October cut-off dates will not be possible until early September"
With all the labor certification being sold on or around June 2007, old labors started getting used up. These applications are probably trickling in during the course of the year, and may have seen a huge rush when they announced that they are going to make EB3 unavailable. Therefore, their earlier assumption that they can move forward was wrong. On the other hand, they probably totally messed up in counting the number of cases they already had on hand.
I dont agree to the continued "heavy demand" comment. What demand? Were they accepting applications when the queue was already closed for the year? If not, there is no case of "heavy demand", unless there was a bunch of applications around Dec02-Mar03 for China but as usual they used a 3 year old to count the number applications
That is exactly what I don't understand. How can they have new applications coming in with PD as old as 2001? I can understand if somebody have family outside US and their new born will be eligible to file with Older PD. But how many people have family outside India, not at all.
With all the labor certification being sold on or around June 2007, old labors started getting used up. These applications are probably trickling in during the course of the year, and may have seen a huge rush when they announced that they are going to make EB3 unavailable. Therefore, their earlier assumption that they can move forward was wrong. On the other hand, they probably totally messed up in counting the number of cases they already had on hand.
I dont agree to the continued "heavy demand" comment. What demand? Were they accepting applications when the queue was already closed for the year? If not, there is no case of "heavy demand", unless there was a bunch of applications around Dec02-Mar03 for China but as usual they used a 3 year old to count the number applications
That is exactly what I don't understand. How can they have new applications coming in with PD as old as 2001? I can understand if somebody have family outside US and their new born will be eligible to file with Older PD. But how many people have family outside India, not at all.
2011 2011 Audi A6
krishnam70
03-26 12:40 AM
Roseball,
This is a very good alternative that you have suggested. Does this mean that i can have my full 12+17 months of my OPT, and my H1 will only start when i do the stamping in India. But in that case i would need to have the same employer at the time i enter correct? Also what if i want to change my employer after i have my H1 stamped while coming inside the country?
Thanks in advance.
Comes with a risk at POE. You could be stopped and its happening to H1's too.
- cheers
kris
This is a very good alternative that you have suggested. Does this mean that i can have my full 12+17 months of my OPT, and my H1 will only start when i do the stamping in India. But in that case i would need to have the same employer at the time i enter correct? Also what if i want to change my employer after i have my H1 stamped while coming inside the country?
Thanks in advance.
Comes with a risk at POE. You could be stopped and its happening to H1's too.
- cheers
kris
more...
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
gauravsh
03-28 12:10 PM
Hi,
In 2005 I was working at california and my employer was at NJ. I did my tax filing with a all state agent abd he filed taxes for just NJ and federal.
Yesterday I got a notice from California that I have filed taxes using california address and didnot files state taxes for CA.
and I need to proof that I filed the taxes that year or file the taxes.
I went to HR block and prepared taxes for 2005 and mailed to them.
Same thing was there when I filed for 2006 taxes, my consultant didnt filed the taxes for CA.
So I prepared taxes for 2006 also and mailed to them. Both I mailed as a physical mail.
Did any one had similar experiance or any issues?
In 2005 I was working at california and my employer was at NJ. I did my tax filing with a all state agent abd he filed taxes for just NJ and federal.
Yesterday I got a notice from California that I have filed taxes using california address and didnot files state taxes for CA.
and I need to proof that I filed the taxes that year or file the taxes.
I went to HR block and prepared taxes for 2005 and mailed to them.
Same thing was there when I filed for 2006 taxes, my consultant didnt filed the taxes for CA.
So I prepared taxes for 2006 also and mailed to them. Both I mailed as a physical mail.
Did any one had similar experiance or any issues?
more...
wandmaker
10-28 12:11 PM
- Pre-approved labor dated 03/2004
- Filed 140 in 04/2007 and filed 485 in 08/2007. Got EADs as well
- RFE on 140 after 2 years waiting (in fact it was on the last day of 2nd year. In between, it was passed thru all the 4 centers and came back to same place where it was filed). Education mismatch and other stuff. Employer responded in 21 days
- 2nd RFE on 140 after 30 days - Education mismatch - Again responded
- There was no response even after 60 days, so we called and created a service request.
- Finally the 140 has been denied today. I did not get the notice yet. I'm thinking, it is because of Education mismatch
The labor was for 4years degree and I have 3 years degree + 1 year post graduate diploma with 8 years experience by the time filing 140. And I did my masters in US, but I got this after couple of months of I filed my 140.
Please advice what are options available for me.
USCIS used to accept 3=4, 60 page template evaluations - it is no longer the case. Second, your is SL, it always throws a doubt in legitimacy of job offer. Given the current sitiation, 2nd RFE is mainly on education because USCIS is not convinced with your 1st response. Your chances of success is slim (if you can prove the 3 +1 is in the same line of study) to none - Restart your GC. You are now paying the price for choosing the SL route.
- Filed 140 in 04/2007 and filed 485 in 08/2007. Got EADs as well
- RFE on 140 after 2 years waiting (in fact it was on the last day of 2nd year. In between, it was passed thru all the 4 centers and came back to same place where it was filed). Education mismatch and other stuff. Employer responded in 21 days
- 2nd RFE on 140 after 30 days - Education mismatch - Again responded
- There was no response even after 60 days, so we called and created a service request.
- Finally the 140 has been denied today. I did not get the notice yet. I'm thinking, it is because of Education mismatch
The labor was for 4years degree and I have 3 years degree + 1 year post graduate diploma with 8 years experience by the time filing 140. And I did my masters in US, but I got this after couple of months of I filed my 140.
Please advice what are options available for me.
USCIS used to accept 3=4, 60 page template evaluations - it is no longer the case. Second, your is SL, it always throws a doubt in legitimacy of job offer. Given the current sitiation, 2nd RFE is mainly on education because USCIS is not convinced with your 1st response. Your chances of success is slim (if you can prove the 3 +1 is in the same line of study) to none - Restart your GC. You are now paying the price for choosing the SL route.
2010 .com/2011/03/audi-a6-2000-
pmamp
04-19 08:03 PM
It ought to have some impact on members of Congress.
Atleast somebody talked abut legals and their problems...Here's the link..
http://www.uschamber.com/issues/lett...sa_program.htm
=================TEXT========================
Letter on Employment-Based (EB or Green Card) and H-1B Visa Programs
April 12, 2007
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE UNITED STATES SENATE:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would like to reiterate the need to reform both the employment-based (EB or green card) and H-1B visa programs. The Chamber is the world�s largest business federation, representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region.
The Chamber represents numerous companies and organizations that need to bring thousands of foreign workers and students into the United States each year. The inability of these companies to bring highly educated workers and students into the United States severely hurts their competitiveness in the global market and often leads to companies moving operations overseas. It is imperative that any comprehensive immigration reform includes changes that would allow employers in the United States to recruit and retain highly educated foreign talent and guarantee our continued global economic competitiveness and success.
The announcement last week by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)regarding the fact that the H-1B visa cap for the FY2008 was reached on the first day applications were accepted marks the dire need for changes in the system. This is also the fourth consecutive year the H-1B cap was met before the fiscal year even starts. USCIS will now conduct a �computer-generated random selection process� to determine which of these needed workers will be excluded.
Other areas of U.S. immigration system for highly-skilled immigrants face similar daunting barriers�from years of waiting for a green card to the inability of hiring a student from a United States university as a permanent worker right after graduation. The current system is counterproductive to the country�s economic, security, and social goals. Retaining the best and the brightest foreign workers help make U.S. economy strong. These artificial barriers are forcing some companies to conduct business elsewhere, wherever they can hire the necessary talent. The Chamber strongly urges you to supports comprehensive immigration reform that would include:
Raising the EB cap and exempting specific highly skilled professionals in
sciences, arts, business, and other critical fields from the final allotted number.
Allowing foreign students who have earned advanced degrees from American
universities, as well as from foreign universities, in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to be exempt from both the EB and H-1B
visa cap numbers.
Designing the H-1B visa cap numbers around a market-based annual adjustment,
rather than an arbitrary fixed number.
The creation of an entire new visa category that would allow STEM students,
studying in the United States on a student visa, to seamlessly transition to a green
card when offered a job.
The Chamber urges inclusion of these measures in a comprehensive immigration reform package. Without these provisions in a broad immigration reform package, American companies will continue to lose their competitive edge in the global economy.
On behalf of the Chamber, I thank you and look forward to working with this Congress to pass meaningful comprehensive immigration reform.
Sincerely,
R. Bruce Josten
Atleast somebody talked abut legals and their problems...Here's the link..
http://www.uschamber.com/issues/lett...sa_program.htm
=================TEXT========================
Letter on Employment-Based (EB or Green Card) and H-1B Visa Programs
April 12, 2007
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND THE UNITED STATES SENATE:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce would like to reiterate the need to reform both the employment-based (EB or green card) and H-1B visa programs. The Chamber is the world�s largest business federation, representing more than three million businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region.
The Chamber represents numerous companies and organizations that need to bring thousands of foreign workers and students into the United States each year. The inability of these companies to bring highly educated workers and students into the United States severely hurts their competitiveness in the global market and often leads to companies moving operations overseas. It is imperative that any comprehensive immigration reform includes changes that would allow employers in the United States to recruit and retain highly educated foreign talent and guarantee our continued global economic competitiveness and success.
The announcement last week by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)regarding the fact that the H-1B visa cap for the FY2008 was reached on the first day applications were accepted marks the dire need for changes in the system. This is also the fourth consecutive year the H-1B cap was met before the fiscal year even starts. USCIS will now conduct a �computer-generated random selection process� to determine which of these needed workers will be excluded.
Other areas of U.S. immigration system for highly-skilled immigrants face similar daunting barriers�from years of waiting for a green card to the inability of hiring a student from a United States university as a permanent worker right after graduation. The current system is counterproductive to the country�s economic, security, and social goals. Retaining the best and the brightest foreign workers help make U.S. economy strong. These artificial barriers are forcing some companies to conduct business elsewhere, wherever they can hire the necessary talent. The Chamber strongly urges you to supports comprehensive immigration reform that would include:
Raising the EB cap and exempting specific highly skilled professionals in
sciences, arts, business, and other critical fields from the final allotted number.
Allowing foreign students who have earned advanced degrees from American
universities, as well as from foreign universities, in science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to be exempt from both the EB and H-1B
visa cap numbers.
Designing the H-1B visa cap numbers around a market-based annual adjustment,
rather than an arbitrary fixed number.
The creation of an entire new visa category that would allow STEM students,
studying in the United States on a student visa, to seamlessly transition to a green
card when offered a job.
The Chamber urges inclusion of these measures in a comprehensive immigration reform package. Without these provisions in a broad immigration reform package, American companies will continue to lose their competitive edge in the global economy.
On behalf of the Chamber, I thank you and look forward to working with this Congress to pass meaningful comprehensive immigration reform.
Sincerely,
R. Bruce Josten
more...
leo2606
09-26 12:48 PM
FBI is going to tell only if your FP results are gone back to USCIS or not.
They do not tell about the Name Check.
Hi
I read that you have called FBI to know about the name check status.Whats thier contact no ?What inputs do they ask to get your case status ?
Let everyone know
Thanks
GCcomesoon
They do not tell about the Name Check.
Hi
I read that you have called FBI to know about the name check status.Whats thier contact no ?What inputs do they ask to get your case status ?
Let everyone know
Thanks
GCcomesoon
hair .com/2011/05/2011-audi-a6-
Chris Rock
08-12 01:27 AM
IV core,
Thanks very much for your tireless work.
I have some serious questions to you. Hope you will answer them. I fully understand that you are all volunteers. I am not demanding anything; rather this is a request...
1) Does IV working on any temprory EB visa fix for people waiting for 8 years? Or IV is waiting for CIR to happen?
2) A simple one line amendment (that is easily acceptable by the lawmakers) in a must pass bill will fix the problems of long time sufferers. Does IV have anything in its agenda?
3) Does IV beleive in bringing releif to IV members in steps or do you want to solve all members problem in one shot? If the second case is true, is it possible in this economy?
4) Recently many immigration related amendments are debated in congress; not for one bill but during two bills. There was no single amendment that helps the heavily retrogated categories. Why IV is not successful in requesting the lawmakers to bring up an amendment? Is there a single soul (lawmaker) sympathetic to our cause? If money is the only issue, I will donate first and persuade my friends to do the same.
We (me and many of my friends) were once active members right from the early days of IV. We contributed and involved in every IV initiative before. Now we are in the sidelines. I strongly beleive, members like me will be active again once we see any hope. Right now there is none.
Thanks very much for your tireless work.
I have some serious questions to you. Hope you will answer them. I fully understand that you are all volunteers. I am not demanding anything; rather this is a request...
1) Does IV working on any temprory EB visa fix for people waiting for 8 years? Or IV is waiting for CIR to happen?
2) A simple one line amendment (that is easily acceptable by the lawmakers) in a must pass bill will fix the problems of long time sufferers. Does IV have anything in its agenda?
3) Does IV beleive in bringing releif to IV members in steps or do you want to solve all members problem in one shot? If the second case is true, is it possible in this economy?
4) Recently many immigration related amendments are debated in congress; not for one bill but during two bills. There was no single amendment that helps the heavily retrogated categories. Why IV is not successful in requesting the lawmakers to bring up an amendment? Is there a single soul (lawmaker) sympathetic to our cause? If money is the only issue, I will donate first and persuade my friends to do the same.
We (me and many of my friends) were once active members right from the early days of IV. We contributed and involved in every IV initiative before. Now we are in the sidelines. I strongly beleive, members like me will be active again once we see any hope. Right now there is none.
more...
aat0995
04-27 07:22 PM
I filed I-140 at NSC on 07/27/2007 LUD - 01/02/2008, but my current case status reads as below
The I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER was transferred and is now pending standard processing at a USCIS office. You will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something from you. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done, counting from when USCIS received it. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. To receive e-mail updates, follow the link below to register.
The status doesn't specify the transfered location. Does anyone have a similar case status and know where the case could have been transfered. To me the obvious choice seems like TSC. Please correct me if my assumption is wrong, your input will be appreciated
I also have the same message. However, if I call USCIS and then enter the receipt number it says I have reached TSC. So I assume my case is at TSC.
The I140 IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER was transferred and is now pending standard processing at a USCIS office. You will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something from you. If you move while this case is pending, please use our Change of Address online tool to update your case with your new address. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when this case will be done, counting from when USCIS received it. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. To receive e-mail updates, follow the link below to register.
The status doesn't specify the transfered location. Does anyone have a similar case status and know where the case could have been transfered. To me the obvious choice seems like TSC. Please correct me if my assumption is wrong, your input will be appreciated
I also have the same message. However, if I call USCIS and then enter the receipt number it says I have reached TSC. So I assume my case is at TSC.
hot -audi-a6-car-wallpapers/
tnite
09-12 01:35 PM
I did tell the first CS that it was more than 90 days and to the second I/O ,I mentioned that it was July 2nd.She asked me whether the checks were cashed and I said no. Then she asked for my full name , dob and ssn and gave me the receipts info. I/O was very patient and verified my address to make sure everything was right.
The receipts start with LIN (Nebraska)
The receipts start with LIN (Nebraska)
more...
house 2011 audi a6
mhtanim
06-07 09:51 PM
After sending RFE response, I got 1st LUD on 06/02/2009 with message change.
Soft LUDs on: 06/03/2009, 06/04/2009, 06/05/2009
Soft LUDs on: 06/03/2009, 06/04/2009, 06/05/2009
tattoo 2009 Audi A6 2.7 TDI Flatout
wizpal
02-08 01:49 PM
From Dallas metroplex area
count me in..
count me in..
more...
pictures pictures 2010 Audi A8 audi a8 2011 blogspotcom. audi 2011 blogspotcom. audi
AK_GC
03-17 02:13 PM
We didn't have issues getting the original loan and getting refinances for our home with H1 and our EAD/ AP....although they need lot more paperwork. But if you have good credit score, and if you have the papers that they request, you should be able to get a good rate. The time from application to closing takes a little longer though.
dresses audi a6 2011
KbK
04-09 11:50 PM
Hi friends
I am sure lot of applicants are hold up in labor certification at Backlog Processing Centers. The implication of this delay are; even if the current bill is passed and all the provisions in the current bill are implemented, still it will be of NO USE to the applicants who are awaiting labor certification.
The other option is to apply through PERM and try to get certification quickly. But the catch here is, if the PERM application is approved then the original labor application is cancelled and priority date would become 2006. For example, if someone's application is pending since year 2002 and now if that person applies through PERM and if it gets approved within three months then that person would loose the priority date of 2002 and will have a priority date of 2006. If the green card numbers are not current then it would be a big disadvantage.
On the other hand if someone had applied through PERM in 2004 and his/her labor is approved then, with this new proposed bill, there is a good chance that he/she might get green card immediately because priority dates would have moved up to 2004. The reason I think this is a possibility is because, the quota numbers are going to increase substantially and BPC is very slow in approving labor certification. Hence there is a good chance that priority dates would move up fast.
If this happens then people who had applied earlier and waited for such a long time, will be at very big disadvantage.
I propose that we should request for change in law to allow existing applicants to apply through PERM and keep the old priority dates even after the application is approved.
This will not only help all of us but also help the authorities; as it would reduce the work load on BPC.
Friends at the end, may I request you to please send your thoughts on this?
Thanks
I am sure lot of applicants are hold up in labor certification at Backlog Processing Centers. The implication of this delay are; even if the current bill is passed and all the provisions in the current bill are implemented, still it will be of NO USE to the applicants who are awaiting labor certification.
The other option is to apply through PERM and try to get certification quickly. But the catch here is, if the PERM application is approved then the original labor application is cancelled and priority date would become 2006. For example, if someone's application is pending since year 2002 and now if that person applies through PERM and if it gets approved within three months then that person would loose the priority date of 2002 and will have a priority date of 2006. If the green card numbers are not current then it would be a big disadvantage.
On the other hand if someone had applied through PERM in 2004 and his/her labor is approved then, with this new proposed bill, there is a good chance that he/she might get green card immediately because priority dates would have moved up to 2004. The reason I think this is a possibility is because, the quota numbers are going to increase substantially and BPC is very slow in approving labor certification. Hence there is a good chance that priority dates would move up fast.
If this happens then people who had applied earlier and waited for such a long time, will be at very big disadvantage.
I propose that we should request for change in law to allow existing applicants to apply through PERM and keep the old priority dates even after the application is approved.
This will not only help all of us but also help the authorities; as it would reduce the work load on BPC.
Friends at the end, may I request you to please send your thoughts on this?
Thanks
more...
makeup Audi A6 2011 S Line.
maddipati1
08-03 07:36 PM
ask ur attorney what if u wont get EAD approved by Jan'08
may be ur attorney thinks u will get EAD before Jan'08.
ask him what if u won't get EAD, with this mad # of EAD filings this month.
may be he is too busy with 485 filings. ask him if he will file after Aug17th
im in the same boat except my H1 is until Sep'07. my attorney is preparing to file 3 yr xtn.
S
may be ur attorney thinks u will get EAD before Jan'08.
ask him what if u won't get EAD, with this mad # of EAD filings this month.
may be he is too busy with 485 filings. ask him if he will file after Aug17th
im in the same boat except my H1 is until Sep'07. my attorney is preparing to file 3 yr xtn.
S
girlfriend pictures launch of all new Audi A8 new audi blogspotcom.
roseball
03-20 11:40 AM
I do not think, number of employees matter. I work for a desi company and it has just 2 employees. Labor was breeze and 140 got approved in 4 weeks. Never got any RFE. However, I was in EB-3 despite having 4 years bachelor's degree and 5+ years of experience.
What EndlessWait meant was, more the number of employees in a small company, the chances of RFE with ability to pay will be higher...
What EndlessWait meant was, more the number of employees in a small company, the chances of RFE with ability to pay will be higher...
hairstyles Ingolstadt - Audi A6 Avant
kzinjuwadia
05-14 11:38 AM
I made an infopass appt and found out that the case was approved couple of days ago. I hadn't setup the email notification.
yagw
10-31 06:43 PM
I am planning to shift employers and I have a question:
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
To answer your questions (assuming you filed I-1485 with A - since you mention using EAD).
1. Is employer A going to withdraw the approved I-140? If yes, then you will run into some issues with the way things are going now. But you should be able to fight back (MTR etc) in the worst case. If A is not withdrawing I-140, then less problem.
2. Is Company B, that promises to employ you after GC, can they give any written statement? Here in US it is _at-will_ employment. So, you might have tough time proving it.
3. Another problem is, before they adjudicate your I-485, they might issue an RFE to check if you're still employed in same or similar position. And employment with Company C will not satisfy this requirement.
Now, I am not sure if any documents from company B will establish the fact that you will be working in same/similar occupation. You should better consult with an Immigration Attorney and better yet retain them for future.
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
To answer your questions (assuming you filed I-1485 with A - since you mention using EAD).
1. Is employer A going to withdraw the approved I-140? If yes, then you will run into some issues with the way things are going now. But you should be able to fight back (MTR etc) in the worst case. If A is not withdrawing I-140, then less problem.
2. Is Company B, that promises to employ you after GC, can they give any written statement? Here in US it is _at-will_ employment. So, you might have tough time proving it.
3. Another problem is, before they adjudicate your I-485, they might issue an RFE to check if you're still employed in same or similar position. And employment with Company C will not satisfy this requirement.
Now, I am not sure if any documents from company B will establish the fact that you will be working in same/similar occupation. You should better consult with an Immigration Attorney and better yet retain them for future.
seaken75
07-18 12:55 AM
What kind of RFE besides the letter from the OBG doctor?
if u go to the doc, they will perform the the tests that are ok to perform..
Check with doc if they will accept the test results (PAP , HIV , etc) from your obgyns office. These tests are already done during initial stages of pregnancy.
Finally the doc will add a note to the medical report that some tests/shots are omited due to pregnancy.
I went through same thing..
Will the case be accepted with this partial report-- It will be.
Will there be an RFE? -- i dont know.. may be
if u go to the doc, they will perform the the tests that are ok to perform..
Check with doc if they will accept the test results (PAP , HIV , etc) from your obgyns office. These tests are already done during initial stages of pregnancy.
Finally the doc will add a note to the medical report that some tests/shots are omited due to pregnancy.
I went through same thing..
Will the case be accepted with this partial report-- It will be.
Will there be an RFE? -- i dont know.. may be
No comments:
Post a Comment