logiclife
08-03 07:23 PM
Hi logiclife,
I agree with you. You're spot on. My other friend, please take a note of Logiclife's comments.
Do you have any sections from USCIS, which states that there is no need of job duties on the experience letter and just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. much appreciated. Thx.
No, I dont have any code or INA section for that. And I never said that just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. No, that wont suffice, coz that only shows what happened in the past. The employer letter is supposed to assure USCIS that the job offer is still valid and if USCIS gives you greencard then the employer is still offering employment which was the basis for filing greencard. The future component is a must. What happened in past and what happened so far (up until 485 filing) is irrelevant. Therefore just the title and dates of employment ARE NOT ENOUGH.
What is relevant is the job described in labor cert is still available to you IN FUTURE and whether employer is willing to say it on a letter to USCIS that "Hey, take care of this guy's 485 coz I still plan to hire him on XYZ position IN FUTURE ".
I am telling you from my own experience with what my lawyer had prepared for my HR to sign.
My employer's letter simply states that A) they will pay me X amount at the minimum (which is my current salary) and B) the job is still being offered as per job described in ETA 750 and I-140.
That covers everything. Labor cert has job description. 140 has other credentials. If a letter with 485 says that job offer is still valid a per job described in labor and 140, that covers everything.
I agree with you. You're spot on. My other friend, please take a note of Logiclife's comments.
Do you have any sections from USCIS, which states that there is no need of job duties on the experience letter and just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. much appreciated. Thx.
No, I dont have any code or INA section for that. And I never said that just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. No, that wont suffice, coz that only shows what happened in the past. The employer letter is supposed to assure USCIS that the job offer is still valid and if USCIS gives you greencard then the employer is still offering employment which was the basis for filing greencard. The future component is a must. What happened in past and what happened so far (up until 485 filing) is irrelevant. Therefore just the title and dates of employment ARE NOT ENOUGH.
What is relevant is the job described in labor cert is still available to you IN FUTURE and whether employer is willing to say it on a letter to USCIS that "Hey, take care of this guy's 485 coz I still plan to hire him on XYZ position IN FUTURE ".
I am telling you from my own experience with what my lawyer had prepared for my HR to sign.
My employer's letter simply states that A) they will pay me X amount at the minimum (which is my current salary) and B) the job is still being offered as per job described in ETA 750 and I-140.
That covers everything. Labor cert has job description. 140 has other credentials. If a letter with 485 says that job offer is still valid a per job described in labor and 140, that covers everything.
wallpaper nice wallpapers for love. nice
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
thomachan72
09-04 02:09 PM
Good. Let us collect a list of people who died and pray for them.
I you could add their PD and Category also, would be nice.
Funniest thread and indeed your reply was the funniest for today. I cant stop laughing..really.. you answered so seriously but yet hiding so much humor in it.. wonderful.
Isn't there an online community for people from andhra? why chose IV for these prayer requests? Previously it was praying for SRK who apparently got raped at the POE and now for all dead people??
Even the thread anouncing the members who got freedom this month is being drowned by these discussions. There is enough to celebrate this month...lot of our brothers / sisters have been greened...let us celebrate their freedom and forget our misseries for some time.
I you could add their PD and Category also, would be nice.
Funniest thread and indeed your reply was the funniest for today. I cant stop laughing..really.. you answered so seriously but yet hiding so much humor in it.. wonderful.
Isn't there an online community for people from andhra? why chose IV for these prayer requests? Previously it was praying for SRK who apparently got raped at the POE and now for all dead people??
Even the thread anouncing the members who got freedom this month is being drowned by these discussions. There is enough to celebrate this month...lot of our brothers / sisters have been greened...let us celebrate their freedom and forget our misseries for some time.
2011 Called A Nice Wallpaper .
sujijag
03-11 06:33 PM
If someone does this - its fraud, if they do it themselves - its legitimate.
Seek Lawyer's help, asking such qns in forums only creates backlash ;)
Seek Lawyer's help, asking such qns in forums only creates backlash ;)
more...
quizzer
02-23 04:54 PM
Thats true, When my I-140 was approved, as per the site my date was atleast 2 months away, but i received the approval notice. :)
Shirish,
Can you give more details about your I140?
EB2 or EB3?
NSC or TSC?
RD and AD???
Thanks
Shirish,
Can you give more details about your I140?
EB2 or EB3?
NSC or TSC?
RD and AD???
Thanks
Administrator2
08-05 12:04 PM
I am sorry for posting in here, but I was wondering if someone actually went in person to the Houston Consulate to get their passport renewed. Also, do we need to have any reason to attend in person at the Consulate such as emergency, etc.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
If you are in an emergency situation and need to renew your ppt on urgent basis, please send me a PM.
I am from India and my passport is expiring on Aug 17. I read before in the forum that it is better to go in person to renew the passport. Any experiences please let me know.
Thanks a bunch
If you are in an emergency situation and need to renew your ppt on urgent basis, please send me a PM.
more...
Aah_GC
06-13 06:39 PM
I have asked this question before and have called around 4 reps so far. Do I just leave a message or ask for the Congressman / woman? The receptionists are probably not even writing down the messages.
2010 I Love You Cards amp; Wallpapers:
gsc999
01-25 08:18 PM
Great!
THAT is the spirit, thank you my friend!
The drive will happen on
all weekday evenings (5pm - 7pm)
between
Tuesday 1/29/2008- Friday 2/8/2008
Are you a part of the NorCal yahoogroup?
Thanks again!
THAT is the spirit, thank you my friend!
The drive will happen on
all weekday evenings (5pm - 7pm)
between
Tuesday 1/29/2008- Friday 2/8/2008
Are you a part of the NorCal yahoogroup?
Thanks again!
more...
raghuram
05-08 04:52 PM
I have not looked around for last few years to see who gives the highest rate. There may be some difference of few paisa per dollar, but if you ignore that, ICICI money transfer is good. I am using it for many years.
hair paper wallpaper love.
old_hat
04-27 09:51 PM
http://www.dhs.gov/journal/leadership/
* USCIS has increased the emphasis on processing employment-based petitions. Our goal is to complete adjudication on the older I-140 petitions and to process newer petitions within our targeted processing time of four months. We are making progress toward this goal and anticipate reaching this goal by the end of September 2009.
* USCIS is issuing employment authorization documents valid for two years, as needed.
* USCIS is working with the State Department to make sure we use every available visa number. In 2007, we had more visas available in the family-based categories than were needed, so as permitted by law, we transferred those available family-based visas for use in the employment-based application process.
I recognize that this is a difficult and complex situation and USCIS is working hard to make improvements and to increase transparency in our processes.
Mike Aytes
Acting Deputy Director, USCIS
* USCIS has increased the emphasis on processing employment-based petitions. Our goal is to complete adjudication on the older I-140 petitions and to process newer petitions within our targeted processing time of four months. We are making progress toward this goal and anticipate reaching this goal by the end of September 2009.
* USCIS is issuing employment authorization documents valid for two years, as needed.
* USCIS is working with the State Department to make sure we use every available visa number. In 2007, we had more visas available in the family-based categories than were needed, so as permitted by law, we transferred those available family-based visas for use in the employment-based application process.
I recognize that this is a difficult and complex situation and USCIS is working hard to make improvements and to increase transparency in our processes.
Mike Aytes
Acting Deputy Director, USCIS
more...
kshitijnt
02-17 07:34 AM
I have a couple of questions:
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
1. Write unknown
2. New applicant, if you are applying under c09 category for the first time.
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
1. Write unknown
2. New applicant, if you are applying under c09 category for the first time.
hot nice wallpapers for love.
desi3933
07-20 04:26 PM
AP is a must. If you travel out of the country and your GC gets approved while you're away... your H1 becomes invalid and you cannot use it enter US. The only way to return then is AP.
Incorrect.
One is allowed to enter on H1 under deferred inspection if the I-485 is approved while applicant is not in US. Of course, one can enter on AP as well.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
Incorrect.
One is allowed to enter on H1 under deferred inspection if the I-485 is approved while applicant is not in US. Of course, one can enter on AP as well.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
house Love Wallpaper Is For You Nice
cgs
08-21 10:54 AM
Enjoy and Please visit us:)
tattoo love red rose nice picture and
seba
09-24 03:29 PM
GreenTech, that's a good question. I am considering to transfer to offices in Asia or Europe next year and then attend B-school in the US after 2 years. That way, once I graduate, I will also at least have the option to get another 6-year H1 in the US.
thepaew, thanks for the advice. I have been thinking about this for a while, and my options are:
1) Start the GC process now and wait until I get the GC. Then think about B-school after I get the GC (I am not interested in part-time programs).
2) Forget the GC process and transfer to Europe or Asia next year and then attend B-school in the US after a few years.
Personally for me, having an MBA in 5 years is more valuable than having a GC in 5 years, so I am leaning towards option 2 above. However, if I don't get into B-school, then that's another story... I would probably transfer back to the US on L1 and start the GC process. At that point, I would apply under EB2 anyway with my Bachelor's and 5+ years experience.
Thanks again everyone for the replies and advice. And yes, of course you are not lawyers, but your help is still very useful. During my H1 renewal process, I got more useful info from here than from my company's lawyer!
thepaew, thanks for the advice. I have been thinking about this for a while, and my options are:
1) Start the GC process now and wait until I get the GC. Then think about B-school after I get the GC (I am not interested in part-time programs).
2) Forget the GC process and transfer to Europe or Asia next year and then attend B-school in the US after a few years.
Personally for me, having an MBA in 5 years is more valuable than having a GC in 5 years, so I am leaning towards option 2 above. However, if I don't get into B-school, then that's another story... I would probably transfer back to the US on L1 and start the GC process. At that point, I would apply under EB2 anyway with my Bachelor's and 5+ years experience.
Thanks again everyone for the replies and advice. And yes, of course you are not lawyers, but your help is still very useful. During my H1 renewal process, I got more useful info from here than from my company's lawyer!
more...
pictures Love Wallpaper
marblerock
06-11 12:32 PM
Mr. Sanju,
We are all aware of what going on at the Senate floor and also about the ammendments that put forth on the floor. So my question is clear anc simple what ammendment is supported by CORE IV and what are we looking for.
Because the passing of the current version of the bill will effect all the old cases which many people are in and I wont allow that to happen. I will try my best to avoid this situation to happen. Even though i have a MAster in engineering I will not support SKIL progran that will void the previously pending cases. Good try core IV yto make member to work towards the betterment of few people You know what such people are called" SELFFISH". Guys beware on whaT ACTIONS YOU ARE DOING SO THAT YOU WONT REPENT.
Please feel free to influence any bill any way you please. Seems like you are in cotrol of your destiny. When you point that SELFISH finger at the IV core, also look at the three fingers pointing back at you.
The IV position on the pertinent amendments already discussed on the floor is on the the front page of the website.
If your are privy to the amendments being negotiated behind the scenes, please be kind and share the information with us. None of us has any information on these and as such cannot take a position.
In my opinion you are asking for it. If everyone was not fatigued from last week, your allegedly disappearing thread would be flaming out pretty fast.
We are all aware of what going on at the Senate floor and also about the ammendments that put forth on the floor. So my question is clear anc simple what ammendment is supported by CORE IV and what are we looking for.
Because the passing of the current version of the bill will effect all the old cases which many people are in and I wont allow that to happen. I will try my best to avoid this situation to happen. Even though i have a MAster in engineering I will not support SKIL progran that will void the previously pending cases. Good try core IV yto make member to work towards the betterment of few people You know what such people are called" SELFFISH". Guys beware on whaT ACTIONS YOU ARE DOING SO THAT YOU WONT REPENT.
Please feel free to influence any bill any way you please. Seems like you are in cotrol of your destiny. When you point that SELFISH finger at the IV core, also look at the three fingers pointing back at you.
The IV position on the pertinent amendments already discussed on the floor is on the the front page of the website.
If your are privy to the amendments being negotiated behind the scenes, please be kind and share the information with us. None of us has any information on these and as such cannot take a position.
In my opinion you are asking for it. If everyone was not fatigued from last week, your allegedly disappearing thread would be flaming out pretty fast.
dresses wallpaper art, sunday, love,
Appu
04-02 10:31 PM
So if (for example) an H1B worked in the US for a few weeks before their visa became available, are they technically eligible for this? Or perhaps they were out of status for a week or two between jobs? I'm sure many H1's might have been in this situation. It's unclear who this applies to.
Yep, my thinking, exactly. Also, people going between F1 and H1 or between H1 and H4 could all claim a few weeks or months of "undocumented" status.
I just read the Specter amendments to 2454 and I can't see where in 218D or 602 it says the alien must have been here illegally. Can someone quote that part? All I can see is this requirement in 601.
`(1) PRESENCE; EMPLOYMENT.--The alien establishes that the alien--
``(A) was physically present in the United States before January 7, 2004; and
``(B) was employed in the United States before January 7, 2004, and has been employed in the United States since that date.
That's right, it doesn't. I have enquired my lawyer about this. She'll get back to me on Tuesday. I will post more information then.
Yep, my thinking, exactly. Also, people going between F1 and H1 or between H1 and H4 could all claim a few weeks or months of "undocumented" status.
I just read the Specter amendments to 2454 and I can't see where in 218D or 602 it says the alien must have been here illegally. Can someone quote that part? All I can see is this requirement in 601.
`(1) PRESENCE; EMPLOYMENT.--The alien establishes that the alien--
``(A) was physically present in the United States before January 7, 2004; and
``(B) was employed in the United States before January 7, 2004, and has been employed in the United States since that date.
That's right, it doesn't. I have enquired my lawyer about this. She'll get back to me on Tuesday. I will post more information then.
more...
makeup awesome ackgrounds for
admin
04-03 07:37 AM
Great fact sheet. It should list people like Andy Grove, Jerry Yang, and Sergey Brin - Hungarian, Chinese and Russian co-founders of Intel, Yahoo and Google - all immigrants.
Morpheus,
Thanks for your interest. We did consider all three of them but when we did more research, we found that all three of them did not get their Green Card on EB category. They had come here because their parents had come here.
qvadis, Thanks for pointing out Andy Bechtolsheim and Safi Qureshey.
Morpheus,
Thanks for your interest. We did consider all three of them but when we did more research, we found that all three of them did not get their Green Card on EB category. They had come here because their parents had come here.
qvadis, Thanks for pointing out Andy Bechtolsheim and Safi Qureshey.
girlfriend Nice Wallpapers For Love.
.jpg "Nice Sayings about Love")
tikka
06-22 09:39 AM
is a TB skin test neccessary even if you tell the doc you've had a history of positive TB tests? do i have to prove i've had a history of postive TB test for the doctor to remark that on i-693..or can he just remark that without evidence and go on my word
thanks
Your chest xray was negative so you are fine.
To file for the 485 the skin test is a requirement. The doc has to prick you on your arm and in 48 hours you have the results.
You need him to sign off on the results.
thanks
Your chest xray was negative so you are fine.
To file for the 485 the skin test is a requirement. The doc has to prick you on your arm and in 48 hours you have the results.
You need him to sign off on the results.
hairstyles wallpapers of love poems. nice
paskal
12-21 04:36 PM
/\/\/\/\/\/\
laksmi
03-06 01:02 PM
EAD correction is very simple and they will fix with in 4 months worse case.
InTheMoment
06-22 09:50 AM
With the USCIS recent notice on mandatory TB-test unless supported by a valid explanation by the Civil Surgeon, I feel it is a clear invitation for a RFE (one of the most common. Search past RFE's and you will be amazed to find how common this is!)
No comments:
Post a Comment