makemygc
07-18 11:56 AM
some people r thinking of flower campaign to atlanta center so as to speed up slowed down processin. if anyone is interested...
http://www..com/discussion-forums/atlanta-perm/4827173/last-page/
I don't think it's going to work again plus its only going to annoy people at USCIS as they have to assign someone to accept and trash those flowers.
http://www..com/discussion-forums/atlanta-perm/4827173/last-page/
I don't think it's going to work again plus its only going to annoy people at USCIS as they have to assign someone to accept and trash those flowers.
wallpaper dog bounty hunter family
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
mrajatish
09-02 11:54 AM
Let us restart the Washington state chapter - all interested volunteers, please email me at mrajatish@gmail.com to kickstart the process.
-Raj
-Raj
2011 dog bounty hunter family tree.
desi3933
06-25 12:34 PM
You could argue that you don't need to have a job now, just that you need to be in a "same or similar"position when the 485 is approved. if your priority date is very backlogged, you have lots of time to find a job.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
As per this memo -
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for “same or similar” employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
While I-485 can be approved when PD is current, however, it can be denied anytime (does not matter if PD is current or not). The conditions for job offer must be maintained at all times while I-485 is pending.
With this, I am not sure, the defense of PD is not current is going to work.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
As per this memo -
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for “same or similar” employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
While I-485 can be approved when PD is current, however, it can be denied anytime (does not matter if PD is current or not). The conditions for job offer must be maintained at all times while I-485 is pending.
With this, I am not sure, the defense of PD is not current is going to work.
more...
usirit
11-21 12:24 AM
By the way, what "...You are from ROW..." means :o
Templarian
11-26 11:09 AM
While I quite like TheCanadian's idea, you can use the one I made. :lol:
more...
smahwal
08-26 12:09 PM
I have been noticing soft LUDs on my EAD and 485. The EAD was issued about 2 months ago and I have had 2 soft luds on that and on the 485 in the last week.
Any ideas on what that means?
Any ideas on what that means?
2010 dog bounty hunter family pictures. DOG THE BOUNTY HUNTER SEASON 3
shana04
07-16 06:38 PM
I am not sure why the previous employer is required to provide a response to the RFE. It is the current employer (or the petitioner) who should respond to the RFE.
My previous employer had a copy of I-94 (previous) so requested him to provide that. He ack that he had but was trying to get excuses as to not provide it.
Can you provide more details on the RFE ?
RFE was to provide my spouse status before applying for I 485 and one of the document was to provide I-94 (as there won't be any initial status document for dependent, it was only H4 stamping in the passport)
Attorney answered this question
My previous employer had a copy of I-94 (previous) so requested him to provide that. He ack that he had but was trying to get excuses as to not provide it.
Can you provide more details on the RFE ?
RFE was to provide my spouse status before applying for I 485 and one of the document was to provide I-94 (as there won't be any initial status document for dependent, it was only H4 stamping in the passport)
Attorney answered this question
more...
GCHope2011
02-05 06:31 AM
Hi EveryOne,
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
Congrats ivar - you are now a free man!!
My humble request - please do contribute to the cause that held you back for so long. If not financially, then through your efforts in advocacy & legislator meetings - every little bit counts.
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
Congrats ivar - you are now a free man!!
My humble request - please do contribute to the cause that held you back for so long. If not financially, then through your efforts in advocacy & legislator meetings - every little bit counts.
hair Dog Bounty Hunter Family Tree.
burnt
12-12 03:39 PM
No questions asked about visa or 485. Just had to show my passport and AP document :)
Thanks for the response. My wife has started working on EAD. So when she comes back, will she have to enter on AP? And as you said, they would not ask for I-485 receipts...Correct? I don't have I-485 receipts and I am just scared that if they ask for it, and I don't have it, then what happens...
Do you know of someone who was asked for the I-485 receipts on their way back?
Thanks for the response. My wife has started working on EAD. So when she comes back, will she have to enter on AP? And as you said, they would not ask for I-485 receipts...Correct? I don't have I-485 receipts and I am just scared that if they ask for it, and I don't have it, then what happens...
Do you know of someone who was asked for the I-485 receipts on their way back?
more...
chanvizgran
03-06 08:48 AM
Hi BPforGC,
Could you please provide me the contact number for nebraska service center and thanks for your advice.
Could you please provide me the contact number for nebraska service center and thanks for your advice.
hot dog bounty hunter family
ushkand
07-21 12:05 AM
Thanks for the responses. I think I will call USCIS and inquire and just to be on the safe side will send in a G325A separately with a letter. Ofcourse, will try getting a response from my attorney's office too. Thanks again.
more...
house “Dog the Bounty Hunter,”
aamchimumbai
12-08 12:16 PM
Vik352,
I am in the same situation as yours. I am assuming that this is your first AP application and not renewal, right?
In my case, I am on H1 and my wife is on H4. For both, visa is NOT stamped in our passports. We received a letter from NSC saying that both our AP applications were approved on 10/21/08. I received my approved AP application but we never received hers. We followed up with the NSC and local USCIS office both confirmed that our application were approved. Therefore, she left US to visit India on 11/15/08. Two days later after her departure we received RFE on photos. Weird. Anyways. We did respond her RFE few days ago.
But now the question is can she return with her approved AP, which may have a later date than her departure OR we need to go for H1/H4 stamping. I am not sure what will happen at the POE when we show up with our APs.
Anyone in similar situation?
Thanks.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
I am in the same situation as yours. I am assuming that this is your first AP application and not renewal, right?
In my case, I am on H1 and my wife is on H4. For both, visa is NOT stamped in our passports. We received a letter from NSC saying that both our AP applications were approved on 10/21/08. I received my approved AP application but we never received hers. We followed up with the NSC and local USCIS office both confirmed that our application were approved. Therefore, she left US to visit India on 11/15/08. Two days later after her departure we received RFE on photos. Weird. Anyways. We did respond her RFE few days ago.
But now the question is can she return with her approved AP, which may have a later date than her departure OR we need to go for H1/H4 stamping. I am not sure what will happen at the POE when we show up with our APs.
Anyone in similar situation?
Thanks.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
tattoo dog bounty hunter family
aristotle
01-31 01:27 PM
Revoking the previously approved I140 doesn't invalidate the H1 extension/transfer. But to get further extensions/transfers, you need A) labor pending for one year OR B) approved I140 from the new employer.
more...
pictures dog bounty hunter family
MerciesOfInjustices
06-07 11:21 PM
Well said!
dresses Watch Dog the Bounty Hunter
iv_only_hope
02-17 11:00 PM
What abt the other categories which seem to be current 4th 5th religious workers etc. Where will their visas go if they stay current?
more...
makeup “Dog the Bounty Hunter” fans
xgoogle
08-20 01:52 PM
Yes even our received dates are different, mine was Sep 28 and my wife's was Sep 27. Receipt #s are SRC07285**** and SRC07284**** respectively.
For me and my spouse [derivative] only the last 2 digits differ. I got approved from TSC on 8/8/8 and received the card on 8/15/8. My spouses status still says:
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On September 28, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
PD: 3/3/6
For me and my spouse [derivative] only the last 2 digits differ. I got approved from TSC on 8/8/8 and received the card on 8/15/8. My spouses status still says:
Current Status: Case received and pending.
On September 28, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
PD: 3/3/6
girlfriend Dog-the-ounty-hunter.jpg
imneedy
02-04 10:33 AM
Does it make sense to change status to h4 from f1 before my spouse goes out of country and come back on h4 instead of AP?
hairstyles dog bounty hunter family
TeddyKoochu
01-06 09:11 AM
Please advise if 5.5+ years of experience and an Advanced degree in Electronics would qualify me for porting me from EB2 to EB1. I have been waiting to file for my I-140 over an year now but things aren't looking anywhere near to it.
So just wanted to understand if this was even legally possible.
Even I have a very similar question. I have bachelors in engineering from a prominent college in India with almost 10 Years of work experience in IT. My EB2 I140 is approved but I have not been able to apply for I485 as I missed the July 07 window. Please advise if there is a possibility that I can apply for EB1-A. I understand that EB1-B requires a PhD. and EB1-C requires the current / future job to have a global /mnc managerial profile so Iam not eligible for that, I do have managerial experienece from my previous job / positions in India. Please advice if EB1-A also mandates a research profile or can professionals not having a research background also apply. I believe that EB1-A is a self application not a company application. Really appreciate some valued advice.
So just wanted to understand if this was even legally possible.
Even I have a very similar question. I have bachelors in engineering from a prominent college in India with almost 10 Years of work experience in IT. My EB2 I140 is approved but I have not been able to apply for I485 as I missed the July 07 window. Please advise if there is a possibility that I can apply for EB1-A. I understand that EB1-B requires a PhD. and EB1-C requires the current / future job to have a global /mnc managerial profile so Iam not eligible for that, I do have managerial experienece from my previous job / positions in India. Please advice if EB1-A also mandates a research profile or can professionals not having a research background also apply. I believe that EB1-A is a self application not a company application. Really appreciate some valued advice.
perm2gc
07-16 07:14 PM
They have been talking about this lawsuit for a long time now. I wonder when they will actually file it. Though they claim that they will file it this week, I would trust them only when they actually do file the lawsuit.:D
they will file once every attorney made enough money by filing our i485 based on their never going to be filed lawsuit:D
they will file once every attorney made enough money by filing our i485 based on their never going to be filed lawsuit:D
EkAurAaya
06-01 01:49 PM
unfortunately anything that says/reads no cap on h1 will be shot down as soon as it takes off...
0 Yorumlar