gcwait2007
05-14 06:49 PM
It all depends on which country she belongs to.
If she belongs to heavily retrogressed countries, she would be better off with consular processing.
If she belongs to heavily retrogressed countries, she would be better off with consular processing.
mk26
05-27 08:28 AM
Looks like this is another bigger issue after our green card issue. Can we do something about this?
bang
01-09 06:41 AM
Because this is the case where it is not clear if the H-1B was applied for before or after oct 2006 and if the H-4 was in H-1 status ever before.
We had applied in July 2006, last few days before the Quota got closed, she completed her Masters in July as well. For some reason it took all this while to get an approval even when converted to Premium in October, they sent a RFE for my H1 & paystubs later took for ever to acknowledge th erecieval and then fianlly approval, as i mentioned we are still waiting to see the approval document to make sure there is a I94 attached.
We had applied in July 2006, last few days before the Quota got closed, she completed her Masters in July as well. For some reason it took all this while to get an approval even when converted to Premium in October, they sent a RFE for my H1 & paystubs later took for ever to acknowledge th erecieval and then fianlly approval, as i mentioned we are still waiting to see the approval document to make sure there is a I94 attached.
b_boy
10-14 02:43 PM
Basic Thumb rule is none of the insurance for visitors cover any pre-existing conditions, so the insurance you buy mainly covers accidental injuries (falling down from stairs / falling in bath tub / auto accident etc.) and bare minimal medical illness (very basics such as fever / cold etc. believe me if it's some thing else the doctors would relate it to a pre-existing condition)
you have 2 types, one is comprehensive coverage just like how it works for you and me and the other is limited coverage, neither of the coverage cover any pre-existing conditions.
you can go the links suggested which gives more info, think twice if you want to get it from India, my friend had a very bad experience with claims from one of the Indian insurance providers.
you have 2 types, one is comprehensive coverage just like how it works for you and me and the other is limited coverage, neither of the coverage cover any pre-existing conditions.
you can go the links suggested which gives more info, think twice if you want to get it from India, my friend had a very bad experience with claims from one of the Indian insurance providers.
more...
walking_dude
03-17 03:28 PM
By contributing monetarily to IVs lobbying efforts.
IV keeps monitoring the newly presented bills in both houses of Congress through its lobbysists and attempts to attach increase to EB quotas to such bills. These efforts require lobbying the US Congressmen and lobbying requires money.
Since IV has limited number of recurring contributors and one-time contributors it has a limited budget. Also, this being an election year chance of any major immigration-related bill passing is remote (immigration being a politically sensitive subject ). Hence IV has been lobbying for Administrative fixes, in the interim, which are more achievable.
If all the IV members become regular contributors, IV will have surplus funds so that it can lobby hard and with more lawmakers to include EB GC increase in all possible legislations.
I checked the full text of this bill, it does not have anything else besides temporary quota increase for H-1B.
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
IV keeps monitoring the newly presented bills in both houses of Congress through its lobbysists and attempts to attach increase to EB quotas to such bills. These efforts require lobbying the US Congressmen and lobbying requires money.
Since IV has limited number of recurring contributors and one-time contributors it has a limited budget. Also, this being an election year chance of any major immigration-related bill passing is remote (immigration being a politically sensitive subject ). Hence IV has been lobbying for Administrative fixes, in the interim, which are more achievable.
If all the IV members become regular contributors, IV will have surplus funds so that it can lobby hard and with more lawmakers to include EB GC increase in all possible legislations.
I checked the full text of this bill, it does not have anything else besides temporary quota increase for H-1B.
How can we actively participate in this process? How can we find out about such bills when they are still in the works and make suggestions to the lawmakers to include relief for EB issues?
rdehar
11-27 01:40 PM
How does it work? It doesn't work anymore :D
Labor substitution is dead.
Beware of anyone scamming you in name of labor sub...
Labor substitution is dead.
Beware of anyone scamming you in name of labor sub...
more...
petersebastian
03-31 05:49 PM
Your 180 days start from the day your I-94 expired. And yes, 2 weeks or 4 weeks over stay will make a difference. Next time when you enter the country or at the Visa office they might ask you the reason.
You did nit clarify if your partner is a US citizen, PR or visa holder. That might help in giving you some additional advise.
He's American. I am aware that they will ask about that but I just want to make it clear that I'm facing a 3 year ban after overstaying the 180 days after my I94 expiration date (so the end of July in my case).
You did nit clarify if your partner is a US citizen, PR or visa holder. That might help in giving you some additional advise.
He's American. I am aware that they will ask about that but I just want to make it clear that I'm facing a 3 year ban after overstaying the 180 days after my I94 expiration date (so the end of July in my case).
kurtz_wolfgang
08-15 01:23 PM
I would suggest Jonty, not to waste your time. I posted the question in general. It wasn't specific to you. If anybody is free and feels like, they can answer.:rolleyes::cool::cool::cool:
more...
at0474
01-09 02:30 PM
My guess:
No change in EB2 dates for India. Slight forward movement for EB3.
No change in EB2 dates for India. Slight forward movement for EB3.
waitin_toolong
11-06 08:29 AM
hey no one checks if you really need it or not, maybe request one for MIL or whoever is more feeble. It always helps the first time. Getting in and out of planes and getting to right place at right time. (you are not charged anything for service, though some tip is always appreciated).
You and spouse will also have an easier time from the time they board to the time you meet them.
You and spouse will also have an easier time from the time they board to the time you meet them.
more...
kumar1305
01-26 07:33 PM
Instead of all this country caps, applying for GC and waiting, why don't they get a rule like European countries? In UK, netherlands and Denmark it is very simple. All you have to do is prove that you made more money (ofcouse taxes count) than the stipulated amount by the government. Pay the taxes for 4 or 5 years and take the GC(Permanent Resident). Simple no lawyer no crap. Country benefits we benefit. I lived in UK for more than 3 years and I would have become a citizen by now. But never wanted to be in UK, it was only a stop over. I always loved America, don't know why? Do you think it is because of Hollywood? I'm kidding. But still I love this country. Hope things will change some day. If not my daughter will sponsor me when she turns 21.
thomachan72
09-07 09:46 AM
Just as under the Indian constitution under the Income tax act all citizens whether residing inside the country or not are treated equally. the Govt will be acting against the law and infringing upon basic rights if they create different tax structures based upon place of residence for citizens. For eg:- interest on bank deposits is income generated within the country and for that there is a compulsory TDS in case of NRIs. This is a provision to prevent people from repatriating income without paying due taxes as it becomes the responsibility of the bank to collect the tax. Now as any citizen an NRI has the right to any exemptions / deductions and can claim back excess tax that was deducted when he/she files the income tax.
I wouldn't be worried about this article unless your personal chartered accountant in India tells you something. You cannot be taxed differently from any other citizen. Let me ask you one thing; Dont you as a citizen have the right to vote irrespective of where you stay? similarly your rights dont change if you stay abroad or work abroad. Infact the govt of many states rely heavily on foreign repatriation particularly from the gulf countries.
There is going to be a HUGE HUGE aproar if something silly like this were to happen. Its like saying, "NRIs have to pay more at the Indian gas stations because the tax is higher for them"
Dont worry be happy it is a false article written by somebody who apparently has not understood really what he/she read.
I wouldn't be worried about this article unless your personal chartered accountant in India tells you something. You cannot be taxed differently from any other citizen. Let me ask you one thing; Dont you as a citizen have the right to vote irrespective of where you stay? similarly your rights dont change if you stay abroad or work abroad. Infact the govt of many states rely heavily on foreign repatriation particularly from the gulf countries.
There is going to be a HUGE HUGE aproar if something silly like this were to happen. Its like saying, "NRIs have to pay more at the Indian gas stations because the tax is higher for them"
Dont worry be happy it is a false article written by somebody who apparently has not understood really what he/she read.
more...
chanduv23
07-25 09:34 AM
I am in same situation. My previous employer has informed me that he has already revoked my 140 petition. I sent in the ac21 paperwork to be on safer side and also verified my home address on records in case they send something. You may want to do the same, also, make sure you have your own Attorney and file for G28 promptly.
hopefulgc
03-08 12:57 PM
AFAIK, I-140 is the underlying petition for the I-485. If I-140 is denied, the i-485 is automatically denied.
Move fast, start a PERM and see if u can lock in a date.
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
Move fast, start a PERM and see if u can lock in a date.
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
more...
jr8rdt
11-21 03:04 PM
I have included the experience letter to my I-140 but the USCIS doesn't like the content of it hence the RFE. How can I overcome this? I got the letter when I left the company 10 years ago . I came to the US after that. the letter was very broad not specific duties. it was signed using letter head by my manager. I thought it was OK. but apparently not.
Problem is the company is no longer in business. I am planning to have a letter from a coworker who now live in Canada instead and should it be notarized ? is one letter enough for RFE? Does it mean my ex co-worker should bring the letter to a lawyer in Canada and have it notarized? or can my lawyer send a notarized letter and ask him to sign?
do I have to mentioned that the company is no longer in business in the letter?should I write the letter my self or have my lawyer do it for me?
anybody has a sample letter for RFE experience letter?
THanks....
I need help.....
Problem is the company is no longer in business. I am planning to have a letter from a coworker who now live in Canada instead and should it be notarized ? is one letter enough for RFE? Does it mean my ex co-worker should bring the letter to a lawyer in Canada and have it notarized? or can my lawyer send a notarized letter and ask him to sign?
do I have to mentioned that the company is no longer in business in the letter?should I write the letter my self or have my lawyer do it for me?
anybody has a sample letter for RFE experience letter?
THanks....
I need help.....
chunky
07-26 03:04 PM
My company filed my green card and have applied for 485 for me and my wife on July 19 with July visa bulletin reinstated. We have also applied for AP and EAD for my wife. We both are on H1 at this time. My wife' job is going to end by month end.
Does she need to file change of status to H4 or it is fine to stay in US with AOS pending status.
My 140 is still pending
Does she need to file change of status to H4 or it is fine to stay in US with AOS pending status.
My 140 is still pending
more...
RDB
08-03 02:38 PM
Alright - my wife and I completed the Interview today and they asked for proof of relationship (joint assets, tax returns etc.), current employment letter and Birth Certificates. After that the officer told me that he has approved the case in the system, however, as my PD is not current they can't give me the actual card.
He also mentioned that this is the last ritual in the process and once the dates become current, all they need to do is to order the card production!
I did ask him why we were called for interview when the dates are not current and he said that the best way to process the applications received during the deluge of July 2007 is this way :) - he was kind of mad at DOS for doing that!
So, I guess I just have to wait for the Dates to become current - which might take another 5-10 years :D
Thanks for the link. Looks like I will have to get ready for an interview!!!!
He also mentioned that this is the last ritual in the process and once the dates become current, all they need to do is to order the card production!
I did ask him why we were called for interview when the dates are not current and he said that the best way to process the applications received during the deluge of July 2007 is this way :) - he was kind of mad at DOS for doing that!
So, I guess I just have to wait for the Dates to become current - which might take another 5-10 years :D
Thanks for the link. Looks like I will have to get ready for an interview!!!!
indigokiwi
04-17 12:50 PM
^^^^^^^
aachoo
04-22 12:51 PM
This is literally word for word the RFE I got. Basically an employment verifications. I did not use AC21, no job changes, no nothing. Attorney aid it was normal and responded in 2 days.
-a
My lawyer got the RFE notice yesterday....
USCIS requesting the following...
1. Dated letter from employer detailing job duties and position
2. Your proffered position if different from current one
3. Date I began employment and current salary
4. Letter must be signed by executive officer of the company
5. Letter must clearly state whether the terms and conditions of employment based visa (or labor certification) continue to exist
They are requesting too many things at this point and it seems like the requests are different from other RFE's received by IV members. This is concerning me a lot. Can expert IV members give me any guidance? Have you received such an RFE, what does this mean? Any advice is very much appreciated.
My LC / I-140 stated that I am an "Electrical Engineering Technician" due to PW concerns at the time of application but my H1-B application said "Applications Engineer (Chemicals Group)". But the job duties were exactly the same word for word. I'm not sure if that is causing the problem. I am being paid significantly more than the LC / 1-140 wage currently. So, lack of ability to pay is not an issue. I have also been continuously employed by the same organization. I have not sought a different employer ever since I applied for my GC.
Please reply with your thoughts.
-a
My lawyer got the RFE notice yesterday....
USCIS requesting the following...
1. Dated letter from employer detailing job duties and position
2. Your proffered position if different from current one
3. Date I began employment and current salary
4. Letter must be signed by executive officer of the company
5. Letter must clearly state whether the terms and conditions of employment based visa (or labor certification) continue to exist
They are requesting too many things at this point and it seems like the requests are different from other RFE's received by IV members. This is concerning me a lot. Can expert IV members give me any guidance? Have you received such an RFE, what does this mean? Any advice is very much appreciated.
My LC / I-140 stated that I am an "Electrical Engineering Technician" due to PW concerns at the time of application but my H1-B application said "Applications Engineer (Chemicals Group)". But the job duties were exactly the same word for word. I'm not sure if that is causing the problem. I am being paid significantly more than the LC / 1-140 wage currently. So, lack of ability to pay is not an issue. I have also been continuously employed by the same organization. I have not sought a different employer ever since I applied for my GC.
Please reply with your thoughts.
Circus123
01-09 02:57 PM
Just to add a comment to my previous reply ---This is the best case scenario looking at the trendz nowadays ...
EB3 June 01
EB2 Dec 2000
EB3 June 01
EB2 Dec 2000
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
No comments:
Post a Comment