meridiani.planum
07-23 05:41 AM
All,
I feel that those who concurrently filed I-140/485 in July 2007 are very lucky!
Here is my situation -
Previous Employer -
EB3,PD-Jan'04,I-140 cleared. Switched in June 2007 and wasn't able to file I-485 in July 2007
New Employer -
EB2, PD-Dec'-07, I-140 (Feb'08 - pending)
Question -
Based on Jun'08 Visa bulletin the dates for EB2-India were at Apr'04. Filed for I-140/485 based on my old priority date for EB3 labor (Jan'04). Explaining USCIS for PD transfer.
Well, folks at NSC did not understand the PD transfer concept and send my application back. Unclear as to what do now. I guess need to wait until the dates for EB2-India reach Dec'07 such that I can file.
Any "Creative" thoughts on how to approach USCIS moving forward.
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Aamchimumbai
my understanding was that in this case you would not do a concurrent filing. You would file the I-140 requesting PD recapture. Once the I-140 was approved, and your PD-recapture also approved, at that point your new PD is confirmed and thats what allows you to file the I-485.
I feel that those who concurrently filed I-140/485 in July 2007 are very lucky!
Here is my situation -
Previous Employer -
EB3,PD-Jan'04,I-140 cleared. Switched in June 2007 and wasn't able to file I-485 in July 2007
New Employer -
EB2, PD-Dec'-07, I-140 (Feb'08 - pending)
Question -
Based on Jun'08 Visa bulletin the dates for EB2-India were at Apr'04. Filed for I-140/485 based on my old priority date for EB3 labor (Jan'04). Explaining USCIS for PD transfer.
Well, folks at NSC did not understand the PD transfer concept and send my application back. Unclear as to what do now. I guess need to wait until the dates for EB2-India reach Dec'07 such that I can file.
Any "Creative" thoughts on how to approach USCIS moving forward.
Thanks in advance for your replies.
Aamchimumbai
my understanding was that in this case you would not do a concurrent filing. You would file the I-140 requesting PD recapture. Once the I-140 was approved, and your PD-recapture also approved, at that point your new PD is confirmed and thats what allows you to file the I-485.
wallpaper #39;jessica-true-lood-0.jpg
njboy
05-30 06:49 PM
the reason she was denied is because she is young
santosh19
10-09 06:25 PM
Got to the forums menu and select I-485 reciept tracker and you will find that you are not the only one sailing. There are bunch of July 2nd filers who have not got their reciepts yet to start with. I am one among them . Filed on July 2nd no activity yet, no checks cashed .
2011 True Blood: I Smell A Rat
vnsriv
03-27 11:02 AM
Hi All,
My gc was filed in Jun 2002 under EB3. I had approved labour and I-140.(in feb 2004).
I had filed my I-485 in June 2005 and got EAD in one month. I got married in Jan.
So is this correct that I can file my wife's case only when priority dates become current?
Now the real question is how do I keep track of this.
Option 1
On US buletin, as of April, http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2847.html
All Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed CHINA INDIA MEXICO PHILIP-PINES
Employment-Based
1st C 01JAN04 01JAN05 C C
2nd C 01JAN03 01JUL02 C C
3rd 01MAY01 01MAY01 01FEB01 08APR01 01MAY01
So I should look at wait till my priorites date become current?(change from 01 Feb to Jun 2002) Is that correct?
Option 2
https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=Vermont
I-485 Application to register **** Employement Based adjustments application March 01,2005
Does it mean if I-485 dates move from March 01 to Jun 2005, I can file my spouse's case
Please suggest which is the correct way to keep the track
Thanks a lot
My gc was filed in Jun 2002 under EB3. I had approved labour and I-140.(in feb 2004).
I had filed my I-485 in June 2005 and got EAD in one month. I got married in Jan.
So is this correct that I can file my wife's case only when priority dates become current?
Now the real question is how do I keep track of this.
Option 1
On US buletin, as of April, http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2847.html
All Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed CHINA INDIA MEXICO PHILIP-PINES
Employment-Based
1st C 01JAN04 01JAN05 C C
2nd C 01JAN03 01JUL02 C C
3rd 01MAY01 01MAY01 01FEB01 08APR01 01MAY01
So I should look at wait till my priorites date become current?(change from 01 Feb to Jun 2002) Is that correct?
Option 2
https://egov.immigration.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=Vermont
I-485 Application to register **** Employement Based adjustments application March 01,2005
Does it mean if I-485 dates move from March 01 to Jun 2005, I can file my spouse's case
Please suggest which is the correct way to keep the track
Thanks a lot
more...
rvendra
05-18 02:11 PM
My case is EB 2 Dec 15th 2003 is priority date. I have filed my I 485 in August 2007. Still my case is pending more than 3 1/2 years. I have tried all possable options. Nothing is wokring out. Just simply telling background check is pending. Can you somebdoy helpme out other than WOM.
Thank you for your help
Raj
Thank you for your help
Raj
leoindiano
04-06 12:52 PM
How about this?
If a company located outside of united states, it cannot apply for more than 300 H1B's? I heard WIPRO and INFOSYS applied 6000 each this year
If a company located outside of united states, it cannot apply for more than 300 H1B's? I heard WIPRO and INFOSYS applied 6000 each this year
more...
gbof
08-01 11:55 AM
....gC ka mousamm aa gya....
2010 Tags: true bloodjessica
jonty_11
08-10 05:16 PM
how is this possible.......mr mustang plzzz come back to throw more lite and enliten us.....
more...
motown
10-21 10:50 PM
I work as a dentist in a company which was held in partnership by 2 partners.I have a approved H1b and my I 140 is filed in May 2006.Now as of Oct 01 the original company is finished as the partners have seperated.I am confused about my case, if I have to file a new H1b and 140 or an ammendment or just nothing.The tax id number for the company which will now give my paycheck has changed.As for me my work location has not changed and I still work in the same position.Can I take paychecks from the new company which now belongs to one of the partners or do I need to inform immigration to refile H1 or I140 or both.Any advice is appriciated
AC-21 Public law 106-396 might be applicable to your case. Please read the last paragraph in page 10 from the following link
http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/handbook/ac21guide.pdf
I am not an attorney. Use it at your own risk.
Good Luck.
Motown
AC-21 Public law 106-396 might be applicable to your case. Please read the last paragraph in page 10 from the following link
http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/lawsregs/handbook/ac21guide.pdf
I am not an attorney. Use it at your own risk.
Good Luck.
Motown
hair Meanwhile, co-star Jessica
GC_1000Watt
05-20 12:52 PM
Hello Gurus,
I am planning for H1B visa stamping at Mumbai consulate in July this year. I am not aware of the current extension process. I will appreciate if anybody can share his/her knowledge on the same.
FYI: I have got my first H1B extension for the next 3 years & i am with the same company all this period.
As far as my information goes, i will first have to get HDFC receipt by asking somebody in India to fill the visa fees on my behalf. and then I have to fill DS156 & DS157 electronically?
Kindly share your knowledge, thoughts and advices.
Thanks in advance.
I am planning for H1B visa stamping at Mumbai consulate in July this year. I am not aware of the current extension process. I will appreciate if anybody can share his/her knowledge on the same.
FYI: I have got my first H1B extension for the next 3 years & i am with the same company all this period.
As far as my information goes, i will first have to get HDFC receipt by asking somebody in India to fill the visa fees on my behalf. and then I have to fill DS156 & DS157 electronically?
Kindly share your knowledge, thoughts and advices.
Thanks in advance.
more...
sss9i
07-21 12:12 AM
Bump up
hot Deborah Ann Woll - True Blood
nochoice
12-17 12:01 PM
Suman,
Several members have raised important questions to you, but you have not responded to them. Since you started this thread, I think you owe responsibility to answer these questions.
Several members have raised important questions to you, but you have not responded to them. Since you started this thread, I think you owe responsibility to answer these questions.
more...
house from the True Blood Paley
leoindiano
08-28 04:36 PM
You contributed 600:confused: for what?
For different initiatives. Did you see my join date? I joined in the first month when it is founded. Not a big deal...I am not even sure why i have to prove and tell these stories....last post....
For different initiatives. Did you see my join date? I joined in the first month when it is founded. Not a big deal...I am not even sure why i have to prove and tell these stories....last post....
tattoo Jessica from True Blood.
KanME
12-26 12:05 PM
Hello all,
not sure if this topic has been touched before; if we have a i-485 application filed; do we qualify as:
1) non-permanent resident aliens
OR
2) non-resident aliens?
thanks
not sure if this topic has been touched before; if we have a i-485 application filed; do we qualify as:
1) non-permanent resident aliens
OR
2) non-resident aliens?
thanks
more...
pictures Jessica Hamby in Season 3,
kart2007
10-13 07:48 PM
What if EAD and AP is lost in mail. Do I need to pay fee again for refiling?
if yes that sucks!!!!!!!
Unfortunately, yes, apply for a replacement EAD asap.
see this: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22004
if yes that sucks!!!!!!!
Unfortunately, yes, apply for a replacement EAD asap.
see this: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22004
dresses True Blood season 2 episode 3
snathan
06-10 09:18 AM
I am very thankful for such a generous response in such a short span of time.
I have everything back with me except I-94 and VISA ( which can be had in india).
I owe this forum a lot.....:) and i will have to repay it ...
I am happy to know that your 'thefted' issue is solved . Is there any way you can help IV. There is a fund drive going on to solve some immigrant issue. If possible please contribute.
I have everything back with me except I-94 and VISA ( which can be had in india).
I owe this forum a lot.....:) and i will have to repay it ...
I am happy to know that your 'thefted' issue is solved . Is there any way you can help IV. There is a fund drive going on to solve some immigrant issue. If possible please contribute.
more...
makeup True Blood Recap: The Fanged
coolpal
04-28 03:37 PM
My wife came from india this sunday (4/26) @ JFK... she is working on EAD and had an expired H1b stamp in her PP.... She was asked about the purpose of the Visit by the IO and also at the AP fingerprinting, and the first IO asked about the expired H1, but she said she is working on EAD and had a valid AP.. he asked her something about how she could prove that she started working on EAD or something like that, but he didn't wait for answer... sent her to AP finger printing.... it all took less than 50 mins. I should say this is waaaaay smoother than the experience we had at EWR in 2006.
pal :)
pal :)
girlfriend Props to Jessica for bringing
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
hairstyles HBO#39;s #39;True Blood#39; Adds Female
like_watching_paint_dry
01-08 10:59 AM
The bad part is when you look to answer the question "what are the odds that the first baby of a new year would be born to an illegal leech?" .. There are so many illegals out here that they have good odds of having a sweepstake winning baby, while legals suffer all kinds of bureaucratic hurdles.
They should give the baby the money and CIS should deport the illegal woman.
They should give the baby the money and CIS should deport the illegal woman.
diptam
08-10 11:59 AM
My check has a temp address of NJ - After that my address changed 3 times ... I didn't even mention that address in G325 because i stayed there for 30 days temporarily ....
Am i screwed ? This thing is going beyond Limit now... They are NOT leaving any option other than settling to other countries like CANADA or Europe...
I got the info from my friends attorney.
i want to verify it with my attorney but he is not lifiting phone. he is too busy
Am i screwed ? This thing is going beyond Limit now... They are NOT leaving any option other than settling to other countries like CANADA or Europe...
I got the info from my friends attorney.
i want to verify it with my attorney but he is not lifiting phone. he is too busy
GCwaitforever
06-30 06:01 PM
Should not the mere fact of finding a substitute person for the labor petition invalidate the labor petition itself? The idea of labor petition meant to indicate non-availability of local talent (which includes H-1Bs already present?)... This is a contradiction in substitute labor petitions.
No comments:
Post a Comment