renupond
10-04 05:02 PM
My self and my wife both are on H1B. Both are working for different companies.
I filled I 485, EAD and AP through my company, for my self and my wife.
Questions:
1) I am the primary person. After getting the EAD, Is it possible, If my wife can open a consulting company with her name?
2) After opening a consulting company on her name, Is it possible, she can leave her H1B employer and run her own paystubs on her own company.
Your help will be really appreciated. :)
I filled I 485, EAD and AP through my company, for my self and my wife.
Questions:
1) I am the primary person. After getting the EAD, Is it possible, If my wife can open a consulting company with her name?
2) After opening a consulting company on her name, Is it possible, she can leave her H1B employer and run her own paystubs on her own company.
Your help will be really appreciated. :)
wallpaper super funny hilarious pictures
nk2
06-17 12:15 PM
There are a lot of IV members whose labor is not approved yet (like me) or did not have their 140 filed as of May 15.
singhsa3
07-12 09:18 AM
Thats not the fact! and could be easily argued against.
"We continue to pay for Your Social Security
But the presidency gives illegals over legals more priority"
"We continue to pay for Your Social Security
But the presidency gives illegals over legals more priority"
2011 Return to Hilarious News Fails
STAmisha
06-19 04:30 PM
please post your comments
more...
.jpeg "hilarious r s v p wording")
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
Munna Bhai
02-08 11:59 AM
You want to keep your 140 intact for 2 reasons:
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
Thanks, please let everyone know if by changing lawyers is there anyway of protecting I-140 from being revoked?? or is there any other way out??
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
Thanks, please let everyone know if by changing lawyers is there anyway of protecting I-140 from being revoked?? or is there any other way out??
more...
rayoflight
12-21 01:51 PM
Thanks all for your replies.
2010 Some kids are really hilarious
EndlessWait
01-10 04:45 PM
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
more...
pal351
11-22 09:16 PM
Fee : $305.00
Applied on line, printed the form.
Attached the following and sent them to USCIS
1) 485 - copy.
2) Old APs 2 - Copies.
3) Cover letter explaining that I need to visit my parents as they are old.
4) DL - Copy.
5) Photos : 2 (write A# and name back of them) (I forgot to send the photos with the application)
I forgot to attach the photos and got RFE, sent photos and approved yesterday. Waiting for the physical copy.
Thank You.
Applied on line, printed the form.
Attached the following and sent them to USCIS
1) 485 - copy.
2) Old APs 2 - Copies.
3) Cover letter explaining that I need to visit my parents as they are old.
4) DL - Copy.
5) Photos : 2 (write A# and name back of them) (I forgot to send the photos with the application)
I forgot to attach the photos and got RFE, sent photos and approved yesterday. Waiting for the physical copy.
Thank You.
hair hilarious
sriramkalyan
01-03 01:24 PM
Just contributed $20 ..
Will do monthly all through the year 2007.
Will do monthly all through the year 2007.
more...
thomachan72
01-05 04:58 AM
Dustinthewind, the preview has good background score and the shots are appropriate. The narrative (labels) that show up are also quite captivating. All together it looks very good and promising, however, I would have liked to see some diaglogues also in between. Maybe a tiny bit longer would have been better. We definitely need to hear the voices of the actors to make it all the more compelling. If there are tragic scenes in the movie a glimpse of those would also be great. Anyway I am not requesting you to change anything but just suggesting a few ways such previews could be more effective. [/I]
hot hilarious r s v p wording
milmuk
07-23 11:24 AM
Hi,
I am planning to renew my AP while in India. What is the procedure to do this?
My details :
Applied for H1 transfer - Dec 15,2008 - normal category -still pending
Ap - valid till Nov 2009
EAD - valid till Nov 2010.Using AC21 for working with the present employer.
I came back to India in March, after completing the project.
My present employer wants me to come to the US only when I have a project in hand.
Based in India, it is very difficult to find the project. Also, most of the projects need US citizen, GC holder, so very less projects available to the H1-B holders. Due to the recession, working on the contract is again a problem, since companies want the permanent employee, instead of contract employee.
I understand that presently working on H1 is difficult, since one should have the project in hand before applying for H1. Sometimes, at the port of entry they ask for paystubs for all the period, ask about the end client details etc. Sometimes people were sent back, since they didn't have all the details at the port of entry.
In this scenario, I am still not sure, if coming back to US will be a good option or not.
But I may need to come if the AP renewal is not possible from India.
In present scenario, If AP renewal is not possible from India, I will have to unnecessarily travel to US on existing AP (till Nov 09).I won't be able to come on H1-B, since my H1 application is still pending even after 6 months. How can one do AP renewal while in India?
Since in the present scenario,I may not get a job(since I don't have GC/citizenship),will it be advisable to come to US just to renew AP?
My ead is valid till Nov 2010,which means If I enter US before ead expiry,I will be able to work on ead.I have lost all the hope for H1 now,since it is more than 7 months.Of course for ead,is it possible to renew it while in India?
I don't have much finances now,so travel to US just to renew ap/ead in the hope of getting gc one day,is bit problematic.I am on EB3 labor 2006 , so GC process will take atleast 5 years.
Even if I reach US for AP renewal, I have to stay there for 2-3 months,till AP gets renewed.
I am not very confortable with this situation.
I just want to keep my GC process going by renewing ap and ead.Is there any way out of this?
I think the rule is , If you don't come to the US while the AP is valid, you abandon the I-485.
Can you give me some guidence on this?
I am planning to renew my AP while in India. What is the procedure to do this?
My details :
Applied for H1 transfer - Dec 15,2008 - normal category -still pending
Ap - valid till Nov 2009
EAD - valid till Nov 2010.Using AC21 for working with the present employer.
I came back to India in March, after completing the project.
My present employer wants me to come to the US only when I have a project in hand.
Based in India, it is very difficult to find the project. Also, most of the projects need US citizen, GC holder, so very less projects available to the H1-B holders. Due to the recession, working on the contract is again a problem, since companies want the permanent employee, instead of contract employee.
I understand that presently working on H1 is difficult, since one should have the project in hand before applying for H1. Sometimes, at the port of entry they ask for paystubs for all the period, ask about the end client details etc. Sometimes people were sent back, since they didn't have all the details at the port of entry.
In this scenario, I am still not sure, if coming back to US will be a good option or not.
But I may need to come if the AP renewal is not possible from India.
In present scenario, If AP renewal is not possible from India, I will have to unnecessarily travel to US on existing AP (till Nov 09).I won't be able to come on H1-B, since my H1 application is still pending even after 6 months. How can one do AP renewal while in India?
Since in the present scenario,I may not get a job(since I don't have GC/citizenship),will it be advisable to come to US just to renew AP?
My ead is valid till Nov 2010,which means If I enter US before ead expiry,I will be able to work on ead.I have lost all the hope for H1 now,since it is more than 7 months.Of course for ead,is it possible to renew it while in India?
I don't have much finances now,so travel to US just to renew ap/ead in the hope of getting gc one day,is bit problematic.I am on EB3 labor 2006 , so GC process will take atleast 5 years.
Even if I reach US for AP renewal, I have to stay there for 2-3 months,till AP gets renewed.
I am not very confortable with this situation.
I just want to keep my GC process going by renewing ap and ead.Is there any way out of this?
I think the rule is , If you don't come to the US while the AP is valid, you abandon the I-485.
Can you give me some guidence on this?
more...
house Hilarious Christmas Cards by
dan19
10-08 11:14 AM
Hi..
Sorry to hear about that. My opinion is that you are safe as long as your company doesn't withdraw/request to revoke you I-140.
>>>>>My questions are the following:
1. What is USCIS view when they see the new H1B transfer petition? Will they reject my I-485?
>> No. Because I-485 is filed for a future employment.
2. If I take a job with Company B, starting Nov 17, can I use AC21 and send in the letter after January 15 (180 days pending).
>> You don't have to sent any letters. Only thing you need to make sure is that you current company doesn't revoke your I-140 before Jan 15. If USCIS asks you for an updated employment letter before Jan 15, you will be in trouble (normally they wont do). If they ask after Jan 15, you can provide it from the new company.
3. Do I have any other options here (I dont have EAD yet, just applied last week)
Once you get EAD and Jan 15 comes, inform your new company that you are using EAD for AC21 purpose. From that time, they need to support your I-485.
Again, again, again...I am not an attorney. So consult an attorney before making any decisions.
Sorry to hear about that. My opinion is that you are safe as long as your company doesn't withdraw/request to revoke you I-140.
>>>>>My questions are the following:
1. What is USCIS view when they see the new H1B transfer petition? Will they reject my I-485?
>> No. Because I-485 is filed for a future employment.
2. If I take a job with Company B, starting Nov 17, can I use AC21 and send in the letter after January 15 (180 days pending).
>> You don't have to sent any letters. Only thing you need to make sure is that you current company doesn't revoke your I-140 before Jan 15. If USCIS asks you for an updated employment letter before Jan 15, you will be in trouble (normally they wont do). If they ask after Jan 15, you can provide it from the new company.
3. Do I have any other options here (I dont have EAD yet, just applied last week)
Once you get EAD and Jan 15 comes, inform your new company that you are using EAD for AC21 purpose. From that time, they need to support your I-485.
Again, again, again...I am not an attorney. So consult an attorney before making any decisions.
tattoo [Image:
DesiTech
06-01 06:25 PM
hi viewers,
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
more...
pictures funny hilarious ugly people30
chanduv23
11-06 10:09 AM
Jet airways resumed new service to US recently. That's why you couldn't find many people traveling by Jet airways. I heard the flights are new, service is good and the travel is quite comfortable. I am travelling to chennai from EWR end of november and am looking forward to the trip.
Great to know, now I feel comfortable :)
Great to know, now I feel comfortable :)
dresses 14 Hilarious News Fails (24
Cataphract
02-20 10:47 AM
http://immigrationvoice.org/media/Flyer_Formated.pdf
Thanks for the flyer link - that takes out any excuse from anybody who is still on the fringe.
Thanks for the flyer link - that takes out any excuse from anybody who is still on the fringe.
more...
makeup hilarious.jpg hilarious
krassib
09-21 04:06 PM
My lawyer and I both tried using this link but we keep getting error messages.
Has anyone got any updates on their cases on this link?
Yes, I told my lawyers next day after the site was opened and they confirmed that my case is in the system and "In Process," although, �In Process� is a very broad term � it does not tell me where in the queue my case is, when it will start to be worked on, i.e. the time factor and estimations are missing. It is really bad, bad system ;-(
Has anyone got any updates on their cases on this link?
Yes, I told my lawyers next day after the site was opened and they confirmed that my case is in the system and "In Process," although, �In Process� is a very broad term � it does not tell me where in the queue my case is, when it will start to be worked on, i.e. the time factor and estimations are missing. It is really bad, bad system ;-(
girlfriend funny hilarious ugly people25
anilsal
03-09 05:54 PM
I had dream last night, part of which I still remember.
As usual in the evening I went to check my mails and found a mail from USCIS. I opened with surprise , preparing myself mentally , which document would they be requesting now. and.......
I screamed in excitement , it was my greencard. I was shocked, and now I was thinking what can I do with the greencard, I thought I should change my jobs which I always wanted, as my job sucks, but realizing that after a month I am going to retire so, dropped that idea and then I started thinking what else I wanted to do when I'll get my GC, and told my wife the idea of now buying the house, but she told me that as you are going to retire next month lets go back to india and the savings that we are left with after paying the taxes , social security and immigration attorneys, will buy a 2 bedroom apartment in India only.
I asked her what about travelling to Europe that you always wanted, but which we never did for the reason, that what if there will be an issue on travelling with AP,but she told me with my blood pressure and and her arthiritis, it won't be possible.
And then..... I started thinking what I lost in the race to get the GC and what I am left after getting the GC. Sadly threw the GC in the trash and again started browsing the forums on immigrationvoice.org. As after these many years,browsing IV forums became my habit.
And then the alarm woke me up and as usual I started to get ready to spend another day in Paradise, in the country of DREAMS.
Quite fun to read.
As usual in the evening I went to check my mails and found a mail from USCIS. I opened with surprise , preparing myself mentally , which document would they be requesting now. and.......
I screamed in excitement , it was my greencard. I was shocked, and now I was thinking what can I do with the greencard, I thought I should change my jobs which I always wanted, as my job sucks, but realizing that after a month I am going to retire so, dropped that idea and then I started thinking what else I wanted to do when I'll get my GC, and told my wife the idea of now buying the house, but she told me that as you are going to retire next month lets go back to india and the savings that we are left with after paying the taxes , social security and immigration attorneys, will buy a 2 bedroom apartment in India only.
I asked her what about travelling to Europe that you always wanted, but which we never did for the reason, that what if there will be an issue on travelling with AP,but she told me with my blood pressure and and her arthiritis, it won't be possible.
And then..... I started thinking what I lost in the race to get the GC and what I am left after getting the GC. Sadly threw the GC in the trash and again started browsing the forums on immigrationvoice.org. As after these many years,browsing IV forums became my habit.
And then the alarm woke me up and as usual I started to get ready to spend another day in Paradise, in the country of DREAMS.
Quite fun to read.
hairstyles Hilarious
lunar
07-21 08:38 AM
Normally my wife is the one who is used to post or follow up on the latest here.
This came up a week ago. I have been working from home in a different state and we do not have any company office near my home. Nearest office location is about 3 hours. I had to move this far away due to personal reasons.
Now after working from home for 3 years (extending EAD, H1Bs etc) Fragomen (most of you know who they are) says I cannot do work from home anymore due to this conflict with uscis. it seems USCIS doesnt recognize your home as a Govt recognized work location. Hence I cannot work from home.
Now my manager wants me to only work from the office since folks reporting to me are also in that state. Now he is using Fragomen and HR emails as a reason for me to move back.
Anythoughts ? I am sure you all will agree that is the law. but why all this now ? even after working for 12 years.
One other point the fragomen lawyer said is - this is going to be the case for all thier clients.
This came up a week ago. I have been working from home in a different state and we do not have any company office near my home. Nearest office location is about 3 hours. I had to move this far away due to personal reasons.
Now after working from home for 3 years (extending EAD, H1Bs etc) Fragomen (most of you know who they are) says I cannot do work from home anymore due to this conflict with uscis. it seems USCIS doesnt recognize your home as a Govt recognized work location. Hence I cannot work from home.
Now my manager wants me to only work from the office since folks reporting to me are also in that state. Now he is using Fragomen and HR emails as a reason for me to move back.
Anythoughts ? I am sure you all will agree that is the law. but why all this now ? even after working for 12 years.
One other point the fragomen lawyer said is - this is going to be the case for all thier clients.
fall2004us
10-20 05:59 PM
Sorry for asking this here. Can somebody please tell me how can i start a new thread in this forum.Thanks
Go here
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum6-non-immigrant-visas/
click on new thread :D
Go here
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum6-non-immigrant-visas/
click on new thread :D
akred
06-03 02:05 PM
The question that was asked was - is Statistics a STEM discipline. That cannot be answered from that page even though it looks so. For e.g if I choose the Mathematics Major, it only lists the occupation that requires a Math Major and not the disciplines under Math. For e.g. one one of the occupation is Natural Sciences Managers which is an occupation and not exactly a discipline.
sta�tis�tics (stə-tĭs'tĭks)
n.
(used with a sing. verb) The mathematics of the collection, organization, and interpretation of numerical data, especially the analysis of population characteristics by inference from sampling.
(used with a pl. verb) Numerical data.http://www.answers.com/statistics&r=67
I would be astounded if statistics is not considered a STEM major. The only way to know for sure beyond this forum is to check with a lawyer.
sta�tis�tics (stə-tĭs'tĭks)
n.
(used with a sing. verb) The mathematics of the collection, organization, and interpretation of numerical data, especially the analysis of population characteristics by inference from sampling.
(used with a pl. verb) Numerical data.http://www.answers.com/statistics&r=67
I would be astounded if statistics is not considered a STEM major. The only way to know for sure beyond this forum is to check with a lawyer.
No comments:
Post a Comment