pappu
06-06 11:10 AM
Good points.
Cann't travel outside usa, because of too many restrictions on h1/h4 visa holders.
yes this can be a newsworthy story from an emotional perspective and views from prominent behaviour scientist to reaffirm our sentiments.
Cann't travel outside usa, because of too many restrictions on h1/h4 visa holders.
yes this can be a newsworthy story from an emotional perspective and views from prominent behaviour scientist to reaffirm our sentiments.
wallpaper Funny bird. views: 1529
gapala
02-09 09:54 AM
You have to somehow prove to USCIS that company A and C are subsidiaries and mere mentioning that they have been owned by the same person may not fly. You need some kind of proof on paper.
This may not fly because, both are considered different legal entities. The time that you have worked for A from Oct 05 to Aug 06 till the date H1B Transfer was filed from C to A, your employment will be considered unauthorized.
You need to immediately contact a good lawyer to evaluate your situation and options. I am sure they will find a way out.
Your case is slightly different than working for multiple employers while on H1B.
You can have multiple H1B's and work for multiple employers, given one of them is primary full time employment. This is perfectly legal and one of my friend has gone through this situation during his GC process. He did get an RFE and provided the details of both employments to CIS and they eventually approved his case. This was in 2004 though.
This may not fly because, both are considered different legal entities. The time that you have worked for A from Oct 05 to Aug 06 till the date H1B Transfer was filed from C to A, your employment will be considered unauthorized.
You need to immediately contact a good lawyer to evaluate your situation and options. I am sure they will find a way out.
Your case is slightly different than working for multiple employers while on H1B.
You can have multiple H1B's and work for multiple employers, given one of them is primary full time employment. This is perfectly legal and one of my friend has gone through this situation during his GC process. He did get an RFE and provided the details of both employments to CIS and they eventually approved his case. This was in 2004 though.
chanduv23
08-07 09:18 AM
A lot of people in the community still not on IV.
2011 Funny Bird Picture
roseball
05-02 10:52 AM
I understand that the chance is slim.... almost microscopic :rolleyes: But I need to prepare for the worst case (or is it the best...?? :confused:) hence the question.
Any idea about how long consular processing takes and does it depend on priority dates (in the case of a further retrogression)?
Thanks for the input, will keep a close watch on the visa bulletin and keep my wife's return trip options open.
Thanks again.
Yes, CP depends on PD as well. The best option for you is to have her fly back to US once the Visa bulletin shows your PD as current and start the prep work (documents, medical tests etc) and file her case along with AP/EAD so once she gets her AP approval, she is free to travel again.
Any idea about how long consular processing takes and does it depend on priority dates (in the case of a further retrogression)?
Thanks for the input, will keep a close watch on the visa bulletin and keep my wife's return trip options open.
Thanks again.
Yes, CP depends on PD as well. The best option for you is to have her fly back to US once the Visa bulletin shows your PD as current and start the prep work (documents, medical tests etc) and file her case along with AP/EAD so once she gets her AP approval, she is free to travel again.
more...
saibabu_d
08-03 10:06 PM
lin0722554234
LIN -> Nebraska
07 -> Year in 2 digits
225 -> Number of working days since October 1 2006
5 -> Default for all electronic data
4234 -> Serial number for the receipts issued on that day starting with 0001.
LIN -> Nebraska
07 -> Year in 2 digits
225 -> Number of working days since October 1 2006
5 -> Default for all electronic data
4234 -> Serial number for the receipts issued on that day starting with 0001.
sagar_nyc
01-26 11:22 AM
I am planning to move to different residence. My 485 application is currently pending.
Has anyone successfully filed change of address form? and have their EAD or other documents deliever to their new address correctly. Reason I am asking my friend changed his residence while his 485 pending and all his document would still come to my address (his old address). He made numerous request to USCIS and files for AR11 etc. His all documents EAD.. even Green card also came back to my address(His old adress). At least he was lucky that I was still staying over there.
Any thoughts much appreciated.
Has anyone successfully filed change of address form? and have their EAD or other documents deliever to their new address correctly. Reason I am asking my friend changed his residence while his 485 pending and all his document would still come to my address (his old address). He made numerous request to USCIS and files for AR11 etc. His all documents EAD.. even Green card also came back to my address(His old adress). At least he was lucky that I was still staying over there.
Any thoughts much appreciated.
more...
srinivas_o
08-24 12:01 AM
What do you mean by your post "Msg deleted"?
Msg deleted
Msg deleted
2010 Featured Artist: Dougal Haslem
Ennada
01-29 11:05 PM
Legalizing unauthorized immigrants would help economy, study says - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/07/immigration.economy/index.html#cnnSTCText)
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
more...
samcam
07-19 12:08 PM
Btw, NBC might not do anything with it at all, but NSC on the other hand might..
PS: I know its a typo, so just kidding here..
Thanks for the info..! btw, what about my first question ..When do the 90 days wait start counting? NBC received my app on July 2nd.. Does it mean it's 90 days after July 2nd??
tnx.
PS: I know its a typo, so just kidding here..
Thanks for the info..! btw, what about my first question ..When do the 90 days wait start counting? NBC received my app on July 2nd.. Does it mean it's 90 days after July 2nd??
tnx.
hair Funny bird feeder
thakkarbhav
09-03 12:49 PM
I did not receive my EAD card - It was approved on Aug 21st...Not sure what went wrong with USPS.
more...
seaken75
11-01 01:36 PM
The document you have reffered is -->EXTENSION OF REGISTRATION PERIOD
FOR CERTAIN NONIMMIGRANTS
and this extension is valid till on or before April 25, 2003
for the following
And you were last admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant on or before
September 30, 2002; and
� If you are a male, born on or before February 24, 1987; and
� If you did not have an application for asylum pending on January 16, 2003, or if you are
not otherwise exempt as described in the attached questions and answers; and
� If you will remain in the United States at least until April 25, 2003.
So irrespective of the above regulation you should have registered if you are from the stated regions unless the original regulation also stated the above points. In that case you need not register based on the 1st point but would have to register based on the 4th point ***If you will remain in the United States at least until April 25, 2003.****. So cannot understand why you were mislead....
The original regulation does not include my country and therefore the extension. The requirements in the document uses the word AND, not OR. So even though i will remain in the U.S. after April 25, 2003, i should still be exempted since my last entry date to U.S. was after Sept 30, 2002.
Is my lawyer and me the only people that interpret it this way?
FOR CERTAIN NONIMMIGRANTS
and this extension is valid till on or before April 25, 2003
for the following
And you were last admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant on or before
September 30, 2002; and
� If you are a male, born on or before February 24, 1987; and
� If you did not have an application for asylum pending on January 16, 2003, or if you are
not otherwise exempt as described in the attached questions and answers; and
� If you will remain in the United States at least until April 25, 2003.
So irrespective of the above regulation you should have registered if you are from the stated regions unless the original regulation also stated the above points. In that case you need not register based on the 1st point but would have to register based on the 4th point ***If you will remain in the United States at least until April 25, 2003.****. So cannot understand why you were mislead....
The original regulation does not include my country and therefore the extension. The requirements in the document uses the word AND, not OR. So even though i will remain in the U.S. after April 25, 2003, i should still be exempted since my last entry date to U.S. was after Sept 30, 2002.
Is my lawyer and me the only people that interpret it this way?
hot And a ird frog:
chanduv23
09-15 12:04 PM
I would say:
Merge all these threads into one - at least 3 or 4 people can take charge over the thread - the first few posts can be updates and tracking info and finalization of drafts and plans
Please encourage ONLY members who are committed, they can be ones who have posted real profile and who have joined state chapters - usually state chapter members are verified members.
It would be great if someone from IV core can also guide on such efforts
Merge all these threads into one - at least 3 or 4 people can take charge over the thread - the first few posts can be updates and tracking info and finalization of drafts and plans
Please encourage ONLY members who are committed, they can be ones who have posted real profile and who have joined state chapters - usually state chapter members are verified members.
It would be great if someone from IV core can also guide on such efforts
more...
house Funny Bird -t-shirt by
hopefulgc
08-20 10:44 PM
apr 2004
tattoo Creation – Funny Bird
perm2gc
11-09 04:33 PM
Your Approval Notice is sent to the attorny not to you.If the current one you have is original one from attorney then your wife has to out of country immediately and enter with I94 ...Please note I94 is the one that determines you status in this country...
more...
pictures stuff. « French Food and
darslee
07-17 07:29 PM
And I second that...it couldn't have been easy to backtrack with grace...:)
dresses 3) When Big Bird was young,
chanduv23
10-13 01:00 PM
Mark is from LI. I wonder why he does not show up any more. Has he quit IV?
He is active - he is a big guy now, sometime back, I approached him for his autograph, and he said he does not have time to sign autographs :D:D:D
Jokes apart - Mark is very much in IV. He is involved at the national level more than the State level - he does make sure he is in conference calls and if we have a meetup in his area, he will make it for sure.
He is active - he is a big guy now, sometime back, I approached him for his autograph, and he said he does not have time to sign autographs :D:D:D
Jokes apart - Mark is very much in IV. He is involved at the national level more than the State level - he does make sure he is in conference calls and if we have a meetup in his area, he will make it for sure.
more...
makeup stock vector : funny bird
admin
05-20 08:32 AM
There is so much to read about the happenings around this topic. How are we faring so far? Thank you for all the hard work!
Every day's Senate proceedings appear in our member's only forum - http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=14
Every day's Senate proceedings appear in our member's only forum - http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=14
girlfriend funny birds
EndlessWait
02-21 03:41 PM
I filed my LC on June 06. The Certification was denied on Feb 07, I filed an appeal right away, and I have not heard anything. I called the DOL so many time and they gave me the same response: "Your case is in process, we work on first in, first out, and we do not expedited cases, we don't have a frame time" That is not a concrete answer.
There is any body that faced a similar situation, Please advised�. what to do!!!!
Thank u.
no accountability..just pay the fees, shutup and wait..
sorry dude but that's the reality
There is any body that faced a similar situation, Please advised�. what to do!!!!
Thank u.
no accountability..just pay the fees, shutup and wait..
sorry dude but that's the reality
hairstyles Funny bird mouth dog
Libra
09-15 10:43 PM
Are you coming?
mars
07-15 04:25 PM
Hi,
Could some one let us know while applying for H1 Extension do we need to provide notarized documents if one has traveled outside US on H1B. Are these documents mandatory ?
Also what's the general processing time for H1 Extension.I mean how many days does it take..
Mars
Could some one let us know while applying for H1 Extension do we need to provide notarized documents if one has traveled outside US on H1B. Are these documents mandatory ?
Also what's the general processing time for H1 Extension.I mean how many days does it take..
Mars
sathishav
03-01 02:07 PM
If i understood your post correctly, you have ported of an unapproved I140. I do understand this is for a "future job", but still you have used AC21.
I agree with your attorney to file, because, if you had worked for Company A and moved AFTER I140 approved and I485 pending for 180 days, you don't have to worry about their status. Since you have not yet worked for them, it safe severe your ties by filing AC21.
http://www.myvisajobs.com/Document/YatesMay05.pdf
Question 1. How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-
485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should
be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on
it�s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If additional evidence is necessary to resolve a material post-filing
issue such as ability to pay, an RFE can be sent to try to resolve the
issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable,
follow the procedures in part A above.
I agree with your attorney to file, because, if you had worked for Company A and moved AFTER I140 approved and I485 pending for 180 days, you don't have to worry about their status. Since you have not yet worked for them, it safe severe your ties by filing AC21.
http://www.myvisajobs.com/Document/YatesMay05.pdf
Question 1. How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-
485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should
be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on
it�s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If additional evidence is necessary to resolve a material post-filing
issue such as ability to pay, an RFE can be sent to try to resolve the
issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable,
follow the procedures in part A above.
0 comments:
Post a Comment