linuxra
01-13 12:53 PM
Hi anybody can have any idea,My employment record and everything is good
no way related to their things will it affect my gc
no way related to their things will it affect my gc
wallpaper Nicki Minaj Pink Friday
Sakthisagar
10-14 10:32 AM
Source The OH law firm
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
10/14/2010: USCIS Pre-Registration Requirement Rule-Making Agenda in Nonimmigrant and Immigrant Proceedings - How Soon?
The USCIS has been pushing proposals to change procedures of filing of nonimmigrant petitions as well as I-485 applications for sometime. The agency placed these proposals on its agenda this year and surely enough, it has initiated the first part of its agenda in its rule-making vault. The agency drafted and has been seeking the OMB approval for proposed regulation to require pre-registration of the H-1B petitions, apparently as part of its business transformation transition program. It appears that the proposed pre-registration requirement in the H-1B petition process may not bring a drastic impact on the H-1B petitioning employers and the alien beneficiaries. However, its agenda for requiring I-485 applicants to pre-register their intents to file I-485 applications regardless of the visa number availability in the Visa Bulletin will have a significant impact on the immigrants because the proposed rule would discontinue the concurrent filing process for employment-based adjustment of status applicants and would require that an alien seeking to immigrate based upon a classification that is subject to numerical limitations must be the beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition prior to proceeding through a revised adjustment of status process. In plain language, it means that it would terminate the current I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing procedure. The agency justification was to streamline the overall I-485 process and to mitigate visa retrogression through improved estimation of immigrant visa availability. This proposal is still in the vault of the USCIS rule-making agenda with the initial estimation of the proposed rule initiation action in October 2010. We have no information as to whether or not the agency will keep this schedule or will rather turn it over to FY 2011. Whether it initiates sooner or later, it will not have an immediate impact on the foreign workers seeking a green card as the rule-making process will drag into months to come in year 2011. But this is something one has to keep an eye on the development of the USCIS schedules of changes in application procedures. For the reasons, this site will closely monitor the agency's movement from here on. Please stay tuned to this web site for the development of this news.
The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/)
10/14/2010: USCIS Pre-Registration Requirement Rule-Making Agenda in Nonimmigrant and Immigrant Proceedings - How Soon?
The USCIS has been pushing proposals to change procedures of filing of nonimmigrant petitions as well as I-485 applications for sometime. The agency placed these proposals on its agenda this year and surely enough, it has initiated the first part of its agenda in its rule-making vault. The agency drafted and has been seeking the OMB approval for proposed regulation to require pre-registration of the H-1B petitions, apparently as part of its business transformation transition program. It appears that the proposed pre-registration requirement in the H-1B petition process may not bring a drastic impact on the H-1B petitioning employers and the alien beneficiaries. However, its agenda for requiring I-485 applicants to pre-register their intents to file I-485 applications regardless of the visa number availability in the Visa Bulletin will have a significant impact on the immigrants because the proposed rule would discontinue the concurrent filing process for employment-based adjustment of status applicants and would require that an alien seeking to immigrate based upon a classification that is subject to numerical limitations must be the beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition prior to proceeding through a revised adjustment of status process. In plain language, it means that it would terminate the current I-140 and I-485 concurrent filing procedure. The agency justification was to streamline the overall I-485 process and to mitigate visa retrogression through improved estimation of immigrant visa availability. This proposal is still in the vault of the USCIS rule-making agenda with the initial estimation of the proposed rule initiation action in October 2010. We have no information as to whether or not the agency will keep this schedule or will rather turn it over to FY 2011. Whether it initiates sooner or later, it will not have an immediate impact on the foreign workers seeking a green card as the rule-making process will drag into months to come in year 2011. But this is something one has to keep an eye on the development of the USCIS schedules of changes in application procedures. For the reasons, this site will closely monitor the agency's movement from here on. Please stay tuned to this web site for the development of this news.
anuh1
04-23 02:18 PM
If the client is ready to offer employment to you, client will take care of everthing. Why you worry about the law suite? My best guess is he is just threatening you because he will loose money on you. If you want you can scare him saying that you will put a case against him in USCIS by various reasons.
2011 Nicki Minaj Pink Friday Album
mundram
04-20 12:03 PM
Recently, I was in the similar situation but with H4 dependents.
Here was the response from my lawyer:
"the I-94 card should reflect that date. What I would like them to do is go to their local port of entry (probably airport), to have the I-94 cards corrected. It does not need to be the same airport that they entered through."
The airport authorities easily updated the "until" date. However, they told me that the system recognizes the exit date based on the visa validity date. But safe to get it updated from your local airport.
Here was the response from my lawyer:
"the I-94 card should reflect that date. What I would like them to do is go to their local port of entry (probably airport), to have the I-94 cards corrected. It does not need to be the same airport that they entered through."
The airport authorities easily updated the "until" date. However, they told me that the system recognizes the exit date based on the visa validity date. But safe to get it updated from your local airport.
more...
sirinme
12-02 02:38 PM
Not sure if I can make it in person, but I will contribute $100. This is on top of my monthly contribution.
kicca
01-31 05:29 PM
^^^
more...
eb3_nepa
04-13 10:46 AM
Will IV be trying to campaign/lobby against the 180 day delay?
2010 Nicki Minaj#39;s upcoming debut
vbkris77
04-22 11:20 PM
First of all, this is a wrong forum to went our your points about illegals.. We in IV encourage a legal immigration. But the moment we start excluding people, the list can go on and on.. You start with so called illegasl today (with due sympathy for using that word..), but this exclusion will go on to legals, new doctors, engineers willing to come, settle and work in USA. Remember this is a land of immigrants. If you have any doubt, just look at the new bills introduced by senators to effectively kill H1B program the only legal option for most educated to come to US.
Lets for instance say we want everyone to go back to their own countries.. Where do you want to draw that line to go back, 1980?, 1900? how about 1600??
Grow up and learn to innovate new ways to get employed and live a happy life. Don't try to ruin the very foundation on which this country is built. Trust me there are more patriots in this forum than you could imagine..
Lets for instance say we want everyone to go back to their own countries.. Where do you want to draw that line to go back, 1980?, 1900? how about 1600??
Grow up and learn to innovate new ways to get employed and live a happy life. Don't try to ruin the very foundation on which this country is built. Trust me there are more patriots in this forum than you could imagine..
more...
sheela
10-05 09:58 AM
Recently a friend of mine hot has GC approved. He is EB2, PD Dec 2005.
Nothing makes sense.
Thanks
Senthil
hi, Do you know: How recent, which nationality, when was his/her aos filed
Nothing makes sense.
Thanks
Senthil
hi, Do you know: How recent, which nationality, when was his/her aos filed
hair Nicki Minaj
wandmaker
08-11 06:45 PM
For example, for my I-140 under EB2-NIW, NSC processing date shows February 27, 2007; and I filed in April 2007. But, I got approved. (no complaints). Technically, they shouldn't have picked up mine.
You are lucky to have your 140 approved :) There are many people that I know, whos files are still waiting to be dusted.
See, quasi-citizens i.e., people applying for Naturalization have better luck because their local congressman will be making calls and putting fire under USCIS ass because these are potential voters in November. So, they have some leverage. But people who are waiting for green card are no good now... wait for 5 years after you get it, you may have luck in getting their attention.
Focus your energy on IV activites (state chapter, campaign and etc), spend time with the family, and live your day to day life. We will get there soon enough with everyones' support ($$$$)
You are lucky to have your 140 approved :) There are many people that I know, whos files are still waiting to be dusted.
See, quasi-citizens i.e., people applying for Naturalization have better luck because their local congressman will be making calls and putting fire under USCIS ass because these are potential voters in November. So, they have some leverage. But people who are waiting for green card are no good now... wait for 5 years after you get it, you may have luck in getting their attention.
Focus your energy on IV activites (state chapter, campaign and etc), spend time with the family, and live your day to day life. We will get there soon enough with everyones' support ($$$$)
more...
RattuRani
06-10 09:34 PM
The USCIS cannot be blamed for the quota mess. That is set by Congress. Now you can legitimately accuse them of sloth and indifference. But not greed. They're not a profit center for the US.
The right place to lobby for change is in Congress. As I've stated in other posts, the appetite doesn't seem to be there right this instant. Maybe if the economy comes roaring back in a couple years, then the political tide will once again turn in favor of reform.
The right place to lobby for change is in Congress. As I've stated in other posts, the appetite doesn't seem to be there right this instant. Maybe if the economy comes roaring back in a couple years, then the political tide will once again turn in favor of reform.
hot Nicki Minaj Pink Friday Album
sumansk
07-16 06:49 PM
AILA/AILF please do some good work other than chiding for spreading rumours.I beleive IV and their internal contacts..and totally beleive this infor from LOGICBHAI...
I suggest AILA does some really good work for the legal guys....
I suggest AILA does some really good work for the legal guys....
more...
house album release Pink Friday.
kpchal2
03-03 07:42 AM
Hello forum gurus
I am planning on moving from Company A to Company B. I have an approved I-140 from Company A which was approved in Sept 2007 and also applied for 485 on July 2nd 2007. It has been almost 1.5 yrs since I applied for 485 and I-140 approval.
Planning to move from Company A to Company B. Company A will not revoke my I-140 that is for sure. I am moving to a good company with 1000+ workforce and in an upcoming industry. It is not a consulting firm. It is a product based company. My wife is currently on EAD and is relying on it to work.
What are the odds that my AC21 may be wrongfully denied. I am having a hard time sleeping while thinking about this. I am on my H1. Can she still use her EAD while we file a petition for Motion to Reopen in the event that the 485 is wrongfully denied or does she have to change to H4 immediatly.
Can some one share your thoughts.
thanks in advance
I am planning on moving from Company A to Company B. I have an approved I-140 from Company A which was approved in Sept 2007 and also applied for 485 on July 2nd 2007. It has been almost 1.5 yrs since I applied for 485 and I-140 approval.
Planning to move from Company A to Company B. Company A will not revoke my I-140 that is for sure. I am moving to a good company with 1000+ workforce and in an upcoming industry. It is not a consulting firm. It is a product based company. My wife is currently on EAD and is relying on it to work.
What are the odds that my AC21 may be wrongfully denied. I am having a hard time sleeping while thinking about this. I am on my H1. Can she still use her EAD while we file a petition for Motion to Reopen in the event that the 485 is wrongfully denied or does she have to change to H4 immediatly.
Can some one share your thoughts.
thanks in advance
tattoo pink friday pictures. Minaj#39
Almond
07-13 08:51 PM
I think it will change to green if someone likes you enough to vote for you:)
more...
pictures Nicki Minaj Pink Friday Album
meridiani.planum
04-01 04:18 AM
Hello Everyone -
I am trying to understand importance of PD after one files 485. I filed my 485 in Jul 2007 and got FP in Sep 07. Then I got a notice for in person interview with USCIS officer. At the end of interview the USCIS officer indicated that the case is approved but will have to wait for Visa # to get the GC. The interview had happened in the month of Feb when visa for EB2 was Unavailable. My PD is Nov 06 and I am just trying to understand how this process will work.
Will my GC be processed when the dates on visa bulletin will be show have nov 06 or it will just get processed as there is no reason to hold the adjudication? Background check or any other
ur PD is 2006-EB2-India and you were called for an interview? thats odd. the interview typically when the case is close to approval, why are they bothering with your case so soon.. something is not adding up
I am trying to understand importance of PD after one files 485. I filed my 485 in Jul 2007 and got FP in Sep 07. Then I got a notice for in person interview with USCIS officer. At the end of interview the USCIS officer indicated that the case is approved but will have to wait for Visa # to get the GC. The interview had happened in the month of Feb when visa for EB2 was Unavailable. My PD is Nov 06 and I am just trying to understand how this process will work.
Will my GC be processed when the dates on visa bulletin will be show have nov 06 or it will just get processed as there is no reason to hold the adjudication? Background check or any other
ur PD is 2006-EB2-India and you were called for an interview? thats odd. the interview typically when the case is close to approval, why are they bothering with your case so soon.. something is not adding up
dresses Nicki Minaj - Pink Friday CD
Juan28210
11-03 05:16 PM
Here's my exact situation:
- My employer is company A
- I am assigned by Company A to Company B (corp-to-corp)
- Company B assigned me to Client X
- I want to move to Company Z
- Company Z would assign me to the same Client X
My non-compete clause says something like... Employee(I) cannot work to client of Company A within 1 year of leaving Company A
Now, is client X considered as client of company A? I'm thinking that company B is the client of company A. Thus, it should be okay if I move to company Z and be assigned to client X.
Any thoughts?
- My employer is company A
- I am assigned by Company A to Company B (corp-to-corp)
- Company B assigned me to Client X
- I want to move to Company Z
- Company Z would assign me to the same Client X
My non-compete clause says something like... Employee(I) cannot work to client of Company A within 1 year of leaving Company A
Now, is client X considered as client of company A? I'm thinking that company B is the client of company A. Thus, it should be okay if I move to company Z and be assigned to client X.
Any thoughts?
more...
makeup Friday” femcee–Nicki Minaj
kumarh1b
01-28 05:16 PM
Can some please advice me how to proceed further Please find the denial notice for your reference. All your inputs means a lot to me. Please help me and guide in proper direction.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
girlfriend nicki minaj pink friday album
sbdol
08-05 06:33 PM
...
What if all the background adjudication of 485 is done in 1 year and then we change from EB3 to EB2, its not going to affect the current 485 ? It will just put the file in a better category ?
If every EB3 is ported to EB2 then EB2 will retrogress to 2001 and EB3 will become current.
What if all the background adjudication of 485 is done in 1 year and then we change from EB3 to EB2, its not going to affect the current 485 ? It will just put the file in a better category ?
If every EB3 is ported to EB2 then EB2 will retrogress to 2001 and EB3 will become current.
hairstyles Nicki Minaj Official Album
black_logs
04-12 04:09 PM
Labor substitution is bad for those who can't find one and good for those who found one. I didn't find one so it's bad for me. But 1 thing the DOL came up with the substitution rule is that 45 days labor expiry rule. Just can't believe the administration can harrass people to that level. When labor substitution is in place what's the point of this 45 days rule ???
forever_waiting
01-06 02:21 PM
It has happened several times in the past when a members thought a certain bill had a lot of scope...then started advocating on the forums for IV to take up the cause and start lobbying for it...and if it didnt work out or no one showed interest, IV core team ended up receiving brickbats that they never put in the neccessary efforts. This is just a fact.
The advocacy and lobbying for any bill doesnt follow the "top-down" but the "bottom-up" approach. IV can coordnate lobbying and advocacy at the national level but requires our members across the country to meet with their lawmakers to get specific responses on whether they will support that bill.
IV usually lobbies or works on bills that seem to have some traction in Congress. If members are very sure that there are other bills that should be focussed on - they should gather together the numbers (i.e. members who think this will help), meet with lawmakers in their districts - try to find co-sponsors for the bills. Then, if truly a momentum exists - the IV core team can step in and help with additional lobbying.
I have met 3 congressmen in my area - one is an anti-immig and the other two fully support EB legislation but at this point are judging the climate in the new Congress.
As another member stated IV is "me and you". And the bottomline is asking IV to take up a cause is not the right approach. Advocacy and the momentum has to be started by the members.
The advocacy and lobbying for any bill doesnt follow the "top-down" but the "bottom-up" approach. IV can coordnate lobbying and advocacy at the national level but requires our members across the country to meet with their lawmakers to get specific responses on whether they will support that bill.
IV usually lobbies or works on bills that seem to have some traction in Congress. If members are very sure that there are other bills that should be focussed on - they should gather together the numbers (i.e. members who think this will help), meet with lawmakers in their districts - try to find co-sponsors for the bills. Then, if truly a momentum exists - the IV core team can step in and help with additional lobbying.
I have met 3 congressmen in my area - one is an anti-immig and the other two fully support EB legislation but at this point are judging the climate in the new Congress.
As another member stated IV is "me and you". And the bottomline is asking IV to take up a cause is not the right approach. Advocacy and the momentum has to be started by the members.
arihant
10-26 10:43 AM
last year i applied for H1 transfer in the midweek of Oct-05 and got the approval on mid week of Feb-06. :cool:
Thanks Masti for your response.
Anybody else have any experiences from this year?
Thanks.
Thanks Masti for your response.
Anybody else have any experiences from this year?
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment