vikki76
09-01 02:04 AM
I was just about to post this article and then saw someone already did this good deed. Apart from core issue of isolation of elderly immigration,this debate between unrestricted family based GC and employment quota will never end.
wallpaper roken-heart
rameshk75
04-07 10:20 AM
Ron's answer for "Leavng petitioning employer after the I485 approval?"
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4764
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4764
saravanaraj.sathya
08-08 03:23 PM
Jasmin - Thanks for ur reply. I know there are several posts regarding pay-stubs. but I was un-clear with the pay issue after filing I-485 thtz why I opened a new thread. I am sorry if it is not appropriate.
But I ve seen in some of the posts where ppl say that we can be on vacation, self-employed etc etc...what does it mean? do they still need to produce pay stubs....My Pd is Nov 2006 it may take several yrs..do they really dig deep from there to my first entry?
Its always safe to have paystubs for atlease 180 days after your 485 receipt date. If they call you for an interview at local office during adjudication, which may happen after anywhere from weeks, months, or years, there are chances that you may be asked to produce paystubs starting from month before interview date all the way back to your first H1 entry into US.
Please do not open new threads for these question for which there are several thread opened and are being discussed thru. Why don't you ask this question on one of those post?
But I ve seen in some of the posts where ppl say that we can be on vacation, self-employed etc etc...what does it mean? do they still need to produce pay stubs....My Pd is Nov 2006 it may take several yrs..do they really dig deep from there to my first entry?
Its always safe to have paystubs for atlease 180 days after your 485 receipt date. If they call you for an interview at local office during adjudication, which may happen after anywhere from weeks, months, or years, there are chances that you may be asked to produce paystubs starting from month before interview date all the way back to your first H1 entry into US.
Please do not open new threads for these question for which there are several thread opened and are being discussed thru. Why don't you ask this question on one of those post?
2011 and the healing process.
EB3_SEP04
07-01 07:37 PM
Hi All,
I had a previous empoyer A > Then a Prefered Vendor B > Then a Client C.
Now I have transferred my H1 to a Preferred Vendor X & Still working on same project with the Client C, but with a different contract all togeather.
Preferred Vendor X > the Client C
Now the issues is , my previous employeer A is harassing me ( Vendor B is having no problems) , asking for money or filing a legal case agaist me,as I have signed a non-compete agreement with them. Can he do so ?? what can be the worst consequences?
Let me tell you one thing, "You've got guts, buddy", Congrats on the bold move. not many people dare to do that.
Can he do so? - Theoratically yes, practically: highly unlikely.
if he is a typical consulting guy with less than 50 emps, he won't do it, because such employers almost always make "adjustments" that puts them in extremely weak spot during such law suits. here are some examples:
- a guy was laid off, his new employer sent him on a project even before filing for his H1 transfer
-many consulting companies do not pay salary while the guy is on "bench"
- they many times knowingly/unknowingly commit tax/accounting fraud or regulatory mistakes that can cause serius consequences
- a friend of mine was interrviewed by a client and when the result was positive, his new would be employer called him at a McDonalds and asked him to sign the contract right there (within 30 minute of meeting), and my friend did. Now most people won't see anything wrong in here. but a lawyer told me that my friend was not given enough time to read/understand a legal document and to talk to a lawyer ideally enough time is about 2 weeks. How many small consulting companies give 2 weeks when the interview at client is clear?
In your case, the end client is not your employer's client. Ask him to show the contract between him and the end client.
bottom line of the story is: there are many defenses that one can play and win the case and/or even put the employer in trouble. That's why most small employers don't do much beyond sending a lawyer's notice (just to scare you enough to write down a check). A real nasty guy can even go one step further and file a law suit only to withdraw it later if you decide to fiight it.
Good luck buddy!
I had a previous empoyer A > Then a Prefered Vendor B > Then a Client C.
Now I have transferred my H1 to a Preferred Vendor X & Still working on same project with the Client C, but with a different contract all togeather.
Preferred Vendor X > the Client C
Now the issues is , my previous employeer A is harassing me ( Vendor B is having no problems) , asking for money or filing a legal case agaist me,as I have signed a non-compete agreement with them. Can he do so ?? what can be the worst consequences?
Let me tell you one thing, "You've got guts, buddy", Congrats on the bold move. not many people dare to do that.
Can he do so? - Theoratically yes, practically: highly unlikely.
if he is a typical consulting guy with less than 50 emps, he won't do it, because such employers almost always make "adjustments" that puts them in extremely weak spot during such law suits. here are some examples:
- a guy was laid off, his new employer sent him on a project even before filing for his H1 transfer
-many consulting companies do not pay salary while the guy is on "bench"
- they many times knowingly/unknowingly commit tax/accounting fraud or regulatory mistakes that can cause serius consequences
- a friend of mine was interrviewed by a client and when the result was positive, his new would be employer called him at a McDonalds and asked him to sign the contract right there (within 30 minute of meeting), and my friend did. Now most people won't see anything wrong in here. but a lawyer told me that my friend was not given enough time to read/understand a legal document and to talk to a lawyer ideally enough time is about 2 weeks. How many small consulting companies give 2 weeks when the interview at client is clear?
In your case, the end client is not your employer's client. Ask him to show the contract between him and the end client.
bottom line of the story is: there are many defenses that one can play and win the case and/or even put the employer in trouble. That's why most small employers don't do much beyond sending a lawyer's notice (just to scare you enough to write down a check). A real nasty guy can even go one step further and file a law suit only to withdraw it later if you decide to fiight it.
Good luck buddy!
more...
spgtopper
05-09 04:08 PM
Hi dudu,
If you attend the local event on May 15th, you will be able to get a ton of local contacts that will be very useful in forming a group etc.
We are hoping that at the May 15th event, several local (DC metro area) IV members will meet and get to know each other as well - that should be a good start to form a strong local group.
S.
If you attend the local event on May 15th, you will be able to get a ton of local contacts that will be very useful in forming a group etc.
We are hoping that at the May 15th event, several local (DC metro area) IV members will meet and get to know each other as well - that should be a good start to form a strong local group.
S.
gcseeker2002
02-12 05:17 PM
Folks,
employer's attorney claims that there is no such thing as H4 premium processing.
Can anyone point me to the correct memo where Premium filing was made available for I-539 applications?
I searched all Mathew-Oh updates dated one year ago and can't locate it.
I need to get that h4 under premium ASAP so that I can transfer to H1 in April.
Can anyone please help?
My company cries about the costs for regular process, forget premium process , so i dont know.
employer's attorney claims that there is no such thing as H4 premium processing.
Can anyone point me to the correct memo where Premium filing was made available for I-539 applications?
I searched all Mathew-Oh updates dated one year ago and can't locate it.
I need to get that h4 under premium ASAP so that I can transfer to H1 in April.
Can anyone please help?
My company cries about the costs for regular process, forget premium process , so i dont know.
more...
sriswam
06-28 06:33 PM
I don't think you can efile I907 for I-140. You have to file via paper. But hurry...they are suspending PP starting July 2nd for atleast a month in anticipation of huge volume of applications that will start pouring in.
www.immigration-law.com
Thanks Sunny. I am aware of the suspension. Paper-filing is not an option as the earliest the papers will reach USCIS is on Monday, July 2nd (if I were to overnight docs tomorrow). Thats why I was hoping to get the e-filing to work.
www.immigration-law.com
Thanks Sunny. I am aware of the suspension. Paper-filing is not an option as the earliest the papers will reach USCIS is on Monday, July 2nd (if I were to overnight docs tomorrow). Thats why I was hoping to get the e-filing to work.
2010 healing quotes for roken
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
Raj2006
06-04 10:07 AM
lawyer paper filed april 15th
receipt received april 27th
received date april 16th receipt date april 26th
last soft LUD April 30th
no fp notice or anything since
called them 2 days ago to put in a request for fp cus i am tired of waiting hoped that this would prompt them to look at it.... so far no change
seems like CSC is slow compared TSC. I dont think they issue FP notice for paper filing. There were lot of applications received by CSC in feb..i think thats what is causing the delay. please keep us updated with your status.
receipt received april 27th
received date april 16th receipt date april 26th
last soft LUD April 30th
no fp notice or anything since
called them 2 days ago to put in a request for fp cus i am tired of waiting hoped that this would prompt them to look at it.... so far no change
seems like CSC is slow compared TSC. I dont think they issue FP notice for paper filing. There were lot of applications received by CSC in feb..i think thats what is causing the delay. please keep us updated with your status.
hair Healing A Broken Heart.
Raju
06-10 07:35 PM
My 6 years end today and my extension filing is already in and pending since April. I wonder if they would entertain people who already filed and are waiting.
I can't believe I am saying this but I hope my H1 extension does not get approved until I can file premium. :-)
You do not qualify for this at least according to the above statement. You do not need 140 approved for h extension. You will automatically get the h extension based on the fact that you labor was filed 365 days prior to your H expiration. This is for folks who need 140 approved for H extension
I can't believe I am saying this but I hope my H1 extension does not get approved until I can file premium. :-)
You do not qualify for this at least according to the above statement. You do not need 140 approved for h extension. You will automatically get the h extension based on the fact that you labor was filed 365 days prior to your H expiration. This is for folks who need 140 approved for H extension
more...
Pria
01-02 09:59 AM
My husband, the primary applicant is a temporary non immigrant worker on H1B visa. I have been on an H4 status for the last 6 years since we relocated to the U.S. Our I-485 is on track and continued (visa availability). I've had an EAD for the past 3 years (renewed twice and now valid until 2012) but never used it, until recently...
I used my EAD very briefly and unfortunately had to leave my job due to personal reasons within 3 weeks of joining. Have I lost my H4 Status? What status am I on now? I want to travel to India in Feb-March. What procedure do I need to follow to make it happen. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Pria
I used my EAD very briefly and unfortunately had to leave my job due to personal reasons within 3 weeks of joining. Have I lost my H4 Status? What status am I on now? I want to travel to India in Feb-March. What procedure do I need to follow to make it happen. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Pria
hot Susan Russo | The healing site
MannyD
10-03 02:32 PM
I can't imagine why people do not want to give whatever I-94 they had collected between two trips out of US. NOt sure of the rules, but the common procedure is to surrender original I-94 AND the ones you got with each H1B. I haven't heard so far that I-94's not returned gained monetary value on ebay or people could use them for anything else. For me, I see surrendering all of them as one ( or some) more document(s) not to worry about.
I feel returning more than one I94 carries its own risks. Who takes it from you? - The airline representative who simply rips off these and shoves it in a cardbox box. By some chance if the newer I94 is overlooked by anyone and a older I94 that also surrendered is entered in your immi records, I'm sure you'd rue that day! Yes, keeping a copy of that I94 is good, but why not prevent the issue at POS?
Gurus, is there any requirement to surrender ALL I94s?
I feel returning more than one I94 carries its own risks. Who takes it from you? - The airline representative who simply rips off these and shoves it in a cardbox box. By some chance if the newer I94 is overlooked by anyone and a older I94 that also surrendered is entered in your immi records, I'm sure you'd rue that day! Yes, keeping a copy of that I94 is good, but why not prevent the issue at POS?
Gurus, is there any requirement to surrender ALL I94s?
more...
house healing quotes for roken
jasmin45
10-03 02:24 PM
Greetings,
Here’s what I got from my attorney on Monday, October 1st 07. It seems there was a conference call of some sort with USCIS officials past week. Thought this will just keep you informed if you haven’t heard about this yet. Please check with your attorney for confirmation.
Below is the summary FYI only.
1. Expect further retrogressions on the visa bulletins
2. USCIS received approximately 800,000 total applications in July and August in addition, they received 100,000 family based I-485 cases in July
3. Do not expect premium processing to be re-instated for I-140s for a while
4. There is a big problem with the receipt notice updates that are being published by USCIS—they are not accurate and they are further behind than they are publishing. Aytes is trying to fix this discrepancy.
5. If you submitted photos with the EAD applications, then Aytes said you will get your EAD faster than those who did not
6. Expect changes in regulations to permit H and L people to travel without the I-485 receipt notice due to the major backlog in receipting
7. Aytes said they are trying to set it up that next year the EAD and Advance Paroles will be issued for more than a one year expiration and that there may possibly be one document issued for both the EAD and APs. More on this will come by the end of the year.
8. Backlog Elimination Centers (BEC) should be up to date in one month
9. Since the BEC will be updated, Carlson said to expect an increase in audits for the PERM cases at the end of this year and next year----make sure ALL of the recruitment requirements are being met; no fraud involved; employees not being required to pay or pay back labor expenses; employees not involved in the recruitment, etc.
10. 20% of PERM cases are being denied
11. Atlanta’s motions for reconsiderations should be processed faster soon
12. New PERM form on March 28, 2008
13. Carlson stated that the DOL’s position on attorney fees are the foreign national can have an attorney represent him/her for letters of support, previous job descriptions etc. to prepare for the upcoming I-140 stage and ensure that he fits the already prepared job offer requirements, but ALL fees and costs associated with the PERM filing (job offer requirements, advertising, recruitment, preparing the form, filing the form, motions, etc) MUST be paid by the company. FAQ’s are on the DOL website.
14. Work site enforcement----expect CIS officers to request to see I-9s---Make sure the I-9s are being properly completed by the employers.
15. I-9 raids are a hot topic!!!! For example, the city Reno (NV) saw several McDonald restaurants raided on Thursday—this is expected to happen all over the USA and with all types of employers. PLEASE make sure you have the I-9s in a separate place and handy in case of a raid. If I-9s are with other paperwork, then the raiding officer will review it all!
16. WATCH OUT FOR DUIs---in both nonimmigrant and immigrant cases!!! Delays are occurring in these cases.
17. The US consulates and CBP are Googling you!
Here’s what I got from my attorney on Monday, October 1st 07. It seems there was a conference call of some sort with USCIS officials past week. Thought this will just keep you informed if you haven’t heard about this yet. Please check with your attorney for confirmation.
Below is the summary FYI only.
1. Expect further retrogressions on the visa bulletins
2. USCIS received approximately 800,000 total applications in July and August in addition, they received 100,000 family based I-485 cases in July
3. Do not expect premium processing to be re-instated for I-140s for a while
4. There is a big problem with the receipt notice updates that are being published by USCIS—they are not accurate and they are further behind than they are publishing. Aytes is trying to fix this discrepancy.
5. If you submitted photos with the EAD applications, then Aytes said you will get your EAD faster than those who did not
6. Expect changes in regulations to permit H and L people to travel without the I-485 receipt notice due to the major backlog in receipting
7. Aytes said they are trying to set it up that next year the EAD and Advance Paroles will be issued for more than a one year expiration and that there may possibly be one document issued for both the EAD and APs. More on this will come by the end of the year.
8. Backlog Elimination Centers (BEC) should be up to date in one month
9. Since the BEC will be updated, Carlson said to expect an increase in audits for the PERM cases at the end of this year and next year----make sure ALL of the recruitment requirements are being met; no fraud involved; employees not being required to pay or pay back labor expenses; employees not involved in the recruitment, etc.
10. 20% of PERM cases are being denied
11. Atlanta’s motions for reconsiderations should be processed faster soon
12. New PERM form on March 28, 2008
13. Carlson stated that the DOL’s position on attorney fees are the foreign national can have an attorney represent him/her for letters of support, previous job descriptions etc. to prepare for the upcoming I-140 stage and ensure that he fits the already prepared job offer requirements, but ALL fees and costs associated with the PERM filing (job offer requirements, advertising, recruitment, preparing the form, filing the form, motions, etc) MUST be paid by the company. FAQ’s are on the DOL website.
14. Work site enforcement----expect CIS officers to request to see I-9s---Make sure the I-9s are being properly completed by the employers.
15. I-9 raids are a hot topic!!!! For example, the city Reno (NV) saw several McDonald restaurants raided on Thursday—this is expected to happen all over the USA and with all types of employers. PLEASE make sure you have the I-9s in a separate place and handy in case of a raid. If I-9s are with other paperwork, then the raiding officer will review it all!
16. WATCH OUT FOR DUIs---in both nonimmigrant and immigrant cases!!! Delays are occurring in these cases.
17. The US consulates and CBP are Googling you!
tattoo healing quotes for roken
GCEB2
09-21 10:33 AM
thanks mnhatim....The information is helpful. How about bay area side do you know any affordable places. Also any other websites i can browse threw.
more...
pictures healing quotes for roken
HopeSprings
02-14 12:25 AM
The voice of legal immigrants.
dresses hair quotes on roken heart healing quotes for roken heart. quotes for roken
ddanait
02-08 03:45 PM
Yes.. I was one of them..
more...
makeup healing quotes for roken
gc2005
11-17 01:35 PM
SKIL is the best bet for us. Hopefully we will see it being discussed soon in Senate.
I agree, SKIL is the best bet for us. There are chances of something happenning before Oct 2007 because of no H1B visa numbers being available unitl then. I don't think it has been that bad situation with H1B until now.
I agree, SKIL is the best bet for us. There are chances of something happenning before Oct 2007 because of no H1B visa numbers being available unitl then. I don't think it has been that bad situation with H1B until now.
girlfriend proper healing process.
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiegxyLPFCg_9tv2bvbdV-VF6DJjwaJ19JNOzZ_H9P1ACGvgFfFA2liBbRb_TtqafBv6xHtMYvouKSLZ3i9_XajYVPoInGtJIBqgOI74ahrHGDvt-ImiUR4iy7pXkghSx8IclCUNJpLS0c/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiegxyLPFCg_9tv2bvbdV-VF6DJjwaJ19JNOzZ_H9P1ACGvgFfFA2liBbRb_TtqafBv6xHtMYvouKSLZ3i9_XajYVPoInGtJIBqgOI74ahrHGDvt-ImiUR4iy7pXkghSx8IclCUNJpLS0c/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiegxyLPFCg_9tv2bvbdV-VF6DJjwaJ19JNOzZ_H9P1ACGvgFfFA2liBbRb_TtqafBv6xHtMYvouKSLZ3i9_XajYVPoInGtJIBqgOI74ahrHGDvt-ImiUR4iy7pXkghSx8IclCUNJpLS0c/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiegxyLPFCg_9tv2bvbdV-VF6DJjwaJ19JNOzZ_H9P1ACGvgFfFA2liBbRb_TtqafBv6xHtMYvouKSLZ3i9_XajYVPoInGtJIBqgOI74ahrHGDvt-ImiUR4iy7pXkghSx8IclCUNJpLS0c/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
hairstyles Healing Brokeng Heart
123456mg
08-03 05:19 PM
I bet you your attorney had either not replied that RFE and plainly let go the matter or the RFE response must have not gotten to USCIS in time. It had happened to one of my company collegue as well. Please ask your attorney to give you copies of details about the RFE and also provide (with FEdEx tracking number) the response that he wrote to USCIS. It is very easy to track if it is your company attorney screw-up or a genuine issue.
ramus
08-15 12:07 PM
Great.. please contribute to DC rally in anyway you can.
I thought this will give some hope to you.
Mine reached USCIS on July-3rd around 6:00am. All 6 (2x485, 2xAP, 2xEAD) checks were cached today.
Hope yours on the way too...
I thought this will give some hope to you.
Mine reached USCIS on July-3rd around 6:00am. All 6 (2x485, 2xAP, 2xEAD) checks were cached today.
Hope yours on the way too...
pappu
01-07 07:18 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/
Please stay tuned for a massive IV campaign coming up. We will be announcing it tonight on the forums.
Contact your chapter leaders for various state chapter action items.
Please stay tuned for a massive IV campaign coming up. We will be announcing it tonight on the forums.
Contact your chapter leaders for various state chapter action items.
No comments:
Post a Comment