waitforevergc
09-04 02:05 PM
People:
Please pray that EB2I becomes 2008 :)
I desperately want to file for i-485 and get EAD since my job is in shaky ground.
Please pray for me folks.
Please pray that EB2I becomes 2008 :)
I desperately want to file for i-485 and get EAD since my job is in shaky ground.
Please pray for me folks.
wallpaper Other symbols of tattoo that
Irs
05-12 09:48 AM
if you go to India and your application is cleared when you are there, you must return to the consulate who approved your application to get your visa stamped.
brahmam
09-04 11:22 AM
OK, now that we all are agonizing over what's gonna happen, I think the following could be a possibility. USCIS has pre-adj almost 150,000 apps and has got nothing more to do now and the new Q1 for 2010 has around 35,000 visa numbers available to be processed.
Would DOS let CIS sit on their bums with not much to do other than process any new 485s that could be filed by ROW or would DOS move the dates to 2008 or 2007 so that any more people that still need to file 485 can do so and CIS stays busy. I think they would want to keep CIS busy. this would of course not mean every one of us will get approved since EB2/3 India and china only have around ~3000 visa numbers available in Q1 2010.
who votes for this russian roulette option? :D
Would DOS let CIS sit on their bums with not much to do other than process any new 485s that could be filed by ROW or would DOS move the dates to 2008 or 2007 so that any more people that still need to file 485 can do so and CIS stays busy. I think they would want to keep CIS busy. this would of course not mean every one of us will get approved since EB2/3 India and china only have around ~3000 visa numbers available in Q1 2010.
who votes for this russian roulette option? :D
2011 tribal tattoos and their
pash02
05-26 11:37 AM
Thanks to IV core members, QGA, senators and their staff.
Kudos to Immigration Voice!
Kudos to Immigration Voice!
more...
sumansk
09-26 05:16 PM
Man I called and talked to teh 2nd level person and she said my app is not in the system...So what could be the reason for it...It was received on 18th july in NSC..Any pointers guys..?? :(
amsgc
06-16 02:02 AM
AMSGC
Will this be a problem in name check process of I-485. I have contacted my lawyer and waiting on his reponse. If he gives me a go ahead I am going to fix it first thing monday morning.
Thanks
Murali
Murali,
I have not even filed the I-485 yet. I just gave an objective thought to your problem - I personally would have had it fixed. At the very least, find out if it is just a typo on the card, or if your name associated with the number is backwards, which I think is a serious issue.
Will this be a problem in name check process of I-485. I have contacted my lawyer and waiting on his reponse. If he gives me a go ahead I am going to fix it first thing monday morning.
Thanks
Murali
Murali,
I have not even filed the I-485 yet. I just gave an objective thought to your problem - I personally would have had it fixed. At the very least, find out if it is just a typo on the card, or if your name associated with the number is backwards, which I think is a serious issue.
more...
patiently_waiting
01-14 04:10 PM
This may be useful for guys to do stamping in Tijuana :-
Tijuana Trip (http://tijuanatrip.blogspot.com/)
Tijuana Trip (http://tijuanatrip.blogspot.com/)
2010 its exact meaning.
GCHope2011
08-10 02:17 PM
I recently heard that the new immigration bill is finally going to be passed in Oct 2010. The highlights would be mainly to use all the green cards alloted irrespective of any country. And to support this bill they will receive all the 485 applications irrespective of the PD. Can anyone confirm if this is accurate info.
Thanks.
It will be better if you could mention your sources. Otherwise, it is just speculation and wishful thinking.
Thanks.
It will be better if you could mention your sources. Otherwise, it is just speculation and wishful thinking.
more...
chanduv23
07-05 12:43 PM
by now everybody might have heard stories about how USCIS pulled staff and worked overtime and weekends to utilize the 60k visas in one month to prevent the july 485 filings.
What I am wondering is why did they do it. One obvious reason is the incresed fee comming into effect from July 30 2007. In addition to it what are the other reasons.
Is there any agenda within USCIS to prevent people from getting EAD and ac21 benefits?
Is USCIS filled with anti immgrant mentality who have takem upon themselves to make our lives difficult?
Maybe politicians involved - only when powerful politicians are involved such things happen - USCIS/DOS does not do such things on its own.
What I am wondering is why did they do it. One obvious reason is the incresed fee comming into effect from July 30 2007. In addition to it what are the other reasons.
Is there any agenda within USCIS to prevent people from getting EAD and ac21 benefits?
Is USCIS filled with anti immgrant mentality who have takem upon themselves to make our lives difficult?
Maybe politicians involved - only when powerful politicians are involved such things happen - USCIS/DOS does not do such things on its own.
hair tribal tattoo
ujjwal_p
09-03 05:26 PM
You loose your PD. BTW, please update your profile.
I think there's some nuance to this. You don't lose your PD if the company revokes your I-140, but you do lose your PD if USCIS revokes your I-140 due to fraud.
I think there's some nuance to this. You don't lose your PD if the company revokes your I-140, but you do lose your PD if USCIS revokes your I-140 due to fraud.
more...
Anders �stberg
July 15th, 2004, 04:50 PM
Thanks QJ! They are cute.
I also wish I could find a way of making the photography money flow the other way. :)
I also wish I could find a way of making the photography money flow the other way. :)
hot Flowers Meanings (A huge
Hope_GC
03-12 07:48 PM
Congrats
more...
house Poly Tribal Tat
mna123
07-30 05:38 PM
I am stuck out side of US for my name check for last 9 months when I applied for my H-1. I have approved I 140. is there any way I can file my I 1485 and Advance parole or any thing to get back into US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
tattoo Tribal Tattoo Tribal tattoo
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
pictures This is Megan#39;s only tattoo
inskrish
08-01 12:04 AM
Love the analogy.
Thanks Coopheal for leaving the IV wiki effort.
Pappu,
Just wanted to clarify, is it 'Leaving' or 'Leading'?
Thanks Coopheal for leaving the IV wiki effort.
Pappu,
Just wanted to clarify, is it 'Leaving' or 'Leading'?
dresses Tribal Armband Tattoo Design
antihero
04-14 11:13 PM
IV does not support any fraudulent activity by anybody, whether employees or employers or anybody else.
It because of faking the resumes by unscrupulous individuals things have come to this pass. Many genuinely honest and hardworking folks are slogging on in the GC queue while many who can't even spell technology have got GCs in a matter of months by exploiting loopholes.
My advice, go back to your home country, get some education in your chosen vocation and restart your career through honest means.
It because of faking the resumes by unscrupulous individuals things have come to this pass. Many genuinely honest and hardworking folks are slogging on in the GC queue while many who can't even spell technology have got GCs in a matter of months by exploiting loopholes.
My advice, go back to your home country, get some education in your chosen vocation and restart your career through honest means.
more...
makeup chinese tribal tattoos designs
ramus
08-15 12:41 PM
Thanks for your contribution and willing to take part in DC rally.
Sure...Just contributed $100, will do more in coming months.
Sure...Just contributed $100, will do more in coming months.
girlfriend Tribal bird tattoos Tribal
ushkand
09-15 10:27 PM
For the main applicant (me) under
Section: Adjustment as direct beneficiary of immigrnt petition
For spouse
Section: Derivtive Adjustment
Maybe you need to call an attorney and eventuallu USCIS to get this corrected.
Section: Adjustment as direct beneficiary of immigrnt petition
For spouse
Section: Derivtive Adjustment
Maybe you need to call an attorney and eventuallu USCIS to get this corrected.
hairstyles The color of the tattoo is
Chicago Desi
08-23 01:11 PM
No, I do not have a EAD or AP. I did not apply for them. I am planning to keep extending my H1 and not get into the hassle of EAD and AP every year.
Though its your decision but having EAD and AP in my hand (whether or not to use them) would give me some hope.
Though its your decision but having EAD and AP in my hand (whether or not to use them) would give me some hope.
harrydr
08-03 09:36 AM
Hello IV friends,
My PD is May 2008 and currently i have an approved i-140. I have been wanting to change my job but always been scared of the impact on my GC processing as i heard if i change my job prior to filing for I-485 (which i cannot as the PD is not current), i would have start the process all over again. What are my options here? Thanks in advance.
My PD is May 2008 and currently i have an approved i-140. I have been wanting to change my job but always been scared of the impact on my GC processing as i heard if i change my job prior to filing for I-485 (which i cannot as the PD is not current), i would have start the process all over again. What are my options here? Thanks in advance.
conundrum
03-28 10:01 AM
Great for us...aren't are Indian PHD's in the US are as scholarly and motivated as before? lol To think that there are left over visas in this category beats me ! :D
Having a PhD alone doesn't put you in EB1. Everything depends on the job requirement. You can have a PhD and still be in EB3 if the job that you are working doesn't require an advanced degree.
Having a PhD alone doesn't put you in EB1. Everything depends on the job requirement. You can have a PhD and still be in EB3 if the job that you are working doesn't require an advanced degree.
No comments:
Post a Comment