Dhundhun
06-05 09:09 PM
For H4:
USCIS does not give any document stating the fact that AOS is pending. Although EAD is not required to be present in USA, if H4 is not there, only EAD is proof of valid stay.
So if SSN is not there or DL (or state ID) is expired then you need EAD - EAD renewal is up to you.
USCIS does not give any document stating the fact that AOS is pending. Although EAD is not required to be present in USA, if H4 is not there, only EAD is proof of valid stay.
So if SSN is not there or DL (or state ID) is expired then you need EAD - EAD renewal is up to you.
wallpaper Pans › Lincoln Lubrication
franklin
11-16 04:56 PM
If you have applied for AOS (1-485) your application will continue processing regardless of Priority Date becoming current.
However, and this is the important bit, you will only get your final approval (aka greencard in the mail) if a visa number is allocated to you. That only happens when you Priority Date is current (in the vast majority of cases, unless you were incredibly lucky and got a visa number allocated to you before Aug 17th - you would have your greencard by now if that were the case).
FWIW - this is how a lot of applications were approved in May / June time. A lot of people had been waiting a long time (since 05 before retrogression hit) with approved applications pending visa number availability. Suddenly, they became available, and they got their cards quickly.
Consider it this way. A lot of people appllied for AOS in 05 before retrogression. Their PD then became retrogressed and they were stuck in the yearly EAD / AP renewals, waiting for their PD to become current again for their GC to be approved. This happened for a brief window in May / June / July (depending on your PD / country ect) and then they got approval. Anything ringing a bell in this pattern?
However, and this is the important bit, you will only get your final approval (aka greencard in the mail) if a visa number is allocated to you. That only happens when you Priority Date is current (in the vast majority of cases, unless you were incredibly lucky and got a visa number allocated to you before Aug 17th - you would have your greencard by now if that were the case).
FWIW - this is how a lot of applications were approved in May / June time. A lot of people had been waiting a long time (since 05 before retrogression hit) with approved applications pending visa number availability. Suddenly, they became available, and they got their cards quickly.
Consider it this way. A lot of people appllied for AOS in 05 before retrogression. Their PD then became retrogressed and they were stuck in the yearly EAD / AP renewals, waiting for their PD to become current again for their GC to be approved. This happened for a brief window in May / June / July (depending on your PD / country ect) and then they got approval. Anything ringing a bell in this pattern?
anilsal
11-16 10:43 PM
I think healthy trade/economic relationship with economic potential powerhouse INDIA is important for the US in the long term. That is why the deal was a done deal long long ago IMHO.
2011 3601 Calvert Street, Suite 19,
desi3933
01-14 10:57 AM
http://www.cis.ctc.edu/pub/groups/ppmsug/ICvEEHandout.pdf
__________________
Not a legal advice.
__________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
resident1374
01-26 08:04 PM
I have been going around forums to get an answer and it seems my case is unique in nature...can someone help me out?
Recently had family-based AOS interview with the USCIS (my wife is a naturalized citizen). One question was asked by the officer - "Did I travel outside US after filing the AOS?" and my answer "Yes - to Canada for few days - by car".
I traveled to Canada on my company�s H1B.
The officer explained that once you file you Marriage based GC the only way you can travel is on Advance Parole. Travel on H1B is possible as long as the H1 and the AOS is of the same employer. In my case the AOS was family-based and the travel was on H1B. Such a travel may be considered to be abandonment of the Family based GC process.
The officer was extremely helpful in providing us information and said he needed more time to go through my case and decide on approval/denial of my case after consulting with other officers/supervisors (I130 looks good for approval) but there is a possibility (he said) that I may have to re-file the I-485 but there is a possibility that I may be approved.
He told he is waiting on some papers which is in some other State and that will take some time (not sure what papers was he talking about)
He also said that he will also look into my employer-based GC and see if he can approve that case if possible? Well, I am not sure about that as my priority date is SEP 2004 (EB3). This he said will save me some money of not re-filing and also instead of 2yr conditional GC (marrige is less than 2yrs) I will be able to get 10 yr GC. He took a copy of my I-140 receipt.
Now, I have a full-time offer from a company and not sure what to do? What if I use my Family-based EAD - that will invalidate my employer based pending AOS - correct? And what if my Family-based I485 gets denied due to abandonment while on the EAD - is the EAD still valid or is it valid only after re-filing the I485?
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
Recently had family-based AOS interview with the USCIS (my wife is a naturalized citizen). One question was asked by the officer - "Did I travel outside US after filing the AOS?" and my answer "Yes - to Canada for few days - by car".
I traveled to Canada on my company�s H1B.
The officer explained that once you file you Marriage based GC the only way you can travel is on Advance Parole. Travel on H1B is possible as long as the H1 and the AOS is of the same employer. In my case the AOS was family-based and the travel was on H1B. Such a travel may be considered to be abandonment of the Family based GC process.
The officer was extremely helpful in providing us information and said he needed more time to go through my case and decide on approval/denial of my case after consulting with other officers/supervisors (I130 looks good for approval) but there is a possibility (he said) that I may have to re-file the I-485 but there is a possibility that I may be approved.
He told he is waiting on some papers which is in some other State and that will take some time (not sure what papers was he talking about)
He also said that he will also look into my employer-based GC and see if he can approve that case if possible? Well, I am not sure about that as my priority date is SEP 2004 (EB3). This he said will save me some money of not re-filing and also instead of 2yr conditional GC (marrige is less than 2yrs) I will be able to get 10 yr GC. He took a copy of my I-140 receipt.
Now, I have a full-time offer from a company and not sure what to do? What if I use my Family-based EAD - that will invalidate my employer based pending AOS - correct? And what if my Family-based I485 gets denied due to abandonment while on the EAD - is the EAD still valid or is it valid only after re-filing the I485?
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
retropain
08-24 06:05 PM
greatguy, you sound like a great guy. But honestly the idea isn't too great...especially nowadays with such much immigration scrutiny, tightening of regulations, deportations, etc. A five year old labor sub, that too unapproved, isn't going to be approved easily...maybe you should file a PERM based petition and get that approved in a month or two and that way atleast you secure a 2006 PD. If some relief comes in, you're wait shouldn't be too long...
more...
sankap
10-28 12:01 PM
Skilled immigration: Green-card blues | The Economist (http://www.economist.com/node/17366155)
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
Skilled immigration
Green-card blues
A backlash against foreign workers dims business hopes for immigration reform
The Economist: October 30, 2010
Oct 28th 2010 | Washington, dc
BAD as relations are between business and the Democrats, immigration was supposed to be an exception. On that topic the two have long had a marriage of convenience, with business backing comprehensive reform in order to obtain more skilled foreign workers.
That, at least, was what was meant to happen. In March Chuck Schumer, a Democratic senator, and Lindsey Graham, a Republican, proposed a multi-faceted reform that would toughen border controls and create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants while granting two longstanding goals of business: automatic green cards (that is, permanent residence) for students who earned advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or maths in America, and an elimination of country quotas on green cards. The quotas bear no relationship to demand, leaving backlogs of eight to ten years for applicants from China and India. Barack Obama immediately announced his support.
But the proposal never became a bill, much less law. Mr Graham developed cold feet and withdrew his support; he was concerned that the Democrats were moving too quickly, as the economic misery that has turned Americans against foreign trade spread to dislike of foreign workers. Last year Congress made it harder for banks that had received money from the Troubled Asset Relief Programme to hire workers on H-1B visas, the most popular type for skilled foreign workers. In January the Citizenship and Immigration Service barred the use of H-1Bs for workers based on a client�s premises instead of their own company�s, a move aimed at outsourcing companies, many of them based in India.
In August even Mr Schumer, needing to look tough on outsourcing, pushed through a bill sharply raising H-1B fees on firms that depend heavily on the visas. Perhaps the most naked election-year hostility to foreigners appeared during the debate in September over a Democratic bill in the Senate that would have rewarded companies for firing foreign-based workers and replacing them with Americans. Charles Grassley, a Republican senator, responded with a proposal to prohibit any company that had laid off Americans from hiring visa workers at all. The bill did not win enough votes to break a filibuster.
Tightened restrictions, political aggravation and economic conditions seem to be having an effect. In 2009 the number of employment-based green cards and H-1B visas was the lowest in years (see chart). It took an unusually long time for the quota of H-1Bs for the fiscal year that ended on September 30th to be used up. Several Indian outsourcing companies have made a point of boosting local hiring at American facilities.
This is partly the result of the recession, which has hurt demand for all types of workers. But in a recent report the Hamilton Project, a moderately liberal research group, notes that the number of foreign workers in America has been declining for some time. This might reflect America�s diminished appeal to the world�s most sought-after workers, as well as brightening prospects in their own countries. A survey for the pro-immigration Kauffman Foundation in 2007 found that only a tiny proportion of foreign students planned to stay in the United States. This almost certainly extracts an economic toll, since immigrants are more likely than others to start businesses or file patents.
America�s immigration policies have long put a higher priority on family reunification than on employment. Legal immigrants to the country are more likely to have failed to finish high school than either native-born Americans or immigrants to other English-speaking countries. Immigrants to Canada are far more likely to have a college degree.
Legislators from both parties have at various times advanced proposals that would smooth the way for skilled migrants, but they have usually foundered on the more intractable problem of dealing with illegal immigration. �These two issues can and should be separate,� says Michael Greenstone of the Hamilton Project. �We are giving up economic growth by putting the two issues together.�
Democratic Hispanic legislators oppose separating them for fear of losing business support for comprehensive reform. In principle, then, a Republican takeover of the House might increase the likelihood of a stand-alone bill on skilled immigration. That, however, is not the Republicans� priority. Lamar Smith, the Republican who would probably become chairman of the House judiciary committee, is more focused on deporting illegal immigrants and strengthening the border.
Still, it would be premature to write off the odds of immigration reform. If Mr Obama is to accomplish anything in the next Congress, he needs to find common ground with Republicans on something. Business-friendly immigration reform might just qualify.
2010 Bill Hood Ford Lincoln Mercury
delhirocks
07-11 11:38 AM
I disagree...I think our next steps should be letters/webfaxes/phone calls to senators and Congressmen/women.
The reason why the flower protest news gained some legs was because it was unique. Lets not over do things. Now that we have somewhat of the media coverage, especially in NY times & Washington Post, we should write letters to senators/congress and request assistance.
The reason why the flower protest news gained some legs was because it was unique. Lets not over do things. Now that we have somewhat of the media coverage, especially in NY times & Washington Post, we should write letters to senators/congress and request assistance.
more...
sircaustic
07-15 10:46 PM
Hi,
I need some URGENT HELP here. My I-485 was denied and so has been MTR filed by my attorney. To give you a quick background of my case:
I-140 approved in 2007
I-1485 in August 2007
Received RFE in May 2009. The RFE had two parts to it that are as follows:
Part 1: Request for Evidence for Birth
Part 2: When I filed the application, the following question was left unanswered by mistake:Have you ever, in or outside United States been arrested, cited, charged, indicted, fined or imprisoned for breaking or violating any law or ordinance, excluding traffic violations
When i sent the response, i included birth certificates for wife and I but somehow both my attorney and I did not notice that we failed to answer the question - the second part of the RFE. Because of which my I-485 case got denied.
Within 3 days of receving the denial notice, I , through my attorney filed a MTR that included a signed declaration that I have never been arrested. Today I received an email update from USCIS that my MTR has been denied. I will know more once I get the reasons for denial.
What are my options here? Is there a way this case can be fixed and brought back on track or am I in a no-go situation? Please advise on the next steps.
Thank you in advance to those who respond.
I need some URGENT HELP here. My I-485 was denied and so has been MTR filed by my attorney. To give you a quick background of my case:
I-140 approved in 2007
I-1485 in August 2007
Received RFE in May 2009. The RFE had two parts to it that are as follows:
Part 1: Request for Evidence for Birth
Part 2: When I filed the application, the following question was left unanswered by mistake:Have you ever, in or outside United States been arrested, cited, charged, indicted, fined or imprisoned for breaking or violating any law or ordinance, excluding traffic violations
When i sent the response, i included birth certificates for wife and I but somehow both my attorney and I did not notice that we failed to answer the question - the second part of the RFE. Because of which my I-485 case got denied.
Within 3 days of receving the denial notice, I , through my attorney filed a MTR that included a signed declaration that I have never been arrested. Today I received an email update from USCIS that my MTR has been denied. I will know more once I get the reasons for denial.
What are my options here? Is there a way this case can be fixed and brought back on track or am I in a no-go situation? Please advise on the next steps.
Thank you in advance to those who respond.
hair Used 2008 Lincoln MKX. 3601
s416504
02-04 03:48 PM
You should contact your lawyer & ask USCIS to amend your H1 for 3 years instead of 1 year. One time My H1B got approved but USCIS forgot to add up vacation time then My Lawyer contacted USCIS officer to amed that time. Later got new H1B approval with correct date.
I think that will give clear idea if USCIS not finding you I140?
My concern is during the H1 Extension process USCIS have touched all my files (485/EAD/AP) but not I-140.
I have put all my WAC/SRC numbers on USCIS website, I could see the LUD date changed against all files except for I-140. which apparently have a different A#.
I m worried, if USCIS would come up sometime in future n say they dont see my I-140 file.
its the same co. which filed my I-140 & I-485.
I think that will give clear idea if USCIS not finding you I140?
My concern is during the H1 Extension process USCIS have touched all my files (485/EAD/AP) but not I-140.
I have put all my WAC/SRC numbers on USCIS website, I could see the LUD date changed against all files except for I-140. which apparently have a different A#.
I m worried, if USCIS would come up sometime in future n say they dont see my I-140 file.
its the same co. which filed my I-140 & I-485.
more...
xeixas
09-08 10:43 PM
I just renewed my H1B visa for another 3 years, and I also have an approved advance parole document. If I leave the US before my H1B visa is stamped in my passport and re-enter the country using my AP, do I lose my H1B status? (that's what my attorney says)
How about my the H4 of my wife? She is already using EAD, so if we re-enter the country should she use the AP document or the H4 visa?
This is way too confusing...
How about my the H4 of my wife? She is already using EAD, so if we re-enter the country should she use the AP document or the H4 visa?
This is way too confusing...
hot Contempo Lincoln. 3601 North
Administrator2
07-07 08:41 PM
I don't agree with what mbawa2574 has to say,but I certainly disagree banning mbawa for expressing views. I think, mbawa2574 is well within limits of posting anything that could hurt IV image/goals. ( On this thread, I mean).
What's the damage caused to your effort?( apart from deleting threads )
I'd rather help channel his thoughts and energies in a direction that helps IV than ban him.
mbawa2574, can you get in touch with some one in IV Core and put your thoughts on paper?
I'm sure you understand by now that IV is made of just you, me and bunch of other anonymous keyboard monkeys.
Cheers!
Thanks for your thoughts. We respectfully disagree. There was time for this discussion. Its easy for someone to post anything on the forum, unmindful of the time & effort put in by others. I think we reserve the right to make sure what appears on the home page of the website. Is there anything wrong with that?
Have you tried asking Numbersusa, Programmers Guild and your employer about changing leadership? What makes this organization any different? Just because anyone can post anything on IV website to get visibility on the homepage, its not ok to abuse the resources of the organization. We did not create IV to promote democracy or freedom of expression, there are ample of other sites to promote democracy and freedom of expression, you are free to use those resource at your liking. IV website is for a single purpose of achieving the goals we have set for the organization. You can find our goals on the website. And anything that conflicts with our goal will be removed. Its easy to use terms like democracy, freedom of expression etc to defend actions that malign the good effort put in by others. To make things clear, IV's objective is not to promote or preserve democracy/freedom of expression. We have a goal to achieve and we will not deter from our goal, whatever it takes.
What's the damage caused to your effort?( apart from deleting threads )
I'd rather help channel his thoughts and energies in a direction that helps IV than ban him.
mbawa2574, can you get in touch with some one in IV Core and put your thoughts on paper?
I'm sure you understand by now that IV is made of just you, me and bunch of other anonymous keyboard monkeys.
Cheers!
Thanks for your thoughts. We respectfully disagree. There was time for this discussion. Its easy for someone to post anything on the forum, unmindful of the time & effort put in by others. I think we reserve the right to make sure what appears on the home page of the website. Is there anything wrong with that?
Have you tried asking Numbersusa, Programmers Guild and your employer about changing leadership? What makes this organization any different? Just because anyone can post anything on IV website to get visibility on the homepage, its not ok to abuse the resources of the organization. We did not create IV to promote democracy or freedom of expression, there are ample of other sites to promote democracy and freedom of expression, you are free to use those resource at your liking. IV website is for a single purpose of achieving the goals we have set for the organization. You can find our goals on the website. And anything that conflicts with our goal will be removed. Its easy to use terms like democracy, freedom of expression etc to defend actions that malign the good effort put in by others. To make things clear, IV's objective is not to promote or preserve democracy/freedom of expression. We have a goal to achieve and we will not deter from our goal, whatever it takes.
more...
house #39;05 LINCOLN TOWN CAR,
sixpockets
04-15 10:16 AM
TomPlate is correct, I followed the same procedure after being rejected twice.
Here's the supporting FAQ from IRS ...
http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=120000,00.html#PIN7
Here's the supporting FAQ from IRS ...
http://www.irs.gov/efile/article/0,,id=120000,00.html#PIN7
tattoo 2001 Lincoln LS Sedan - Click
Ramba
07-06 01:23 PM
Do you guys forget they recaptured used around 100,000 in FY2005.
They recaptured 130,000 (unused from FY 1999 and 2000) thro AC21 act and used all of them by 2005.
Therefore from 2001 to 2006 available# for recapture is 101,000, excluding AC21 reacpture.
They recaptured 130,000 (unused from FY 1999 and 2000) thro AC21 act and used all of them by 2005.
Therefore from 2001 to 2006 available# for recapture is 101,000, excluding AC21 reacpture.
more...
pictures Lincoln Pressurized Used Oil Receiver - LIN-3601 - Standard Ind amp; Auto Eq,
shruthi07
01-01 10:05 PM
You can apply for a new passport after 30 mar 2007.
Expiry Date will be 10 years from the date of issue.
You will get your old passport along with the new one.
Expiry Date will be 10 years from the date of issue.
You will get your old passport along with the new one.
dresses 3601 Vine St, Lincoln, NE,
GCVictim
07-09 12:47 PM
Dear Mr. ------:
Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. The need to fix our broken system is clear, and I appreciate having the benefit of your insight on one of the most important issues of our day.
Immigration reform must ultimately be about improving our system for legal immigration, not about creating new benefits for illegal aliens. Although we are a proud nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. If policymakers will agree that all immigrants must abide by the rule of law, then we can reach a consensus on ways to improve the legal process so that it meets the needs of our society, our economy, and our national security.
During the 110th Congress, the Senate considered comprehensive immigration reform legislation (S. 1639). I had serious concerns that the legislation, as drafted, would have repeated the well documented mistakes of the 1986 amnesty bill. Furthermore, Senators were not allowed the full opportunity to offer amendments to this flawed legislation, and as such, I was one of 53 Senators who voted against the cloture motion to bring S. 1639 to a vote.
I have been working throughout my time in the Senate to develop a solution to this problem that I believe will work. I encourage you to visit my website at http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/immigration for more information regarding the immigration reforms I support. As we consider immigration reform proposals in the future, I will continue to promote these policies, but I will oppose any bill that rewards illegal conduct and encourages further disrespect for our laws.
I appreciate the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. The need to fix our broken system is clear, and I appreciate having the benefit of your insight on one of the most important issues of our day.
Immigration reform must ultimately be about improving our system for legal immigration, not about creating new benefits for illegal aliens. Although we are a proud nation of immigrants, we are also a nation of laws. If policymakers will agree that all immigrants must abide by the rule of law, then we can reach a consensus on ways to improve the legal process so that it meets the needs of our society, our economy, and our national security.
During the 110th Congress, the Senate considered comprehensive immigration reform legislation (S. 1639). I had serious concerns that the legislation, as drafted, would have repeated the well documented mistakes of the 1986 amnesty bill. Furthermore, Senators were not allowed the full opportunity to offer amendments to this flawed legislation, and as such, I was one of 53 Senators who voted against the cloture motion to bring S. 1639 to a vote.
I have been working throughout my time in the Senate to develop a solution to this problem that I believe will work. I encourage you to visit my website at http://www.cornyn.senate.gov/immigration for more information regarding the immigration reforms I support. As we consider immigration reform proposals in the future, I will continue to promote these policies, but I will oppose any bill that rewards illegal conduct and encourages further disrespect for our laws.
I appreciate the opportunity to represent the interests of Texans in the United States Senate. Thank you for taking the time to contact me.
Sincerely,
JOHN CORNYN
United States Senator
more...
makeup 2011 at Jazz at Lincoln
agv
03-19 11:45 AM
I came in USA on H1 visa and continued in that status till 2008 (six years). Company A sponsored a green card for me in 2003 for a position different than the one on my H1B based on future employment opportunity/position. My I-140 was approved in early 2007 and after applying for my I-485, I got my EAD and AP in August 2007. However since I was working on H1B with another company at that time, which was valid till June 2008, I did not use my EAD and worked till my H1B lasted. As my H1B expired, my status while living in US as per my lawyer changed to AOS pending.
I took a couple of months off and visited India. Came back to US without a problem using my AP. Looked to start a business but did not succeed due to economic condition. I still maintained an honest intent to join the sponsoring employer when I get my GC and vice- versa with regard to the sponsoring employer. To earn living therefore, I joined another company for a couple months in a similar field using my EAD but did not use AC21 (as a full time primary job). That job did not last long and now I am again looking for employment opportunity.
I visited my lawyer recently with current situation and a few questions and he said I can be in deep trouble - being unemployed mostly since leaving my H1B status and having worked for another company for those few weeks in a job capacity that was a bit different than the one on my petition. He said I could be deported too if my luck is bad in this case. I request you to advise me whether what happened was really wrong and if I can correct it anyway? As corrective measure, my lawyer says that with immediate effect either I should join the green card sponsoring employer or find another employer with similar job offer (willing to port my Green card) - to avoid hard quuestions with USCIS. In this economy, nobody wants to take extra burden. But I spoke with my GC sponsor. He said the job is there for me like before and he is willing to write a letter of intent to hire me on permanent basis currently or in future if required to whosoever concerned but would prefer to wait a few months giving the crunch in business these days.
WHAT SHOULD I DO? Would the letter suffice the honest intent on both sides regarding the employment offer? Can I afford to take a little more time find a simmilar job? PLEASE SUGGEST.
I came in USA on H1 visa and continued in that status till 2008 (six years). Company A sponsored a green card for me in 2003 for a position different than the one on my H1B based on future employment opportunity/position. My I-140 was approved in early 2007 and after applying for my I-485, I got my EAD and AP in August 2007. However since I was working on H1B with another company at that time, which was valid till June 2008, I did not use my EAD and worked till my H1B lasted. As my H1B expired, my status while living in US as per my lawyer changed to AOS pending.
I took a couple of months off and visited India. Came back to US without a problem using my AP. Looked to start a business but did not succeed due to economic condition. I still maintained an honest intent to join the sponsoring employer when I get my GC and vice- versa with regard to the sponsoring employer. To earn living therefore, I joined another company for a couple months in a similar field using my EAD but did not use AC21 (as a full time primary job). That job did not last long and now I am again looking for employment opportunity.
I visited my lawyer recently with current situation and a few questions and he said I can be in deep trouble - being unemployed mostly since leaving my H1B status and having worked for another company for those few weeks in a job capacity that was a bit different than the one on my petition. He said I could be deported too if my luck is bad in this case. I request you to advise me whether what happened was really wrong and if I can correct it anyway? As corrective measure, my lawyer says that with immediate effect either I should join the green card sponsoring employer or find another employer with similar job offer (willing to port my Green card) - to avoid hard quuestions with USCIS. In this economy, nobody wants to take extra burden. But I spoke with my GC sponsor. He said the job is there for me like before and he is willing to write a letter of intent to hire me on permanent basis currently or in future if required to whosoever concerned but would prefer to wait a few months giving the crunch in business these days.
WHAT SHOULD I DO? Would the letter suffice the honest intent on both sides regarding the employment offer? Can I afford to take a little more time find a simmilar job? PLEASE SUGGEST.
I took a couple of months off and visited India. Came back to US without a problem using my AP. Looked to start a business but did not succeed due to economic condition. I still maintained an honest intent to join the sponsoring employer when I get my GC and vice- versa with regard to the sponsoring employer. To earn living therefore, I joined another company for a couple months in a similar field using my EAD but did not use AC21 (as a full time primary job). That job did not last long and now I am again looking for employment opportunity.
I visited my lawyer recently with current situation and a few questions and he said I can be in deep trouble - being unemployed mostly since leaving my H1B status and having worked for another company for those few weeks in a job capacity that was a bit different than the one on my petition. He said I could be deported too if my luck is bad in this case. I request you to advise me whether what happened was really wrong and if I can correct it anyway? As corrective measure, my lawyer says that with immediate effect either I should join the green card sponsoring employer or find another employer with similar job offer (willing to port my Green card) - to avoid hard quuestions with USCIS. In this economy, nobody wants to take extra burden. But I spoke with my GC sponsor. He said the job is there for me like before and he is willing to write a letter of intent to hire me on permanent basis currently or in future if required to whosoever concerned but would prefer to wait a few months giving the crunch in business these days.
WHAT SHOULD I DO? Would the letter suffice the honest intent on both sides regarding the employment offer? Can I afford to take a little more time find a simmilar job? PLEASE SUGGEST.
I came in USA on H1 visa and continued in that status till 2008 (six years). Company A sponsored a green card for me in 2003 for a position different than the one on my H1B based on future employment opportunity/position. My I-140 was approved in early 2007 and after applying for my I-485, I got my EAD and AP in August 2007. However since I was working on H1B with another company at that time, which was valid till June 2008, I did not use my EAD and worked till my H1B lasted. As my H1B expired, my status while living in US as per my lawyer changed to AOS pending.
I took a couple of months off and visited India. Came back to US without a problem using my AP. Looked to start a business but did not succeed due to economic condition. I still maintained an honest intent to join the sponsoring employer when I get my GC and vice- versa with regard to the sponsoring employer. To earn living therefore, I joined another company for a couple months in a similar field using my EAD but did not use AC21 (as a full time primary job). That job did not last long and now I am again looking for employment opportunity.
I visited my lawyer recently with current situation and a few questions and he said I can be in deep trouble - being unemployed mostly since leaving my H1B status and having worked for another company for those few weeks in a job capacity that was a bit different than the one on my petition. He said I could be deported too if my luck is bad in this case. I request you to advise me whether what happened was really wrong and if I can correct it anyway? As corrective measure, my lawyer says that with immediate effect either I should join the green card sponsoring employer or find another employer with similar job offer (willing to port my Green card) - to avoid hard quuestions with USCIS. In this economy, nobody wants to take extra burden. But I spoke with my GC sponsor. He said the job is there for me like before and he is willing to write a letter of intent to hire me on permanent basis currently or in future if required to whosoever concerned but would prefer to wait a few months giving the crunch in business these days.
WHAT SHOULD I DO? Would the letter suffice the honest intent on both sides regarding the employment offer? Can I afford to take a little more time find a simmilar job? PLEASE SUGGEST.
girlfriend Lincoln Lubrication 3601 - 18 Gallon Value Series Oil Drain LIN3601
gauravsh
05-04 10:36 AM
I assume you haven't filed your I 1485 yet.
Why are you even bothered about H1B status when you are working from India ? ( You don't need an H1B status to work from India. You can be on US payroll as long as your company is ok with that.)
When you are in India, you can apply for an H1B and get a visa stamping while coming back.
Thanks, You are right I havent applied for my I485 yet. I am only concerened about when I return back to US, will there is any issues at POE due to my long absence on H1B?
Really appreciate all the answers!!
Why are you even bothered about H1B status when you are working from India ? ( You don't need an H1B status to work from India. You can be on US payroll as long as your company is ok with that.)
When you are in India, you can apply for an H1B and get a visa stamping while coming back.
Thanks, You are right I havent applied for my I485 yet. I am only concerened about when I return back to US, will there is any issues at POE due to my long absence on H1B?
Really appreciate all the answers!!
hairstyles office 603-745-3601
PD_Dec2002
07-07 09:49 PM
I have described my situation below. Can someone please tell me if they have ever encountered this and what is the best avenue to take?
1. My LC was sent back to me on Tues (after 4 years).
2. It was neither denied nor approved. They said that I did not make at least 95% of prevailing wage rate.
3. I am currently a little less than that if I can take into account all bonuses etc.
4. The company's immigration lawyer (outside counsel) is saying that if I think that I will probably meet the wage rate threshhold by the time entire GC process is complete, then it's OK to amend LC and say that, "Yes, I am making that much money".
5. Else - other option is to challenge the DOLs definition of prevailing wage rate.
6. Company lawyer/HR (I don't think any of them have any immigration law background) are all confused about it. They are not sure whether I can take bonuses into account. If I don't - then it is less likely that I wil reach prevailing wage rate at next review.
7. Also - they are uncomfortable saying that I WILL meet PW. I guess they think that I will hold them to it and then just slack off until my review.
What should I do???
I only know the answer for Q6. No, you cannot take bonus and other perks into account to calculate your total compensation or wage for DOL. The DOL wage has to be the annual salary that you will earn...as shown in your pay stubs.
Thanks,
Jayant
1. My LC was sent back to me on Tues (after 4 years).
2. It was neither denied nor approved. They said that I did not make at least 95% of prevailing wage rate.
3. I am currently a little less than that if I can take into account all bonuses etc.
4. The company's immigration lawyer (outside counsel) is saying that if I think that I will probably meet the wage rate threshhold by the time entire GC process is complete, then it's OK to amend LC and say that, "Yes, I am making that much money".
5. Else - other option is to challenge the DOLs definition of prevailing wage rate.
6. Company lawyer/HR (I don't think any of them have any immigration law background) are all confused about it. They are not sure whether I can take bonuses into account. If I don't - then it is less likely that I wil reach prevailing wage rate at next review.
7. Also - they are uncomfortable saying that I WILL meet PW. I guess they think that I will hold them to it and then just slack off until my review.
What should I do???
I only know the answer for Q6. No, you cannot take bonus and other perks into account to calculate your total compensation or wage for DOL. The DOL wage has to be the annual salary that you will earn...as shown in your pay stubs.
Thanks,
Jayant
rajpatelemail
11-05 07:47 PM
I think - there will be more people in AF Unit this consulate
As Hyderabad is very popular in those lines.
As Hyderabad is very popular in those lines.
shana04
01-21 09:29 AM
But my questions is that what happen if my GC applied thru Emp A for "programmer analyst" with 60K and now I am planning to change my job with Emp B as "Sr. Program Manager" with 100K?l
Nothing
Since my Emp A (GC sponsor) agree to continue the GC process, why do i need to invoke AC21 with Emp B?
if your employer A supports then you dont need to file AC21 and it is not mandatory to file AC21
But, once you get your GC you need to join employer A
Note: you dont want to give control to the employer where you are not working and it depends on your relation with your employer. When you have posted this question which means you dont have that much control over the situation. so I would go with AC21 with new employer unless it is in same or similar job description (title really does not matter unless 80% of job description matches, but do check with your attorney)
Good luck
Nothing
Since my Emp A (GC sponsor) agree to continue the GC process, why do i need to invoke AC21 with Emp B?
if your employer A supports then you dont need to file AC21 and it is not mandatory to file AC21
But, once you get your GC you need to join employer A
Note: you dont want to give control to the employer where you are not working and it depends on your relation with your employer. When you have posted this question which means you dont have that much control over the situation. so I would go with AC21 with new employer unless it is in same or similar job description (title really does not matter unless 80% of job description matches, but do check with your attorney)
Good luck
No comments:
Post a Comment