rsb
06-29 02:11 PM
Thanks logiclife for you detailed answer.
wallpaper WWE CM Punk 2nd.
Laasya05
01-22 05:10 PM
No you don't need to be on payroll before filing the PERM. That is what I did. GC can be applied for future employment.
so can we file LC perm with an employer while on H4 and move to H1 little bit later?
----------------------------
Contribute $320
signed up for monthly contribution $20
PD:-August 2003 (EB3)
LC approved
I-140 approved
I-485 did not file
Spouse on H4.
so can we file LC perm with an employer while on H4 and move to H1 little bit later?
----------------------------
Contribute $320
signed up for monthly contribution $20
PD:-August 2003 (EB3)
LC approved
I-140 approved
I-485 did not file
Spouse on H4.
REQUIRE_GC
07-12 10:47 AM
Thanks a lot for your valuable input.
But I beleive all the input you mentioned, would be applicable for all kind of employer (Bigger or smaller) and get the RFE for ability to pay. I would like to know if you join the real small emplyer (about 35 employee) would it necessarly cause any other postential issue and/or must be a chance of getting the RFE as joining the such a small employer?
Please let me know.
Thanks for all your input in advance.
I do not think # of employee would be an issue for USCIS as long as they are able to pay you decent salary. One of my freind got GC approved with 10 Employee company. The key is Your company's attorney / officer should be able to respond RFE on time
But I beleive all the input you mentioned, would be applicable for all kind of employer (Bigger or smaller) and get the RFE for ability to pay. I would like to know if you join the real small emplyer (about 35 employee) would it necessarly cause any other postential issue and/or must be a chance of getting the RFE as joining the such a small employer?
Please let me know.
Thanks for all your input in advance.
I do not think # of employee would be an issue for USCIS as long as they are able to pay you decent salary. One of my freind got GC approved with 10 Employee company. The key is Your company's attorney / officer should be able to respond RFE on time
2011 Cm-punk-nexus_crop_450x300
sharadara
09-02 10:17 AM
Thanks GCDreamer and sbmallik.
Are you saying that an H4 visa holder cannot work online for an Indian co. and earn Indian income while residing in the US?
Are you saying that an H4 visa holder cannot work online for an Indian co. and earn Indian income while residing in the US?
more...
gc4me
04-23 10:13 AM
This email is useless as nowhere in the email the alien's name is mentioned.
In USCIS website you only have the option to add a case with the receipt number. They don't verify whether this case belongs to you or not.
If your company/attorney gives you a receipt # that belongs to another person�s I-140 application, still you will get this email.
The only option you have is to request for a copy of I-140 using G-639 form under FOIA.
If you subscribe on USCIS website you will get email indicating and saying like:
The following is the latest information on your case status
Receipt Number:XXXXXX (i maksed it to hide my info)
Application Type: I140 , IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status:
This case has been approved. On June 12, 2006, an approval notice was mailed. If 30 days have passed and you have not received this notice, you may wish to verify or update your address. To update your address, please speak to an Immigration Information Officer during business hours.
If you have questions or concerns about your application or the case status results listed above, or if you have not received a decision or advice from USCIS within the projected processing time frame*, please contact the National Customer Service Center.
National Customer Service Center (800) 375-5283.
*The projected processing time frame can be found on the receipt notice that you received from the USCIS.
*** Please do not respond to this e-mail message.
Sincerely,
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
In USCIS website you only have the option to add a case with the receipt number. They don't verify whether this case belongs to you or not.
If your company/attorney gives you a receipt # that belongs to another person�s I-140 application, still you will get this email.
The only option you have is to request for a copy of I-140 using G-639 form under FOIA.
If you subscribe on USCIS website you will get email indicating and saying like:
The following is the latest information on your case status
Receipt Number:XXXXXX (i maksed it to hide my info)
Application Type: I140 , IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER
Current Status:
This case has been approved. On June 12, 2006, an approval notice was mailed. If 30 days have passed and you have not received this notice, you may wish to verify or update your address. To update your address, please speak to an Immigration Information Officer during business hours.
If you have questions or concerns about your application or the case status results listed above, or if you have not received a decision or advice from USCIS within the projected processing time frame*, please contact the National Customer Service Center.
National Customer Service Center (800) 375-5283.
*The projected processing time frame can be found on the receipt notice that you received from the USCIS.
*** Please do not respond to this e-mail message.
Sincerely,
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
tiger05
03-01 07:45 PM
Hi Rocky,
Thanks for your reply
Ya I was on unpaid vacation and 2006 was my first year. I will discuss with my attorney also.
Thanks for your reply
Ya I was on unpaid vacation and 2006 was my first year. I will discuss with my attorney also.
more...
greencard_fever
09-03 10:25 PM
Jeez! This is a really deplorable situation. USCIS has all the information and they are asking AILA for help? Why not just ask the guys who have their AOS cases pending? It's so unfortunate that this needs to be done.
Well Said..we can help USCIS (Volunteer) to process our Application on time:D:D:D:D
Well Said..we can help USCIS (Volunteer) to process our Application on time:D:D:D:D
2010 WWE CM Punk Aftershock Top
shreekhand
04-28 07:34 PM
Go Utah! ... Go Texas !
more...
rahul98
07-17 07:07 PM
Great job IV..I am proud to be a part of IV.
Contributed $100...
Order Details - Jul 17, 2007 16:16 GMT-07:00
Google Order #10xxxxxxxxxxx3
Contributed $100...
Order Details - Jul 17, 2007 16:16 GMT-07:00
Google Order #10xxxxxxxxxxx3
hair cm punk - sports, wrestling,
calaway42
10-04 12:42 AM
lol .. uh-oh.. I think i did something wrong..
I reviewed the tuturial.. and during step2.. there should be a strip of rectengle hanging on top of it? (In my case on the left/right side..I am making a vertical one) hmmmm...
My steps..
1. I made a New File..
2. Made "layer 1" and made a 20x500 vertical rentangle with rantengle marquee tool.
3. filled it in with paint bucket
4. CTRL +click on the layer that contains my rectangle.. then moved it 1 up and 1 left..(just the whole thing moved)
5. made "layer 2" and with paint bucket I filled it with white..(BUT!! big BUT!! :) I still had Marquee tool on my rectengle.. and it looked like nothing happened to layer 1 or 2 after filling it in)
6. then CTRL +click on the layer 1.. and clicked "layer 2" when it was highlighted....
what did i do wrong? :*(
I reviewed the tuturial.. and during step2.. there should be a strip of rectengle hanging on top of it? (In my case on the left/right side..I am making a vertical one) hmmmm...
My steps..
1. I made a New File..
2. Made "layer 1" and made a 20x500 vertical rentangle with rantengle marquee tool.
3. filled it in with paint bucket
4. CTRL +click on the layer that contains my rectangle.. then moved it 1 up and 1 left..(just the whole thing moved)
5. made "layer 2" and with paint bucket I filled it with white..(BUT!! big BUT!! :) I still had Marquee tool on my rectengle.. and it looked like nothing happened to layer 1 or 2 after filling it in)
6. then CTRL +click on the layer 1.. and clicked "layer 2" when it was highlighted....
what did i do wrong? :*(
more...
singhsa3
04-30 05:11 PM
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly help me develop a model. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
So far I have the following rational (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Facts
1. Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
2. Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
3. FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
4. Per FLC data, 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47,251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumptions
1. Each labor application uses in 2.2 visas.
2. Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 180,000 BEC labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
3. Total BEC visas requirements 180,000*2.2= 396,000
4. NIW applications are negligible.
5. Retrogressed countries account for 50% of visas used.
Calculations
Scenario 1: Visa processing time is Zero
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(47,251+6000)x2.2=18,306
3. BEC visas remaining as on 10/01/08= 396,000-20,173-18,306= 357,521
Scenario 2: Visa processing time is one year. Note: it affects only the applications certified within the preceding year.
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20,173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(6000)x2.2=122,259
3. BEC visas (And NOT labor) remaining as on 10/01/08 = 396,000-122,259= 273,741.
What it means:
BEC contained labors from both retrogressed and non-retrogressed countries. Thus, in FY’08 and FY’09 visa consumptions will be attributed to BEC mainly. Once this backlog is cleared, the normal consumption (Supply = Demand) should resume. But it will also mean that there will always be 2-3 years wait.
Conclusion:
Suggested Cut-off dates for India as on 10/01/2008: ??? TBD.
Last update:
Time 11.32 AM ET , 05/01/08.
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly help me develop a model. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
So far I have the following rational (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Facts
1. Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
2. Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
3. FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
4. Per FLC data, 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47,251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumptions
1. Each labor application uses in 2.2 visas.
2. Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 180,000 BEC labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
3. Total BEC visas requirements 180,000*2.2= 396,000
4. NIW applications are negligible.
5. Retrogressed countries account for 50% of visas used.
Calculations
Scenario 1: Visa processing time is Zero
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(47,251+6000)x2.2=18,306
3. BEC visas remaining as on 10/01/08= 396,000-20,173-18,306= 357,521
Scenario 2: Visa processing time is one year. Note: it affects only the applications certified within the preceding year.
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20,173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(6000)x2.2=122,259
3. BEC visas (And NOT labor) remaining as on 10/01/08 = 396,000-122,259= 273,741.
What it means:
BEC contained labors from both retrogressed and non-retrogressed countries. Thus, in FY’08 and FY’09 visa consumptions will be attributed to BEC mainly. Once this backlog is cleared, the normal consumption (Supply = Demand) should resume. But it will also mean that there will always be 2-3 years wait.
Conclusion:
Suggested Cut-off dates for India as on 10/01/2008: ??? TBD.
Last update:
Time 11.32 AM ET , 05/01/08.
hot CM Punk troubled Randy Orton
chanduv23
04-21 01:44 PM
If I485 is denied for wrong reason (due to USCIS error), I understand that the application and attorney can file a MTR, but during the time till the case is reopened again, is it legal for the employee to work on EAD?
My assumption here is once the denial notice is received, it may take few weeks/months to gather the necessary information, send it to USCIS and then the case gets reopened.
This is a grey area subject to interpretations. Talk to an Anttorney - the reason I say this is - when your 485 gets denied wrongfully (your Attorney will tell you if the REASON was wrongful) - say AC21 old employer revoke 140 after 180 days - then an MOTIC whould resolve your issue - which typically takes a few weeks to 2 months or a bit more. Whether you stay here or work here - it is the same - no "Particular status". Once your MOTIC gets approved, you are back in status - so it is a big grey area subject to interpretation and Attorneys have different views based on how conservative one wants to be.
If you are sure your 485 can get denied for a "right reason" - then MTR or Appeal may not work - so you have to work out other options.
My assumption here is once the denial notice is received, it may take few weeks/months to gather the necessary information, send it to USCIS and then the case gets reopened.
This is a grey area subject to interpretations. Talk to an Anttorney - the reason I say this is - when your 485 gets denied wrongfully (your Attorney will tell you if the REASON was wrongful) - say AC21 old employer revoke 140 after 180 days - then an MOTIC whould resolve your issue - which typically takes a few weeks to 2 months or a bit more. Whether you stay here or work here - it is the same - no "Particular status". Once your MOTIC gets approved, you are back in status - so it is a big grey area subject to interpretation and Attorneys have different views based on how conservative one wants to be.
If you are sure your 485 can get denied for a "right reason" - then MTR or Appeal may not work - so you have to work out other options.
more...
house NEXUS wallpaper - WWE
prince_waiting
12-12 02:28 PM
I am in.....No complaints about that......
tattoo losers Wwe+nexus+symbol
casinoroyale
08-22 09:47 AM
Bumping so that this thread can get traction. Looks like mostly GC related traffic comes to IV.
more...
pictures wwe nexus cm punk wallpapers. New Nexus; New Nexus. rekhyt. Dec 12, 05:51 AM
Blog Feeds
09-18 10:20 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4VfI8ZwPjCnEgSIRduaQlTT-Ak2yUMZRRWDoVfbUlnYeZy5roWpvOqRFk6N1MmaSpD32oemuQzC9io6tZVqh1HH2AzvVTRhqMz_e-Hpc8pY45I0HPf0nm24DH_dUEx5OE9dDTe2Ixj_4/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4VfI8ZwPjCnEgSIRduaQlTT-Ak2yUMZRRWDoVfbUlnYeZy5roWpvOqRFk6N1MmaSpD32oemuQzC9io6tZVqh1HH2AzvVTRhqMz_e-Hpc8pY45I0HPf0nm24DH_dUEx5OE9dDTe2Ixj_4/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4VfI8ZwPjCnEgSIRduaQlTT-Ak2yUMZRRWDoVfbUlnYeZy5roWpvOqRFk6N1MmaSpD32oemuQzC9io6tZVqh1HH2AzvVTRhqMz_e-Hpc8pY45I0HPf0nm24DH_dUEx5OE9dDTe2Ixj_4/s320/Wilson+Liar.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4VfI8ZwPjCnEgSIRduaQlTT-Ak2yUMZRRWDoVfbUlnYeZy5roWpvOqRFk6N1MmaSpD32oemuQzC9io6tZVqh1HH2AzvVTRhqMz_e-Hpc8pY45I0HPf0nm24DH_dUEx5OE9dDTe2Ixj_4/s1600-h/Wilson+Liar.jpg)During President Obama's address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, Congressman Joe Wilson (R. SC), shouted "LIAR!" when President Obama stated that the proposed health care plan would not cover "illegal aliens." Now, Joe Wilson said he should know this because he once was an immigration lawyer (http://www.riehlworldview.com/carnivorous_conservative/2009/09/rep-joe-wilson-speaks-to-rwv.html). Whether that meant immigration from or to South Carolina, I am not sure, but one thing is for sure, no one I know ever knew Joe Wilson the immigration lawyer. If by "immigration lawyer" Mr. Wilson meant that he once helped an immigrant get deported, I am not sure that really counts. But if "Joe the Immigration Lawyer" is like "Joe the Plumber," then maybe he thinks he really was one.
After all, an immigration lawyer would likely be able to understand what exactly the law means when it says that only citizens and permanent residents are covered under the Obama plan. What has caused Joe Wilson to react like this, besides a serious lack of self control, is the provision in the proposed legislation that eliminates the requirement of using the "SAVE" system to verify whether someone who is an immigrant, is legally in the United States. Use of this program has stopped very few undocumented immigrants from getting public benefits, but has stopped literally thousands of U.S. citizens, mostly poor, from obtaining benefits because of their lack of accessible proof of their citizenship.
Factcheck.org has presented a short article on Seven Falsehoods About Health Care (http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/seven-falsehoods-about-health-care/). One of those applies directly to this point:
False: Illegal Immigrants Will Be Covered. One Republican congressman issued
a press release claiming that "5,600,000 Illegal Aliens May Be Covered Under Obamacare (http://steveking.house.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Newsroom.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a294b300-19b9-b4b1-1296-659af869849a&Region_id=&Issue_id=)," and we�ve been peppered with queries about similar claims. They�re not true. In fact, the House bill (the only bill to be formally introduced in its entirety) specifically says that no federal money would be spent on giving illegal immigrants health coverage:
H.R. 3200: Sec 246 � NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS. Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.
Also, under current law, those in the country illegally don�t qualify for federal health programs. Of interest: About half of illegal immigrants have health insurance now, according to the nonpartisan Pew Hispanic Center, which says those who lack insurance do so principally because their employers don�t offer it."Misleading GOP Health Care Claims" (http://factcheck.org/2009/07/misleading-gop-health-care-claims/) July 23 � by Brooks Jackson, Viveca Novak, Lori Robertson and Jess Henig.
I can certainly see both sides of the debate, and, frankly, neither side is being completely honest or clear. What is quite clear, is how immigration, and our broken immigration system, keeps coming up in the context of the debate of national agenda items, such as the health care debate.
Several weeks ago I blogged on the danger that the tone of the Health care debate (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/08/healthcare-debate-and-immigration.html)had for the coming immigration reform debate. Calling the President a Liar during his speech to a joint session to Congress is Exhibit A in what we have in store for the coming debate. If Joe Wilson the Immigration Lawyer can misrepresent the consequences of legislative language as straight forward as these two particular sections, we have to be prepared for the extraordinary misrepresentations of any positive aspects of an immigration reform bill. Whether it is "amnesty," "rewarding law breakers," "open borders," "Liars," or even "destroyers of American culture" we have to understand how to phrase and present the response. Without a doubt, the response from those of us who understand the need to balance immigration reform, with security concerns, and with economic growth has to be not only vocal, but focused. We, as Real Immigration Lawyers, must know the language of the proposed legislation, we must know the myths that are out there, and we need to be vocal in our response.
Next week, more than 40 talk radio hosts are descending on Capital Hill for the FAIR (http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=846)Annual Scare the Crap Out of Congress Boondoggle. The outrageous claims of the downfall of America caused by illegal immigration, along with similarly nutty myths will be presented as facts. Actual real news organization will cite the Center for Immigration Studies as a legitimate source of information. We must be prepared to call into our local radio stations, whose hosts are in D.C. next week, and be prepared to present the facts of immigration. Not by sugar coating the problems that are caused by illegal immigration, but rather by pointing out which specific laws are broken (INA 212(a)(9) anyone?) and how having a comprehensive solution can actually fix the immigration pothole in the legislative superhighway. Immigration Lawyers it is time to Stand Up and be vocal and beat back the immigration myths (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?bc=27924).
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8070452709764975137?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/liar-what-does-health-care-have-to-do.html)
dresses wwe cm punk new nexus logo
Browndog
August 22nd, 2005, 09:47 AM
Wow, both these shots are very impressive, and the technique sounds like it could open up lots of creative aspects to daylight photography. thanks for sharing the technique with us.
more...
makeup wwe nexus 2011 cm punk.
jsb
10-29 03:33 PM
I checked my current labor certification. it has the following details :
ETA FORM 9089
A) PREVAILING WAGE INFORMATION
SOC/O*NET(OES) CODE
15-1031.00
OCCUPATONAL TITLE
COMPUTER SOFTWARE ENGINEER
B) JOB OPPORTUNITY INFORMATION
JOB TITLE: SOFTWARE ENGINEER(THIS IS CURRENT)
C) IDENTIFY THE JOB TITLE OF THE ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE OCCUPATION:
PROGRAMMER ANALYST OR SYSTEMS ANALYST
D) JOB DUTIES
CREATE TEST PLANS, TEST CASES AND ANALYZE USER NEEDS AND CREATE AND
MODIFY APPLICATION SOFTWARE USING VARIOUS SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES
My question is based on the above can i switch to another field like SAP for example. I am not sure if companies will be ready to give me a offer letter with the above text for a SAP job.
Any ideas friends?
There is no hard and fast rule in this matter. "Same or similar" is very vague. My guess is that if new work field is not drastically different you should be fine. But for AC21 application, as I hear, you need do nothing unless there is an RFE. Guidelines given by USCIS to their field office on AC21, seem to advise them to be quite lenient.
ETA FORM 9089
A) PREVAILING WAGE INFORMATION
SOC/O*NET(OES) CODE
15-1031.00
OCCUPATONAL TITLE
COMPUTER SOFTWARE ENGINEER
B) JOB OPPORTUNITY INFORMATION
JOB TITLE: SOFTWARE ENGINEER(THIS IS CURRENT)
C) IDENTIFY THE JOB TITLE OF THE ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATE OCCUPATION:
PROGRAMMER ANALYST OR SYSTEMS ANALYST
D) JOB DUTIES
CREATE TEST PLANS, TEST CASES AND ANALYZE USER NEEDS AND CREATE AND
MODIFY APPLICATION SOFTWARE USING VARIOUS SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGIES
My question is based on the above can i switch to another field like SAP for example. I am not sure if companies will be ready to give me a offer letter with the above text for a SAP job.
Any ideas friends?
There is no hard and fast rule in this matter. "Same or similar" is very vague. My guess is that if new work field is not drastically different you should be fine. But for AC21 application, as I hear, you need do nothing unless there is an RFE. Guidelines given by USCIS to their field office on AC21, seem to advise them to be quite lenient.
girlfriend wwe nexus cm punk wallpapers
gc007
08-04 01:36 PM
I think you are right. G-28 for I-140 shud be signed by layer and employer
And there shud be 3 separate G-28 's req for I-485/131/765 signed by layer and the actual applicant.
Mine was filled this way.
May be you shud get some information from others too who have done with one G28
Hope it helps
Hi,
My employer is filing my I-140 and I-485/131/765 concurrently. My lawyer/representative send a list which says G-28 signed by lawyer and my employer. I understand for I-140, G-28 is signed by lawyer and employer(petitioner). When filed concurrently is one G-28 is enough for whole forms?
I read we need to have G-28 form for each form and for 485/131/765 forms G-28 should be signed by the actual applicant and the lawyer instead of the petitioner(my employer). Right now in my case there is only G-28 form they were sending that was signed by my employer(petitioner) and the lawyer...is one G-28 is fine for whole application packet when filed concurrently...
USCIS website clearly says without G-28 form they will reject the application right away...but it didn't mentioned for each form though...but all my colleagues says they signed three G-28 forms one each 485/765/131...i am little confused and concerend..please suggest..
thanks in advance..
And there shud be 3 separate G-28 's req for I-485/131/765 signed by layer and the actual applicant.
Mine was filled this way.
May be you shud get some information from others too who have done with one G28
Hope it helps
Hi,
My employer is filing my I-140 and I-485/131/765 concurrently. My lawyer/representative send a list which says G-28 signed by lawyer and my employer. I understand for I-140, G-28 is signed by lawyer and employer(petitioner). When filed concurrently is one G-28 is enough for whole forms?
I read we need to have G-28 form for each form and for 485/131/765 forms G-28 should be signed by the actual applicant and the lawyer instead of the petitioner(my employer). Right now in my case there is only G-28 form they were sending that was signed by my employer(petitioner) and the lawyer...is one G-28 is fine for whole application packet when filed concurrently...
USCIS website clearly says without G-28 form they will reject the application right away...but it didn't mentioned for each form though...but all my colleagues says they signed three G-28 forms one each 485/765/131...i am little confused and concerend..please suggest..
thanks in advance..
hairstyles WWE Nexus - 4 results like the
rogerdepena
08-01 11:30 PM
nope... I have my receipt notice that has June 11th on it, but the only system says July 3rd, which is the day they sent my notice :)
i guess you're right. in my case, receipt date and online case date for I-140/change of status were the same.
anyway, Nebraska process around 4500 application per day--that includes all kinds of form I-765, I-131, I-140, I-485, etc. assuming that 25% of those are are I-485 then they process 1000-1125 I-485/day. again, assuming 40,000 I-485 are still to be encoded then the average waiting time is 35-40 days. whew, i expect mine first week of september.
i guess you're right. in my case, receipt date and online case date for I-140/change of status were the same.
anyway, Nebraska process around 4500 application per day--that includes all kinds of form I-765, I-131, I-140, I-485, etc. assuming that 25% of those are are I-485 then they process 1000-1125 I-485/day. again, assuming 40,000 I-485 are still to be encoded then the average waiting time is 35-40 days. whew, i expect mine first week of september.
jsb
10-26 03:06 PM
Has anybody changed from Attorney to No Attorney? G-28 form has instructions on how to change an attorney, but there is nothing to cancel it altogether.
dixie
09-11 07:06 PM
We cannot fault USCIS for the BEC backlogs .. thats the work of the even more incompetant DOL.Even they have improved with the PERM system. Our battle with retrogression is really a political issue more than a procedural one .The one place there is major room for improvement for USCIS is to use a more reliable system of advancing PDs than the current arbitrary system. There is no denying that USCIS has been improving lately with respect to service times(given the scarce resources), so lets give them credit where it is due.
No comments:
Post a Comment