diesel
05-23 12:11 PM
Thanks for the hard work...
wallpaper Active Earth New Zealand
reddymjm
06-08 02:40 PM
No way they cannot. They will accept till JUN 29th. I am not sure about JUN 30 as it is saturday. You have time till JUN28th to ship it.
There might be movement next two months. They need money too. They will let file every one.
There might be movement next two months. They need money too. They will let file every one.
gc_lover
07-05 06:02 AM
my 485 also reached Nebraska on July 2nd at 9:01 am
by FEDEX.
Is my boat Sinking or floating
Mine reached on Juny 2 9:01 AM too. Its sinking, my friend. Your boat is sinking...just like mine.
See you at the bottom of the ocean!
by FEDEX.
Is my boat Sinking or floating
Mine reached on Juny 2 9:01 AM too. Its sinking, my friend. Your boat is sinking...just like mine.
See you at the bottom of the ocean!
2011 Undersea New Zealand, NIWA
amslonewolf
05-01 03:16 PM
This could have a huge impact.. I posted this on the donor forum as well.
more...
zeta7
03-28 07:34 PM
I landed on March 17, 08 and came back the same day to the US using Automatic Visa Revalidation. I had no questions asked either by Canadian or US authorities. When you land the Canadian authorities will staple a piece of paper to your PP as proof of PR until you get the PR card. While re-entering the US I remove that stapled paper as it was very annoying every time you opened the PP. Nobody will question you just because you have a plan B.
Using AVR may seem like using a viable option, but I'm not even sure if it is for me since I don't even have a H1B stamp in my passport (expired or otherwise) since I haven't left the country since I switched from F1 to H1B status. I'll almost certainly have to use AP to return to the US after landing. As per other concerns in this thread, I don't know if the scrutiny to my AP and passport with the Canadian Visa is going to cause issues when I re-enter.
Using AVR may seem like using a viable option, but I'm not even sure if it is for me since I don't even have a H1B stamp in my passport (expired or otherwise) since I haven't left the country since I switched from F1 to H1B status. I'll almost certainly have to use AP to return to the US after landing. As per other concerns in this thread, I don't know if the scrutiny to my AP and passport with the Canadian Visa is going to cause issues when I re-enter.
factoryman
07-02 12:15 AM
with a copy of I-140, you can complete all your paperwork between now and dawn tomorrow.
In the meanwhile, act everything is normal. Ask a employment letter with job title and current salary (say, you want it for trip to Canada or renewing your DL or some 'genunine' reason like that.
Apply.
Hi guys,
With all the news floating around about the VISAs getting exhausted in early July on one side and having an employer who does not seem too eager to apply for I485 since past two months, how does one deal with it ?
I wish all this was a little less complicated..:confused:
In the meanwhile, act everything is normal. Ask a employment letter with job title and current salary (say, you want it for trip to Canada or renewing your DL or some 'genunine' reason like that.
Apply.
Hi guys,
With all the news floating around about the VISAs getting exhausted in early July on one side and having an employer who does not seem too eager to apply for I485 since past two months, how does one deal with it ?
I wish all this was a little less complicated..:confused:
more...
Googler
07-07 08:31 PM
All officials have talked about processing 60k visas in a month to avoid visas going waste.
None was honest enough to say the unused visas expire on 09/30 NOT 06/30.
So, why the mad rush to give out all visas by 06/30?? We all know why..
Well on that she will just pass the buck to USCIS -- that was their problem -- and USCIS is DHS' problem not DOS (her Dept).
None was honest enough to say the unused visas expire on 09/30 NOT 06/30.
So, why the mad rush to give out all visas by 06/30?? We all know why..
Well on that she will just pass the buck to USCIS -- that was their problem -- and USCIS is DHS' problem not DOS (her Dept).
2010 in the North Island of New
gc4me
04-23 02:50 PM
This guy is a deshi employer. He is on H1 so he is a silent partner & that why scratching his head.
There are attorneys who will charge only after recovering money. The stupid employer can be sued for lost wages along with civil penalties from which the attorney's fee will be paid.
I just read first page of this thread and would advice that don't follow most of reply because they are lawyers or they have not gone through the experience you are going through. $4000 may not be big amount compared to hassle of law suite , piece of mind or the amount of increase you may have received by switching employer. I know a close person who had gone through exactly same situation in NJ and had to pay 12,000 to settle the case. I have seen bunch of people in same situation and my friend always adviced them to stay away from law suite. If your current employer is not big then there are greater chances that it will turn away from you in case of law suite.
If you are not working with same client that you were working when you were in company A then non-compete may not hold against you.
Also can you get in writing from you current employer that they will support you in case of law suite?
There are attorneys who will charge only after recovering money. The stupid employer can be sued for lost wages along with civil penalties from which the attorney's fee will be paid.
I just read first page of this thread and would advice that don't follow most of reply because they are lawyers or they have not gone through the experience you are going through. $4000 may not be big amount compared to hassle of law suite , piece of mind or the amount of increase you may have received by switching employer. I know a close person who had gone through exactly same situation in NJ and had to pay 12,000 to settle the case. I have seen bunch of people in same situation and my friend always adviced them to stay away from law suite. If your current employer is not big then there are greater chances that it will turn away from you in case of law suite.
If you are not working with same client that you were working when you were in company A then non-compete may not hold against you.
Also can you get in writing from you current employer that they will support you in case of law suite?
more...
skynet2500
09-11 11:33 PM
Congratulations to everyone who is getting their applications approved.
My PD is Aug 2006 and I might have a remote chance of getting approved this month. Can someone give me the customer service number to talk about the 485 status. I keep seeing that many people talk to the customer service and get updates on the case. My case is pending at TSC. Thanks a lot.
My PD is Aug 2006 and I might have a remote chance of getting approved this month. Can someone give me the customer service number to talk about the 485 status. I keep seeing that many people talk to the customer service and get updates on the case. My case is pending at TSC. Thanks a lot.
hair “The Islands Of New Zealand
SunnySurya
08-18 01:17 PM
Again folks! please think hard, what can be done ???? (other than filling lawsuits)
more...
wantgc23
09-09 08:34 PM
In current situation Labor is impossible for approval. My attorney told me clearly that labor is impossible to approve in this bad economy and wastage of money.
This is a very valid point.
Only options I see are
1. Follow IV's advocacy efforts
or
2. Just dont care about the damn GC and Live life :)
This is a very valid point.
Only options I see are
1. Follow IV's advocacy efforts
or
2. Just dont care about the damn GC and Live life :)
hot the Lower North Island Map
vkallank
07-20 08:53 AM
anzerraja , i am unable to access the excel sheet at work. if possible please update / i shall do it tonight.
more...
house New Zealand White Wines
ashshah
12-16 03:55 PM
Been in the US since 1998, have an EB-2 PD of 2001, have played by the rules all along. Still no GC... And, the dates are going back to 2000 from the new year.. I've lost hopes...
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
Another recommendation is if possible do a landmark forum course. Its a 3 day course but definitely worth doing especially it may help to handle depression of any kind. Its based on a technology and not everyone gets the same benefits. But it does provide you good insights and everyone gets benefited in some way or the other.
I'm pretty close to getting clinical depression because of this game played by USCIS, Labor Dept, FBI and my own bad luck.
SKILL bill, OMNIBUS, etc. comes and goes. IV does seem to be doing things to lobby for the community, but let's face one reality. Like a news article said, no one in congress or senate wants to touch immigration even with a long pole until 2009.
The US has been very good to me (other than the GC part), more than my home country (India) which is why I'm still here.
Have invested too much of time in this country to just pack up and go. Just curious if any of you feel this way? How do you handle such depressing feelings?
Another recommendation is if possible do a landmark forum course. Its a 3 day course but definitely worth doing especially it may help to handle depression of any kind. Its based on a technology and not everyone gets the same benefits. But it does provide you good insights and everyone gets benefited in some way or the other.
tattoo of the North Island of New
vij
06-15 11:28 AM
Receipts only recieved by lawyer? Will benefeciary get any updates?
I have the same question. who gets the receipts? - only lawyer or both lawyer and benefeciary or both lawyer and employer
I have the same question. who gets the receipts? - only lawyer or both lawyer and benefeciary or both lawyer and employer
more...
pictures -new-zealand-north-island.
kondur_007
07-28 02:08 PM
As I mentioned in my previous post in this thread, I am now posting information that explains why this "horizontal" spill occurred and no amount of campaign will reverse it (other than change in law).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
If this is repetition of what has already been discussed elsewhere on the site, I apologize.
First, let me point out when and how the interpretation changed:
Following is from immigration-information.com site (Ron Gotcher):
�Last week, I wrote to Charles Oppenheim of the State Department, asking several specific questions. This morning, I had a long talk with him, when he very graciously called to respond to the questions I e-mailed him earlier. In the course of our discussion, I learned a great deal about the present backlog situation and what is being done about it. First, let me deal with the questions I had asked.
Mr. Oppenheim explained that while the Visa Office initially took the view that visa numbers had to fall down into employment third preference before the could fall across to the individual country quotas, but after further review, additional legislation, and consultation with Congress, they concluded that they have to allocate the fall across within individual preference petitions first.�
Direct link to above post:
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5456
Some more information from Ron Gotcher�s site can be found at following link
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5703
Now, let�s look at the actual law on this (above is only the interpretation from Mr Oppenheim, following is the actual text of the law: (my comment is in italics)
8 CFR Sec 202(a)
(5) 2/ RULES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS-
(A) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph (read as under that EB category: if it is EB1, it goes to EB1 and if it is EB2 it goes to EB2) shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
Read the entire Sec 202 (a) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
A glimpse of Sec 203(b) is:
b) Preference Allocation for Employment-Based Immigrants. - Aliens subject to the worldwide level specified in section 201(d) for employment-based immigrants in a fiscal year shall be allotted visas as follows:
(1) Priority workers. - Visas shall first be made available in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (4) and (5), to qualified immigrants who are aliens described in any of the following subparagraphs (A) through (C): �.
Please read the entire section 203(b) here:
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe
So, in nutshell:
1. The law is actually clear on this.
2. Now Mr. Oppenheim has interpreted it correctly as well.
3. It don�t think we can convince anyone to change the interpretation (because interpretation appears to be correct. If it was interpreted differently in past, then that was a mistake).
4. The only way to deal with it is to CHANGE THE LAW.
5. More importantly, push for bills to increase overall numbers (recapture, STEM exemption) etc�
6. The big picture: All these is likely to look completely different once CIR comes in, and we need to include our agenda in CIR that would benefit every category for several years to come (not just my GC or your GC).
dresses the North Island of New
Janisaris
09-14 10:57 AM
I called and talked to a level 2 officer and she could not find us in the system.
Filed on July 19th. 140 approved from NSC in June 2006. NSC is receipting August 2nd applications. Very frustrationg and I dont know how long it will take.
Filed on July 19th. 140 approved from NSC in June 2006. NSC is receipting August 2nd applications. Very frustrationg and I dont know how long it will take.
more...
makeup Lower North Island
Goodintentions
02-04 08:36 PM
Dear All,
Even if we have issues, let us all sink our differences, present a united front and contribute! I am sending my contribution by cheque and I have also written a personal mail to all my friends!
Kindly contribute whatever you can, by cheque!
I request all of you to recall the famous lines :
Little drops of water. Little grains of sand,
Make the mighty ocean, And the beauteous land !!!
Hope all of you will turn up in large numbers and also contibute your mite (big or small) and make every effort to make this even a success! Moments like this come not too often! Every opportunity is worth the try!
Thank you! May GOD Bless the efforts of IV!
Wishing the Advocacy event a grand success!
Even if we have issues, let us all sink our differences, present a united front and contribute! I am sending my contribution by cheque and I have also written a personal mail to all my friends!
Kindly contribute whatever you can, by cheque!
I request all of you to recall the famous lines :
Little drops of water. Little grains of sand,
Make the mighty ocean, And the beauteous land !!!
Hope all of you will turn up in large numbers and also contibute your mite (big or small) and make every effort to make this even a success! Moments like this come not too often! Every opportunity is worth the try!
Thank you! May GOD Bless the efforts of IV!
Wishing the Advocacy event a grand success!
girlfriend for New Zealand). This map
mellster
10-10 02:04 PM
Details:
PD - Dec 05, EB3
I-140 Approved,TSC
I-485 - RD 07/03/07 signed by R.Williams at 9:03am.
Checks Cashed - ????
Receipts Received - ???
PD - Dec 05, EB3
I-140 Approved,TSC
I-485 - RD 07/03/07 signed by R.Williams at 9:03am.
Checks Cashed - ????
Receipts Received - ???
hairstyles Research New Zealand Ltd.
acecupid
07-03 01:42 PM
I would sent some cactus if there were options to do that.:D
surabhi
04-23 05:18 PM
There is moral obligation too. Whenever you hire H-1s make sure most of them have dreams to get GC and settle down. Dont take risks in such a ways their dreams get shattered because of poor business practices. just to hire people dont run in your businesses on losses and in turn force yourself to shut down the business.
I think there is difference of opinion here. Since there is chance here that the thread is frequented by current and would-be employers I will try to articulate once again.
1. H1B is a legitimate business expense. It should be factored in as such by the employers.
2. Same is case with GC. But given the fact tht after I-140 it becomes portable, it is perfectly ethical in my opinon to ask employee to put up the expense.
3. H1B or not, employment is at will in US. USICS granting 3 year H1B does not imply employee is bound for 3 years either in letter or spirit of law.
4. Unless the business produces IPR or the employee is in position to lure away exisitng clientele, non-compete doesnt hold water. Employers should refrain from using non-compete as scare tactic.
5. As a corollary to point #3, having term around employment in lieu of h1b processing is illegal. The point of lost business because of employee left doesnt hold good. Employers can only claim non-compete or non-solicitation if the case is geniune. Lost business because employee left will never be upheld.
6. Unless doing revenue sharing (80-20 etc), it is illegal to withold , not pay wages.
7. If employee requests running payroll while not on project in revenue sharing mode ( see #6 above) it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
8. If business needs to let go an employee and employee wants to continue for immigration reasons, it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
I think there is difference of opinion here. Since there is chance here that the thread is frequented by current and would-be employers I will try to articulate once again.
1. H1B is a legitimate business expense. It should be factored in as such by the employers.
2. Same is case with GC. But given the fact tht after I-140 it becomes portable, it is perfectly ethical in my opinon to ask employee to put up the expense.
3. H1B or not, employment is at will in US. USICS granting 3 year H1B does not imply employee is bound for 3 years either in letter or spirit of law.
4. Unless the business produces IPR or the employee is in position to lure away exisitng clientele, non-compete doesnt hold water. Employers should refrain from using non-compete as scare tactic.
5. As a corollary to point #3, having term around employment in lieu of h1b processing is illegal. The point of lost business because of employee left doesnt hold good. Employers can only claim non-compete or non-solicitation if the case is geniune. Lost business because employee left will never be upheld.
6. Unless doing revenue sharing (80-20 etc), it is illegal to withold , not pay wages.
7. If employee requests running payroll while not on project in revenue sharing mode ( see #6 above) it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
8. If business needs to let go an employee and employee wants to continue for immigration reasons, it should be on cost to employee including employer contribution of taxes. this is indeed a favor to employee.
whiteStallion
11-17 09:32 PM
Sent the email...
Thanks for streamlining this process which only took a few seconds...
Kudos to the IV team again !
Thanks for streamlining this process which only took a few seconds...
Kudos to the IV team again !
No comments:
Post a Comment