iqube00
04-24 01:48 PM
my EAD is about to expire on may 6th. I applied for EAD renewal in january , i had around 90 days. My application package along with the cheque came back to me after 1month because I forgot to sign the application form.. Dumb right....
Then i signed my form and send it back to TSC . So i was in a bad situation becuase my employer said if i do not get my EAD card before it expires, they will have to lay me off. So here is what i did , i contacted my local Congressman's office through their website and raised a request to expedite my case and stated if i do not get my EAD i will loose my job.
Surprisingly i got a mail from the congressman office that they are looking into my case and they will take it forward... and after a week i got a mail from USCIS saying my case is approved . So if someone is in my kind of situation its better to go through congressman or senator rather than info pass all that route.. Politics and politicians speak in a different language and so it always wins!!!
You are lucky. My EAD has expired and I sent an expedite request through my local congressman. They denied my request saying that they will not expedite because the 90 day window was not up yet.
Then i signed my form and send it back to TSC . So i was in a bad situation becuase my employer said if i do not get my EAD card before it expires, they will have to lay me off. So here is what i did , i contacted my local Congressman's office through their website and raised a request to expedite my case and stated if i do not get my EAD i will loose my job.
Surprisingly i got a mail from the congressman office that they are looking into my case and they will take it forward... and after a week i got a mail from USCIS saying my case is approved . So if someone is in my kind of situation its better to go through congressman or senator rather than info pass all that route.. Politics and politicians speak in a different language and so it always wins!!!
You are lucky. My EAD has expired and I sent an expedite request through my local congressman. They denied my request saying that they will not expedite because the 90 day window was not up yet.
wallpaper sad love quotes in punjabi.
rajmehrotra
09-15 11:27 AM
Nice idea. Sometimes, bare facts are worth quite a few pictures as well. How about compiling and forwarding the following information for each of our family units?
Items can be :
Years spent in the US.
Federal and state income taxes paid during these years.
Social Security contributions made.
Dollars and hours already spent on the immigration process.
Number of U. S. Citizen kids, if any.
A concise writeup on how the applicant's skill set positively impacts the employer.
Items can be :
Years spent in the US.
Federal and state income taxes paid during these years.
Social Security contributions made.
Dollars and hours already spent on the immigration process.
Number of U. S. Citizen kids, if any.
A concise writeup on how the applicant's skill set positively impacts the employer.
tikka
05-31 12:56 PM
Confirmation Number: 56Y67421A1299244L.
thank you
thank you
2011 sad love quotes hindi. famous
ak27
02-12 06:51 PM
I asked this question to my attorney last week and she told me that there is no rule such as H4 premium processing. However, when both are filed together, it H1 and H4 get processed in premium processing
more...
sac-r-ten
06-02 11:26 AM
All the guys waiting in Canada, you can ask your passport and all other papers back from the Consulate and return to India and try stamping there.
I have heard cases where people in india went for stamping and since they were put on Admin processing, took their passports and returned back on AP. Well, they had AP to fall back. But i think if you are too much worried staying in Canada, better to ask the consultate to return back all papers and passport and go back to homeland and try stamping there. Atleast you will be less worries in homeland and have a good time with family back there.
Just my 2 cents.
Good luck my friends.
I have heard cases where people in india went for stamping and since they were put on Admin processing, took their passports and returned back on AP. Well, they had AP to fall back. But i think if you are too much worried staying in Canada, better to ask the consultate to return back all papers and passport and go back to homeland and try stamping there. Atleast you will be less worries in homeland and have a good time with family back there.
Just my 2 cents.
Good luck my friends.
sansas
01-21 07:28 AM
hi dionysus
i got this from some requirement agencies
i got this from some requirement agencies
more...
veni001
11-08 04:54 PM
I am in a similar situation where I am going to start my EB2 , however the internal job requirements for my position demand more than what the EB2 requirements are. They are as following:
Bachelors plus 6-8 yrs experience
or alternatively
Masters plus 4-6 yrs experience.
I do have Masters and my overall experience is 5.5 yrs but out of that 4.5 yrs were with the current employer so those won't be counted. How will I become eligible for EB2? Will the lawyer downgrade the requirement to Masters + 1 yr experience or will he keep requirement to say Masters + 4yr ? I guess I'm confused how this will work. :o
How many similar positions are in the company? is this the current position you are in, if yes you can not use experience with your employer even in future for this position.
In either case your best bet would be a different EB2 qualified position with same employer or New employer.:o
Bachelors plus 6-8 yrs experience
or alternatively
Masters plus 4-6 yrs experience.
I do have Masters and my overall experience is 5.5 yrs but out of that 4.5 yrs were with the current employer so those won't be counted. How will I become eligible for EB2? Will the lawyer downgrade the requirement to Masters + 1 yr experience or will he keep requirement to say Masters + 4yr ? I guess I'm confused how this will work. :o
How many similar positions are in the company? is this the current position you are in, if yes you can not use experience with your employer even in future for this position.
In either case your best bet would be a different EB2 qualified position with same employer or New employer.:o
2010 Short Sad Love Quotes In Hindi
senthil
05-18 01:41 PM
one way to see IV's friendly faces ....
more...
paragpujara
04-05 08:30 AM
Yeah I will consult a lawyer but before i contact him just want to make sure whatever my employer is explaining is correct or not..
Thanks for your valuable advice.
Thanks for your valuable advice.
hair sad love quotes in hindi. funny love quotes in hindi. funny love quotes in
LONGGCQUE
05-05 10:10 PM
Krishmunn,
How about this ? I have an approved I 140 in eb2 with my current employer, I 485 never filed, then join a new employer, start perm and then I 140.
Questions ..
1) If first employer withdraws I 140 after I move out. Can I still port my older PD when I140 is filed with new employer.
How about this ? I have an approved I 140 in eb2 with my current employer, I 485 never filed, then join a new employer, start perm and then I 140.
Questions ..
1) If first employer withdraws I 140 after I move out. Can I still port my older PD when I140 is filed with new employer.
more...
GCard_Dream
07-10 02:48 PM
I found the answer from the I-693 form. X-ray is only needed in the following situation:
Chest X-Ray - Required ONLY for TST reactions of > 5mm or if specific TST exception criteria met, or for an applicant with TB symptoms or immunosuppression (e.g., HIV). Attach copy of X-Ray Report.
Here is the detailed explanation from USCIS on the the new TB test requirements:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/civil_surgeons_ti.pdf
Chest X-Ray - Required ONLY for TST reactions of > 5mm or if specific TST exception criteria met, or for an applicant with TB symptoms or immunosuppression (e.g., HIV). Attach copy of X-Ray Report.
Here is the detailed explanation from USCIS on the the new TB test requirements:
http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/civil_surgeons_ti.pdf
hot sad love quotes urdu. urdu
Rajwaitingon140
12-18 12:21 AM
Buddy
When I took VISA and entered into Mexico and asked Mexican Immigration Officer please stamp my passport as I entered in Mexico, but he said if you are in Mexico for less than 72 hours then you don't need to take VISA or special permission if your stay is going to more than 72 hours then you need to take visiting VISA...I took it because I was going with my entire family...but I knew my collegues went to Mexico for stamping..without taking any Mexico VISA..hope this helps..if you need any additional info please let me know.
Thanks
Raj
I am planning to visit Mexico (not for H1 stamping - plan to use AP), I had called up their consulate in Philly and was told that they are not issuing visas at that location until Jan first week. The person I spoke to suggested that I go to the consulate in New York. I tried calling the consulate in NY, however, I could not get to speak with anyone there. They had an automated message that lists the things required for the stamping, the visa fee ($36), etc.,
However, no info if I have to schedule an appointment, how long they require to process the application.
Does anyone here have an experience with the Mexican tourist visa stamping?
Thanks in advance.
When I took VISA and entered into Mexico and asked Mexican Immigration Officer please stamp my passport as I entered in Mexico, but he said if you are in Mexico for less than 72 hours then you don't need to take VISA or special permission if your stay is going to more than 72 hours then you need to take visiting VISA...I took it because I was going with my entire family...but I knew my collegues went to Mexico for stamping..without taking any Mexico VISA..hope this helps..if you need any additional info please let me know.
Thanks
Raj
I am planning to visit Mexico (not for H1 stamping - plan to use AP), I had called up their consulate in Philly and was told that they are not issuing visas at that location until Jan first week. The person I spoke to suggested that I go to the consulate in New York. I tried calling the consulate in NY, however, I could not get to speak with anyone there. They had an automated message that lists the things required for the stamping, the visa fee ($36), etc.,
However, no info if I have to schedule an appointment, how long they require to process the application.
Does anyone here have an experience with the Mexican tourist visa stamping?
Thanks in advance.
more...
house sad love quotes in hindi.
sammyb
04-20 06:53 AM
any luck with PIMS pre-verification ... please share ...
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
I got this from different website(not sure if I can quote here).
Before going /planning for a perticular consualte, you can email the consulate with a i797 copy asking them to check if it exists in their system. If it doesn't then they will request concerned athorities to make it available in system so that you won't get stuck with PIMS delay. So far I have heard mexico/canada consualte responding to emails positively.
I will be mailing(canada consulate) them soon. Will keep you updated if i hear anything from them. if it works..its indeed a good options for us.:D
tattoo Hindi love
mchundi
07-28 10:17 AM
Thanks for the reply Mchundi, however, if i CHANGE the job does the rule for a 3 year H1B STILL apply? I mean how does the 3 year thing apply to me? I only have a little over 1 year on this current H1 (out of SIX years).
h1b-tristate,
All this was discussed a few times in this thread and other threads as well.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1216
--MC
h1b-tristate,
All this was discussed a few times in this thread and other threads as well.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=1216
--MC
more...
pictures funny love quotes in hindi.
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz0hxWRYv5UJhRg-RC6H-SfAXoG5eqK7NlWSaf5ePh4NFzZH-iWaaBikjaCP6OiMsHCo23WyGa-dujqR3dgqBdzZxqr4blgK10DJn_mNXVq1vyvss2McjkiR802-WOroq8zDyHrqroCM8/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz0hxWRYv5UJhRg-RC6H-SfAXoG5eqK7NlWSaf5ePh4NFzZH-iWaaBikjaCP6OiMsHCo23WyGa-dujqR3dgqBdzZxqr4blgK10DJn_mNXVq1vyvss2McjkiR802-WOroq8zDyHrqroCM8/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz0hxWRYv5UJhRg-RC6H-SfAXoG5eqK7NlWSaf5ePh4NFzZH-iWaaBikjaCP6OiMsHCo23WyGa-dujqR3dgqBdzZxqr4blgK10DJn_mNXVq1vyvss2McjkiR802-WOroq8zDyHrqroCM8/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz0hxWRYv5UJhRg-RC6H-SfAXoG5eqK7NlWSaf5ePh4NFzZH-iWaaBikjaCP6OiMsHCo23WyGa-dujqR3dgqBdzZxqr4blgK10DJn_mNXVq1vyvss2McjkiR802-WOroq8zDyHrqroCM8/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
dresses sad love quotes in hindi. sad
masti_Gai
12-20 09:29 AM
u don't even know what a labor is and u gotten through ur 140 stage... sounds weird tho...:rolleyes:
more...
makeup wallpaper sad love quotes in
jsb
11-14 12:11 PM
Well, are you sure I would need to work for this "future employer" for 6 months?
AC21 does not have a limit on the number of times you switch employers. Technically, if you were working for Employer A at the time of the RFE and submit a EVL from Employer A, you could then switch to Employer B immediately on AC21. In this scenario, I haven't worked with A for 6 months.
Is this scenario different because A is not a future employer?
With LC, I-140 and I-485 process, intentions of employee/employer relationship are expected to be bonafide, otherwise it would be fraud. Although a lot of people mention here, and some attorneys suggest, to work for 6 months for the sponsoring employer, there doesn't appear to be any law on that. Circumstances can change any time (AC21 supports that). Therefore, six month, or whatever period you may want to fix, is merely to strength the case that the sponsorship was bonafide. AC21 guidelines are quite lenient in that matter.
Bottomline is whatever happened, or you can provide, to support that there was no fraudulent intent, you are fine. If situation is not clear, and someone decides to contend, courts may come into picture.
Some people mention that six-month working could haunt you at citizenship time, but I doubt that. USCIS have a lot of other things to look at. If you have been a good citizen until then you should be fine.
AC21 does not have a limit on the number of times you switch employers. Technically, if you were working for Employer A at the time of the RFE and submit a EVL from Employer A, you could then switch to Employer B immediately on AC21. In this scenario, I haven't worked with A for 6 months.
Is this scenario different because A is not a future employer?
With LC, I-140 and I-485 process, intentions of employee/employer relationship are expected to be bonafide, otherwise it would be fraud. Although a lot of people mention here, and some attorneys suggest, to work for 6 months for the sponsoring employer, there doesn't appear to be any law on that. Circumstances can change any time (AC21 supports that). Therefore, six month, or whatever period you may want to fix, is merely to strength the case that the sponsorship was bonafide. AC21 guidelines are quite lenient in that matter.
Bottomline is whatever happened, or you can provide, to support that there was no fraudulent intent, you are fine. If situation is not clear, and someone decides to contend, courts may come into picture.
Some people mention that six-month working could haunt you at citizenship time, but I doubt that. USCIS have a lot of other things to look at. If you have been a good citizen until then you should be fine.
girlfriend sad love quotes in hindi. urdu hindi sad love like
gcnotfiledyet
07-15 09:26 PM
I have my original I94 from when I entered on F-1. And now I have the I-94 attached to my H-1B. Which one do I hand in?
Both have same I-94 number with different visa class and expiry date. I think you have to hand the one that came with h1b. I think either way it will be in system since both I-94 have same number.
Both have same I-94 number with different visa class and expiry date. I think you have to hand the one that came with h1b. I think either way it will be in system since both I-94 have same number.
hairstyles in love quotes for girls.
kzinjuwadia
05-25 01:27 PM
Hi,
I am little scared, I have taken an Infopass appointment for this friday at my local office, as my PD is current for EB2 - May, and still didn't get any status update or GCs.
Is it risky or inviting a risk by taking infopass apt. ?
Do you think I should have waited ?
please reply if anyone have any idea.
Thank you,
I don't think infopass does any harm to you. it may give more info ahead of time. I had infopass on may 12 as one of my friends with later PD got the approval email. the IO told me the case is approved and approvals are mailed already. got the GC next day :) This is my experience. I don't know if anyone had a bad experience at infopass or something that caused additional problem for their case. I think your's is a genuine case as your PD is current and it's almost month end and many with PD after you are already approved.
I am little scared, I have taken an Infopass appointment for this friday at my local office, as my PD is current for EB2 - May, and still didn't get any status update or GCs.
Is it risky or inviting a risk by taking infopass apt. ?
Do you think I should have waited ?
please reply if anyone have any idea.
Thank you,
I don't think infopass does any harm to you. it may give more info ahead of time. I had infopass on may 12 as one of my friends with later PD got the approval email. the IO told me the case is approved and approvals are mailed already. got the GC next day :) This is my experience. I don't know if anyone had a bad experience at infopass or something that caused additional problem for their case. I think your's is a genuine case as your PD is current and it's almost month end and many with PD after you are already approved.
stirfries
12-01 08:02 PM
It sometimes take longer than few days. During my years of getting AP's every year there are times I had my AP in hand within 3 days to almost 20 days. I am confident you will get your AP document much before the end of the month. Good luck with your travel plans.
Thanks SS777 !!!
I am optimistic as well !!! I am just hoping that I receive the documents by end of this week !
But at the same time, I wouldn't want to sit idle, just hoping !!! :)
I am going to try whatever options that might be available, to speed up the document receipt, if it is possible !!!
Probably, I can set up an appointment with InfoPass, sometime next week, and see what they have to say about this...
The scary part is, I have read several posts by other users who had reported the loss of document once it has been mailed out by USCIS. I hope I do not fall into that category and I want to be aware of the next course of action, if indeed, I fall into that category.
Cancelling my Tickets is the last option that I have in my mind !!!
The things that we have to go through to get a GC !!!! :)
Thanks SS777 !!!
I am optimistic as well !!! I am just hoping that I receive the documents by end of this week !
But at the same time, I wouldn't want to sit idle, just hoping !!! :)
I am going to try whatever options that might be available, to speed up the document receipt, if it is possible !!!
Probably, I can set up an appointment with InfoPass, sometime next week, and see what they have to say about this...
The scary part is, I have read several posts by other users who had reported the loss of document once it has been mailed out by USCIS. I hope I do not fall into that category and I want to be aware of the next course of action, if indeed, I fall into that category.
Cancelling my Tickets is the last option that I have in my mind !!!
The things that we have to go through to get a GC !!!! :)
americandesi
08-11 03:44 PM
I noticed a flaw in GC process with respect to “Ability to pay” and “AC21”
Here are the definitions
Ability to pay - Suppose a company files for I-140, it has to prove its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary.
AC21 states that an employee can change jobs to a similar position if I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. This could happen when I-485 is pending for more than 180 days or after its approval.
Let’s consider the following scenario
1) Company A files for I-140 and I-485 concurrently and proves its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary at I-140 stage.
2) I-140 gets approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days.
3) The employee quits employer A and remains idle (or) becomes self employed (or) joins employer B in a different position.
4) During the I-485 adjudication he provides an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A and says that he intends to work with employer C after I-485 approval.
5) I-485 gets approved.
Here is the flaw. USCIS doesn’t check if employer C has the ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary. All it asks for is an offer letter with wage, duties and annual salary.
What if company C is running in loss and not in a position to pay the proffered wage.
Why should USCIS make a big deal out of ability to pay when it’s not checked across all employers where the beneficiary intends to work?
Here are the definitions
Ability to pay - Suppose a company files for I-140, it has to prove its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary.
AC21 states that an employee can change jobs to a similar position if I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. This could happen when I-485 is pending for more than 180 days or after its approval.
Let’s consider the following scenario
1) Company A files for I-140 and I-485 concurrently and proves its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary at I-140 stage.
2) I-140 gets approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days.
3) The employee quits employer A and remains idle (or) becomes self employed (or) joins employer B in a different position.
4) During the I-485 adjudication he provides an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A and says that he intends to work with employer C after I-485 approval.
5) I-485 gets approved.
Here is the flaw. USCIS doesn’t check if employer C has the ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary. All it asks for is an offer letter with wage, duties and annual salary.
What if company C is running in loss and not in a position to pay the proffered wage.
Why should USCIS make a big deal out of ability to pay when it’s not checked across all employers where the beneficiary intends to work?
No comments:
Post a Comment