sabr
09-19 05:39 PM
meaning I can work for company B now and even though my h1b renewal approves with company A? then when I feel like I can go out and reenter before the h1b renewal period ends?
new2gc
08-13 01:42 PM
Total H1Bs sponsored by the dirty 4 Indian companies are 12000 multiplied by $2000, gives 12 million if you add same no of L1 visas its only 24 million not 600 million. Obama requires a calculator .
Poor guys... they can give away $7.5 Billion to some country as Aid, but cannot secure their own borders without increasing burden on H1/L1 Visas for $0.6 Billion(not even 10% in comparison ) ....what a pity.... :mad:
This is pure B.S. politics....
Poor guys... they can give away $7.5 Billion to some country as Aid, but cannot secure their own borders without increasing burden on H1/L1 Visas for $0.6 Billion(not even 10% in comparison ) ....what a pity.... :mad:
This is pure B.S. politics....
gcdreamer05
08-04 11:50 AM
Does your new I-140 have the old PD printed on it ?
If so you are better filing a new I-485.... and withdraw the old 485, as several threads have explained not to have two 485's running parallel because USCIS itself will ask the user to revoke one...
Please do let us know what happened after you know the information from M team.
She would recommend you to file another 485
If so you are better filing a new I-485.... and withdraw the old 485, as several threads have explained not to have two 485's running parallel because USCIS itself will ask the user to revoke one...
Please do let us know what happened after you know the information from M team.
She would recommend you to file another 485
mrsr
06-26 09:50 PM
how filed ,with the help of lawyer right?
more...
kpchal2
03-03 12:26 PM
hi chanduv
i am not worried about RFE or NOID. I am very much concerned about direct denial and then having to go through MTR and all the stress associated with that. Can you shed some light on the scenarios that miught cause denial other than plain old stupidity of the USCIS.
thanks
i am not worried about RFE or NOID. I am very much concerned about direct denial and then having to go through MTR and all the stress associated with that. Can you shed some light on the scenarios that miught cause denial other than plain old stupidity of the USCIS.
thanks
Hermione
09-27 11:09 AM
Is there anyway we can help the family featured in this thread? Like helping them with funds to hire a good lawyer or something on those lines? Reading all the threads, I am somehow thinking of going for the Indian dream now (Yes, I have the Indian citizenship)!!! 6 years and my wife still does not know if she can live in this country or not!!!
Hold your hourses until you hear the true story of this family. As I said, I tried to find their court decision online (court decisions are public documents), and it was not there. It means that they gave assumed names, also it probably means that they do not want people to read their court documents. I personally have seen asylum cases, and let me tell you, some of them are so full of lies, you would not belive your eyes (I have seen a guy who claimed his wife was beaten and denied medical services - he has never been even married!). I think their story goes like this - they came on tourist visas to visit her family, after that they stayed illegally for 2-3 years saving money to pay the lawyers, after that they paid a crooked attorney to buy some fake "proof" that they were persecuted and applied for assylum. Their application went to court, where judge suspected something was fishy. He probably asked for additional proof or obtained evidence that their documents were fake, and denied the case. That's kind of typical story for a denied asylum, and I would be very-very careful in trying to help them personally. If they get some relieve as a result of a broader legislation, like 245(i), I would not mind it at all (they will, because they have a pending I-130), but helping them while not helping people who decided not to go out with swinging lies and just stayed illegally... I would stay away from it.
The article itself is pretty good, though.
Hold your hourses until you hear the true story of this family. As I said, I tried to find their court decision online (court decisions are public documents), and it was not there. It means that they gave assumed names, also it probably means that they do not want people to read their court documents. I personally have seen asylum cases, and let me tell you, some of them are so full of lies, you would not belive your eyes (I have seen a guy who claimed his wife was beaten and denied medical services - he has never been even married!). I think their story goes like this - they came on tourist visas to visit her family, after that they stayed illegally for 2-3 years saving money to pay the lawyers, after that they paid a crooked attorney to buy some fake "proof" that they were persecuted and applied for assylum. Their application went to court, where judge suspected something was fishy. He probably asked for additional proof or obtained evidence that their documents were fake, and denied the case. That's kind of typical story for a denied asylum, and I would be very-very careful in trying to help them personally. If they get some relieve as a result of a broader legislation, like 245(i), I would not mind it at all (they will, because they have a pending I-130), but helping them while not helping people who decided not to go out with swinging lies and just stayed illegally... I would stay away from it.
The article itself is pretty good, though.
more...
saileshdude
04-27 10:11 PM
a lot of people who applied during July 2007 are getting RFE on 485, I guess this because of pre processing but 99% of these people who are getting RFE are from NSC. I same only one or two people from TSC who got RFE. From this seems like NSC is pre processing but TSC is not.
No TSC is not. TSC goes by priority date and not processing date. TSC I have seen follows different processing style. For e.g. if your namecheck/security check or some kind of check is pending they dont send you FP notice. Also they process applications if your PD is current/close to recent bulletin.
No TSC is not. TSC goes by priority date and not processing date. TSC I have seen follows different processing style. For e.g. if your namecheck/security check or some kind of check is pending they dont send you FP notice. Also they process applications if your PD is current/close to recent bulletin.
ngopikrishnan
08-22 07:20 PM
I heard Finnan, Fleischut & Associates is very good.
http://www.fleischut.com
http://www.fleischut.com
more...
morpheus
04-02 09:44 PM
So if (for example) an H1B worked in the US for a few weeks before their visa became available, are they technically eligible for this? Or perhaps they were out of status for a week or two between jobs? I'm sure many H1's might have been in this situation. It's unclear who this applies to.
I just read the Specter amendments to 2454 and I can't see where in 218D or 602 it says the alien must have been here illegally. Can someone quote that part? All I can see is this requirement in 601.
`(1) PRESENCE; EMPLOYMENT.--The alien establishes that the alien--
``(A) was physically present in the United States before January 7, 2004; and
``(B) was employed in the United States before January 7, 2004, and has been employed in the United States since that date.
I read one summary of the bill that claims 'The alien also must acknowledge, under oath, that the alien is unlawfully present and subject to removal or deportation.' but this is at the time of application - not in the past. So technically this could still apply to many people. I haven't been able to find this clause in the actual bill though.
From what I have read, if this bill passes it may just turn out that an H1B could quit their employer tomorrow, go and join another employer without filing an H1 transfer and file under 218D in the next year. Since they are technically eligible for 218D at this point, they could move straight to a green card without the current massive backlogs. Also, the 218D status has job mobility, and no LCA is required.
Can anyone refute this?
I just read the Specter amendments to 2454 and I can't see where in 218D or 602 it says the alien must have been here illegally. Can someone quote that part? All I can see is this requirement in 601.
`(1) PRESENCE; EMPLOYMENT.--The alien establishes that the alien--
``(A) was physically present in the United States before January 7, 2004; and
``(B) was employed in the United States before January 7, 2004, and has been employed in the United States since that date.
I read one summary of the bill that claims 'The alien also must acknowledge, under oath, that the alien is unlawfully present and subject to removal or deportation.' but this is at the time of application - not in the past. So technically this could still apply to many people. I haven't been able to find this clause in the actual bill though.
From what I have read, if this bill passes it may just turn out that an H1B could quit their employer tomorrow, go and join another employer without filing an H1 transfer and file under 218D in the next year. Since they are technically eligible for 218D at this point, they could move straight to a green card without the current massive backlogs. Also, the 218D status has job mobility, and no LCA is required.
Can anyone refute this?
jkays94
05-04 02:17 PM
COOPER: Along the gulf coast today, First Lady Laura Bush was a very big hit. The one-time librarian zeroed in on an enormous need. Katrina destroyed library collections throughout the region. Mrs. Bush came with a gift of half a million dollars from her foundation's gulf coast library recovery initiative. CNN's John King caught up with her. They talked polls, anthems and immigration.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KING: One of the debates in the country right now is about immigration reform, illegal immigration. And one of the controversies is this new Spanish language version of the national anthem. Your husband the president said he thinks it should only be in English. But if you go to the State Department website, you can find it in I think four languages. Secretary Rice said she's heard a rap version of the national anthem.
LAURA BUSH, FIRST LADY: We've all heard a lot of different versions like at the Super Bowl every year. I don't think there's anything wrong with singing it in Spanish. The point is it's the United States' national anthem. And what people want is it to be sung in a way that respects the United States and our culture.
KING: Is that an issue on which you disagree with your husband, he says it should be sung in English?
BUSH: Well I think it should be sung in English, of course.
KING: But you also said it -- BUSH: But you know it's like reading hymns in the hymnal. I love it when I look at the bottom of "Amazing Grace" and there are the words in the Methodist hymnal in Swahili. I think that's great.
KING: Another by product of these demonstrations has been crowds of tens of thousands, many of them holding the Mexican flag. Even supporters of their cause say they find that offensive. That it's the United States of America, if you want rights, if you want status in the United States of America, don't be waving a Mexican or an El Salvadorian, some other country's flag in our face. Do you agree with that?
BUSH: I think this is a very, very sensitive issue that immigration is. A lot of people have stood in line for a long time and done everything they can do to be accepted as legal citizens of the United States. And it's unfair to think that other people will have the chance to get in front of them when they've abided by the rules.
KING: As you know, voter anger, the country's anger at what they perceive to be a slow federal response is one of the reasons your husband's poll ratings have slumped considerably. He's now in the mid-30s in most poll ratings. They're using the term in Washington, many are, "lame duck." He can't like that.
BUSH: No I'm sure he doesn't like. I don't like that either, obviously. When you're elected for a second term, and there are term limits, then of course you start off in some ways as the lame duck. I still know that my husband's going to be very effective and has been very effective and that his agenda that he ran on in the last election in 2004, he will be able to get through. We have a lot of problems. We have -- there are a lot of challenges facing our country. Besides, obviously, this major challenge of the devastated gulf coast.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
KING: One of the debates in the country right now is about immigration reform, illegal immigration. And one of the controversies is this new Spanish language version of the national anthem. Your husband the president said he thinks it should only be in English. But if you go to the State Department website, you can find it in I think four languages. Secretary Rice said she's heard a rap version of the national anthem.
LAURA BUSH, FIRST LADY: We've all heard a lot of different versions like at the Super Bowl every year. I don't think there's anything wrong with singing it in Spanish. The point is it's the United States' national anthem. And what people want is it to be sung in a way that respects the United States and our culture.
KING: Is that an issue on which you disagree with your husband, he says it should be sung in English?
BUSH: Well I think it should be sung in English, of course.
KING: But you also said it -- BUSH: But you know it's like reading hymns in the hymnal. I love it when I look at the bottom of "Amazing Grace" and there are the words in the Methodist hymnal in Swahili. I think that's great.
KING: Another by product of these demonstrations has been crowds of tens of thousands, many of them holding the Mexican flag. Even supporters of their cause say they find that offensive. That it's the United States of America, if you want rights, if you want status in the United States of America, don't be waving a Mexican or an El Salvadorian, some other country's flag in our face. Do you agree with that?
BUSH: I think this is a very, very sensitive issue that immigration is. A lot of people have stood in line for a long time and done everything they can do to be accepted as legal citizens of the United States. And it's unfair to think that other people will have the chance to get in front of them when they've abided by the rules.
KING: As you know, voter anger, the country's anger at what they perceive to be a slow federal response is one of the reasons your husband's poll ratings have slumped considerably. He's now in the mid-30s in most poll ratings. They're using the term in Washington, many are, "lame duck." He can't like that.
BUSH: No I'm sure he doesn't like. I don't like that either, obviously. When you're elected for a second term, and there are term limits, then of course you start off in some ways as the lame duck. I still know that my husband's going to be very effective and has been very effective and that his agenda that he ran on in the last election in 2004, he will be able to get through. We have a lot of problems. We have -- there are a lot of challenges facing our country. Besides, obviously, this major challenge of the devastated gulf coast.
more...
immi_seeker
10-02 10:10 AM
you could try getting a letter from university that you had completed all the requirements for your degree in 2000 but your degree was formally awarded in 2002
harishgowda
05-19 08:08 AM
Hello,
My H -1B visa is been approved from August 2008 to September 2011 which equals to 3 year.
I have worked in US from October 2008 to January 2009.
Later i got layoff and my Agent\Consultant said that my Visa was cancelled according to U.S. Immigration regulations and termination of employment procedures.
Thereafter i came to India and started work job here. My company had applied for Business Visa but Today my Business Visa got rejected and they gave me the reason that you dont justify that you will come back. What if you stay back there.?
I am thinking to reapply again in next 2 day.
Can anyone help me what should i do in this case?
Thanks,
Harish Gowda
My H -1B visa is been approved from August 2008 to September 2011 which equals to 3 year.
I have worked in US from October 2008 to January 2009.
Later i got layoff and my Agent\Consultant said that my Visa was cancelled according to U.S. Immigration regulations and termination of employment procedures.
Thereafter i came to India and started work job here. My company had applied for Business Visa but Today my Business Visa got rejected and they gave me the reason that you dont justify that you will come back. What if you stay back there.?
I am thinking to reapply again in next 2 day.
Can anyone help me what should i do in this case?
Thanks,
Harish Gowda
more...
dixie
09-19 04:06 PM
We should just be asking for relief on waiting times, ability to travel freely, and change jobs.
Unfortunately, this requires a complete overhaul of the immigration system; not minor amendments. For instance, if we want the ability to change jobs freely that is really asking to de-couple the whole H1-B/GC system from our employers. You know very well how things work with current law: EVERYTHING related to our presence in the US; whether that is the work visa, LC or even the PD is OWNED by our employers.
I do agree that increasing visa numbers does not make good PR for our cause.
But the only quick and non-controversial fix (without increasing visa numbers) that I can think of is recapture and ability to file 485 without a visa number.
However, we cannot shy away from explaining how our problems can be solved .. after all average americans have no clue of how their country's immigration system works; if we dont do the explaining the anti-immigrant groups will do that for us with their own interpretation.
Unfortunately, this requires a complete overhaul of the immigration system; not minor amendments. For instance, if we want the ability to change jobs freely that is really asking to de-couple the whole H1-B/GC system from our employers. You know very well how things work with current law: EVERYTHING related to our presence in the US; whether that is the work visa, LC or even the PD is OWNED by our employers.
I do agree that increasing visa numbers does not make good PR for our cause.
But the only quick and non-controversial fix (without increasing visa numbers) that I can think of is recapture and ability to file 485 without a visa number.
However, we cannot shy away from explaining how our problems can be solved .. after all average americans have no clue of how their country's immigration system works; if we dont do the explaining the anti-immigrant groups will do that for us with their own interpretation.
eb3_nepa
07-29 10:10 PM
Then we let the CITIZENS of the country decide what is best for their country! Guys understand one thing, it is a numbers game.
1) Legal Employment Based Immigrants: LESS THAN 0.5 Million with NO CITIZENS to back us.
2) Illegal Immigrants: MORE THAN 12 million with a HUGE chunk of the Hispanic CITIZENS to back them up.
Even the citizens who DO oppose Illegal immigration, SIMPLY OPPOSE illegal immigration, but DO NOT SUPPORT legal immigration per se.
Please DO NOT make the mistake of taking on the CHC at this point, it is a fight that is IMPOSSIBLE for us to win and POINTLESS to even fight. If we win against the CHC (big IF), we win NOTHING, if we lose, we now have bigger problems.
1) Legal Employment Based Immigrants: LESS THAN 0.5 Million with NO CITIZENS to back us.
2) Illegal Immigrants: MORE THAN 12 million with a HUGE chunk of the Hispanic CITIZENS to back them up.
Even the citizens who DO oppose Illegal immigration, SIMPLY OPPOSE illegal immigration, but DO NOT SUPPORT legal immigration per se.
Please DO NOT make the mistake of taking on the CHC at this point, it is a fight that is IMPOSSIBLE for us to win and POINTLESS to even fight. If we win against the CHC (big IF), we win NOTHING, if we lose, we now have bigger problems.
more...
chris9902
06-12 07:41 PM
about as much as i want aids
GCard_Dream
04-27 05:15 PM
I am not sure. May be it is. Details are still not out yet and I don't see the text of the bill on thomas. Hopefully more detail will emerge in next day or so and then we will know for sure.
http://www.swnebr.net/newspaper/cgi-bin/articles/articlearchiver.pl?160478
http://www.swnebr.net/newspaper/cgi-bin/articles/articlearchiver.pl?160478
more...
dreamworld
11-06 03:53 PM
Hi there,
I have a question related to what you just answered. I am on h4 and my wife is on h1. We have our I140 was also approved. Our PD is in 2007, and right now PD date for EB2 INDIA is April 2004. Can I file for EAD before my PD date? and what is AOS?
My lawyer tells me I cant file for EAD till my PD date is current and I don't want to wait that long
Please advise.
I thank all IV members for their support and help.
If you have the i485 receipt notice, you file EAD by yourself. but to file i485 you need you PD to be current.
I have a question related to what you just answered. I am on h4 and my wife is on h1. We have our I140 was also approved. Our PD is in 2007, and right now PD date for EB2 INDIA is April 2004. Can I file for EAD before my PD date? and what is AOS?
My lawyer tells me I cant file for EAD till my PD date is current and I don't want to wait that long
Please advise.
I thank all IV members for their support and help.
If you have the i485 receipt notice, you file EAD by yourself. but to file i485 you need you PD to be current.
logiclife
10-17 03:00 PM
Hi,
I have applied for my EAD and I-485 in the month of June '07 and all that i have recieved so far is my wife's EAD. I still did not recieve my EAD nor the finger prints notice nor the 485 yet. I have to move to IL from TX now and i am in a big confusion now. I heard that the mails from the USICS will not be forwarded to any new address by the USPS. If i would want to change my address with the USCIS now will it be a good move or is there any other alternative that you all could suggest me...Please advice me on this issue and help me out of this situation.
Krishna.
Yes, the post office DOES NOT forward USCIS mail even if you fill out the "forwarding address" form at post office, I have read this somewhere.
However, you can change your address with USCIS directly with AR-11. That way, USCIS will send it to your new address. Another thing, the receipt notices will go to your lawyer if you used a lawyer. Once the receipt notices come, register those case numbers in an online customer account on USCIS and track status. Once the status is approved, (of EAD or AP), then call USCIS to confirm that the cards are being shipped to your new address.
I have applied for my EAD and I-485 in the month of June '07 and all that i have recieved so far is my wife's EAD. I still did not recieve my EAD nor the finger prints notice nor the 485 yet. I have to move to IL from TX now and i am in a big confusion now. I heard that the mails from the USICS will not be forwarded to any new address by the USPS. If i would want to change my address with the USCIS now will it be a good move or is there any other alternative that you all could suggest me...Please advice me on this issue and help me out of this situation.
Krishna.
Yes, the post office DOES NOT forward USCIS mail even if you fill out the "forwarding address" form at post office, I have read this somewhere.
However, you can change your address with USCIS directly with AR-11. That way, USCIS will send it to your new address. Another thing, the receipt notices will go to your lawyer if you used a lawyer. Once the receipt notices come, register those case numbers in an online customer account on USCIS and track status. Once the status is approved, (of EAD or AP), then call USCIS to confirm that the cards are being shipped to your new address.
Juan28210
11-06 09:31 AM
Thanks for all the replies!
My current employer is not a very big company so I think you're right. They wouldn't waste their money on me.
My current employer is not a very big company so I think you're right. They wouldn't waste their money on me.
Raju
06-13 09:00 AM
Hi
I have given up hopes of getting an H-1B through the Master's quota. I applied on April 4. So there are no hopes anyway.
Now how can one get an H-1B through a non-profit organization. My understanding of this process is not very clear. I was under the impression (wrong impression!!) that if I can get a job at a Non-Profit place through a consulting company(I am an employee of the consulting company and not the Non-Profit org) and because my workplace is at a non-profit organization, I can get an H-1B that qualifies as one that belongs to the Non-Profit H-1B category.
Please clarify. I am trying to understand this clearly.
Thanks very much
I dont think this will fly. This is a stretch. There is nothing to understand here. Claerly, you are an employee of consulting firm, which is a for profit organisation. Your H-1B is filed by the consulting company and not the non-profit organisation.
I have given up hopes of getting an H-1B through the Master's quota. I applied on April 4. So there are no hopes anyway.
Now how can one get an H-1B through a non-profit organization. My understanding of this process is not very clear. I was under the impression (wrong impression!!) that if I can get a job at a Non-Profit place through a consulting company(I am an employee of the consulting company and not the Non-Profit org) and because my workplace is at a non-profit organization, I can get an H-1B that qualifies as one that belongs to the Non-Profit H-1B category.
Please clarify. I am trying to understand this clearly.
Thanks very much
I dont think this will fly. This is a stretch. There is nothing to understand here. Claerly, you are an employee of consulting firm, which is a for profit organisation. Your H-1B is filed by the consulting company and not the non-profit organisation.
jliechty
May 23rd, 2005, 08:54 PM
Gary, I'm just thinking of mine which is a circular polarizer. You rotate the polarizer to achieve the desired amount of polarization. So I can rotate it one way and either darken or lighten the sky. All but your last pic looked as if it was darker on the right side which lead me to the assumption it was a circular type. There's a linear type too which I have never used so I'm not sure how it works, but I imagine it doesn't rotate (anyone?).
Linear vs. Circular has mainly to do with whether it works with metering and autofocus sensors in modern cameras. Both polarizers rotate and function similarly (I'm not sure if there is any difference in the effect shown in the image, but I doubt it).
Anyway, an unevenly polarized sky happens not because the polarizer is not rotated properly / enough, but rather because the camera is not quite at a 90 degree angle to the sun; this uneven polarization becomes more noticeable with wide angle lenses (to a point, then as even wider lenses are used, the sky will get dark in the middle and lighter on the edges even right at 90 degrees from the sun).
Linear vs. Circular has mainly to do with whether it works with metering and autofocus sensors in modern cameras. Both polarizers rotate and function similarly (I'm not sure if there is any difference in the effect shown in the image, but I doubt it).
Anyway, an unevenly polarized sky happens not because the polarizer is not rotated properly / enough, but rather because the camera is not quite at a 90 degree angle to the sun; this uneven polarization becomes more noticeable with wide angle lenses (to a point, then as even wider lenses are used, the sky will get dark in the middle and lighter on the edges even right at 90 degrees from the sun).
No comments:
Post a Comment