sunny1000
10-18 06:05 PM
Is it possible to track 140 without the receipt notices.
Did you pay using your check? If so, I heard in this forum that they print receipt numbers on the back of the checks. I don't know if that helps.
Did you pay using your check? If so, I heard in this forum that they print receipt numbers on the back of the checks. I don't know if that helps.
wallpaper 2002 Bentley Azure Convertible
absaarkhan
06-02 04:08 PM
I am Confused Too -- Why Are People Sending DL and Passport Copies.
It Clear Says do NOT send any Identification Copies Unless requested by USCIS
In case of E-Filing the EAD ,
1) I didnot understand why we have to send copy of DL and Passport photo page. The confirmation reciept clearly says "DO NOT mail photos or copies of identification unless requested to do so by USCIS."
Do you guys think, we have to send these two copies? I am confused now. Could you guys please advise.
2) Also when E-filing for myself and spouse, Is it ok, If I send both of our supporting documents in one package ? or is it better to send them separately.
It Clear Says do NOT send any Identification Copies Unless requested by USCIS
In case of E-Filing the EAD ,
1) I didnot understand why we have to send copy of DL and Passport photo page. The confirmation reciept clearly says "DO NOT mail photos or copies of identification unless requested to do so by USCIS."
Do you guys think, we have to send these two copies? I am confused now. Could you guys please advise.
2) Also when E-filing for myself and spouse, Is it ok, If I send both of our supporting documents in one package ? or is it better to send them separately.
gsumk
08-25 07:17 PM
@ Meet
You will not get new H1. Your remaining time on H1 will be extended once you decide to do COS from H4 to H1. If you were out of country for one full year ony then you will get NEW H1 and then the new fee hike applies to you.
But if you were not out of country for one year then you will get the same H1 extended for the remainder period (6 years minus what ever you have used so far). The new fee hike applies to new H1 applications only.
Hope that helps.
Do we need to apply H4 to H1 thru the same original company to reinstate the old H1.
Please let me know.
You will not get new H1. Your remaining time on H1 will be extended once you decide to do COS from H4 to H1. If you were out of country for one full year ony then you will get NEW H1 and then the new fee hike applies to you.
But if you were not out of country for one year then you will get the same H1 extended for the remainder period (6 years minus what ever you have used so far). The new fee hike applies to new H1 applications only.
Hope that helps.
Do we need to apply H4 to H1 thru the same original company to reinstate the old H1.
Please let me know.
2011 2006 Bentley Azure Convertible
anurag
06-13 11:27 AM
I have been through a couple of acquisitions. You dont need to do anything with the h1b.
But for travel - Whenever you are travel outside US, keep a newspaper clipping of the acquisition. Also take a letter from your HR stating you have been working for Company B, which was acquired by Company A and that you continue to work with the new organization.
But for travel - Whenever you are travel outside US, keep a newspaper clipping of the acquisition. Also take a letter from your HR stating you have been working for Company B, which was acquired by Company A and that you continue to work with the new organization.
more...
sweet_jungle
12-04 04:56 PM
Next year in July when we will become current, it will again become a game of probability. Because of the 2 specific issues I mentioned, we will have a slightly lower probability of our cases getting picked up. So, I am trying to be pro-active to address these specific issues. The issues definitely need to be fixed as these are glaring glitches in the USCIS file transfer system. I am thinking that we can draft a letter and all affected people can write to Ombudsman. Let me know what everybody thinks
I fail to see why these cases you are referring to are any worse off than many others.
I filed my I485 in May 2007, have been current for more than a third of the interim period and still waiting.
I have filed two service requests, two congressional enquiries and nothing. So have other people and it has not helped them either.
We are all in a black hole hoping for our cases to see the light of day some time just like the WAC cases you refer to.
I fail to see why these cases you are referring to are any worse off than many others.
I filed my I485 in May 2007, have been current for more than a third of the interim period and still waiting.
I have filed two service requests, two congressional enquiries and nothing. So have other people and it has not helped them either.
We are all in a black hole hoping for our cases to see the light of day some time just like the WAC cases you refer to.
sledge_hammer
09-26 10:15 AM
How inconsiderate of you; you just hijacked someone elses's thread and to top it all you are spamming it trying to get an answer. Your question is also totally unrelated to this thread topic!
Why don't you search the forum for answers and if none is available then post a new thread...
Can the experts please reply to my question? Thanks,
Why don't you search the forum for answers and if none is available then post a new thread...
Can the experts please reply to my question? Thanks,
more...
getta05
03-27 04:20 PM
So what do I do.
I am looking to buy a SUBWAY franchise outright costing 200 K
I am looking to buy a SUBWAY franchise outright costing 200 K
2010 2008 Bentley Azure Cars
me_myself
12-19 05:15 PM
suavesandeep, thanks a lot for confirming.
more...
nosightofgc
07-14 07:01 AM
I apologize for hijacking this thread. I could not find a way to create a new thread. I subscribed for monthly contributions almost 5 days back and still don't have access to Donor's forum. Emailed the admins, still no response. Can the admins take a look at this one please?
And also how do I create a new thread? I did this some time back, but could not find it where to start.
Thanks
And also how do I create a new thread? I did this some time back, but could not find it where to start.
Thanks
hair 2006 Bentley Azure Convertable
rally
07-12 11:35 AM
Wasn't it Condi who said that this fiasco was a 'small inconvenience' to the applicants ?? A creative open letter ad highlighting the absurdity of this comment in a major paper would drive the message home, just like Alberto Gonzalez's classmates from Harvard did when they published an ad in the Washington post : http://websrvr80il.audiovideoweb.com/il80web20037/ThinkProgress/2007/Page%20A13%205-15-07.pdf
I think this is a really good idea. Can we pursue this to completion?
I think this is a really good idea. Can we pursue this to completion?
more...
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKQ7Opjrldl0NNM4Ht9MaCd15imBRvof4qtDz-Fk5GLkoimdLXqPZfZMqsUTj-xHucmYndngIG6DSC4p2Pxpv6MsdutC58oat1Kw_j-eBb_k02CwYptfUQgy1-VUAMt2uq3Az9RHrLZSH-/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKQ7Opjrldl0NNM4Ht9MaCd15imBRvof4qtDz-Fk5GLkoimdLXqPZfZMqsUTj-xHucmYndngIG6DSC4p2Pxpv6MsdutC58oat1Kw_j-eBb_k02CwYptfUQgy1-VUAMt2uq3Az9RHrLZSH-/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
hot eBay Watch: 1996 Bentley Azure
richana
01-23 09:20 PM
Thanks for the reply! That was very helpful .
Do I still have to be employed by my original sponsor when i get the appt after 6 months?
If I return to the US in a few months do I still have to option of filing 485 even though I've already applied for CP in India?
Yes to Q1. Yes to Q2, but you will have to discontinue the CP option. I would suggest going the CP way in your case. AOS is unpredictable with CP you will have a definite date. Best option get H1 in India return and apply for AOS, if not apply for CP and return with H1 go back in 6 months get GC if all else fails wait in India for 6 months and come back with GC.
Do I still have to be employed by my original sponsor when i get the appt after 6 months?
If I return to the US in a few months do I still have to option of filing 485 even though I've already applied for CP in India?
Yes to Q1. Yes to Q2, but you will have to discontinue the CP option. I would suggest going the CP way in your case. AOS is unpredictable with CP you will have a definite date. Best option get H1 in India return and apply for AOS, if not apply for CP and return with H1 go back in 6 months get GC if all else fails wait in India for 6 months and come back with GC.
more...
house 1999 Bentley Azure Convertible
thesparky007
04-17 11:54 AM
one more
tattoo The Bentley Azure was a large,
Caliber
05-08 11:47 AM
Did they issue your EAD from the time the previous one expired or from the current date. If current date, you'd have lost about 3 months or validity.
Some people I know got EADs from the next day following the expiration of their current EAD. I however got from approval date. Its all so inconsistent.
Next day from the expiration of present EAD
Some people I know got EADs from the next day following the expiration of their current EAD. I however got from approval date. Its all so inconsistent.
Next day from the expiration of present EAD
more...
pictures 2000 Bentley Azure Convertible
RDB
09-16 01:37 PM
There is no LAW that mandates this!......It's kind of a best practice thing - people usually recommend 6 months.
Ok, I know this could be wrong answer... But since we are legal immigrants we need to follow all the laws!!:D
Ok, I know this could be wrong answer... But since we are legal immigrants we need to follow all the laws!!:D
dresses 2010 Bentley Azure Convertible
krishmunn
02-07 10:17 AM
How much is the diffference ? If the pay (you are getting) and the required pay is not vastly different (say within 10-12 % range) you should be OK if company can prove their ability to pay.
The GC salary offered need not be paid now, it need to be paid after 485 is approved (which possibly will take years)
The GC salary offered need not be paid now, it need to be paid after 485 is approved (which possibly will take years)
more...
makeup of Bentley introduces a
vegasbaby
06-04 03:05 PM
The bill looks good on paper. My problem is that it also contains giving the same rights to 'gays'. I personally am not opposed to that but it should not happen that the conservatives in the house & senate take an objection & eventually defeat this bill.
girlfriend 2010 New Bentley Azure
illusions
07-11 12:57 PM
Called her. But she is interviewing Ashish who is in Manhattan, and even though i'm not Indian and since i'm working in Westchester (about 10~15) miles from the city she would not be able to conduct the interview.
I urge that anybody who is not Indian and in Manhattan to please call her.
I urge that anybody who is not Indian and in Manhattan to please call her.
hairstyles Bentley Azure Convertible
kprgroup
12-28 10:03 AM
Background OF Myself
----------------------
a) Worked for Company A from 2003 to 2008.
b) Company A applied I-140 and approved April 2006. AOS 485 filed on July 2007. Got EAD but never used it
c)September 2008 I have Joined employer �B� by transferring H1B (Valid until Aug 2010).
d) Employer A revoked 140 which triggered 485 denial in October 2008.
e)Applied MTR and it was approved in NOVEMBER 2008 and 485 reopened.
f)Applied AP & EAD renewal ,got a EAD card September 2010
g) Since EAD extension got delayed I have applied H1-B Renewal August 1st week of 2010 and got a RFE now asking for proof how beneficiary qualify to extend beyond six years?
Question
I think the I140 revoked and 485 denial back in 2008 triggered the RFE. (Though MTR approved and 485 is pending)
1)I have EAD approved and it�s valid until 2012 September .Is it possible can we withdraw HI-B Petition application when they request RFE?
2)Can I have any chance of explain USCIS, by this rule below?
��USCIS has also specifically stated that if an approved I-140 is withdrawn after an I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days, the I-140 remains valid for purposes of AC21 � 106(c) portabilty:
"If the Form I-140 has been approved and the Form I-485 has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more (as measured from the form I-485 receipt date), the approved Form I-140 will remain valid even if the alien changes jobs or employers as long as the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation." AFM Sec. 20.2(c) ��
Thanks
KPR
----------------------
a) Worked for Company A from 2003 to 2008.
b) Company A applied I-140 and approved April 2006. AOS 485 filed on July 2007. Got EAD but never used it
c)September 2008 I have Joined employer �B� by transferring H1B (Valid until Aug 2010).
d) Employer A revoked 140 which triggered 485 denial in October 2008.
e)Applied MTR and it was approved in NOVEMBER 2008 and 485 reopened.
f)Applied AP & EAD renewal ,got a EAD card September 2010
g) Since EAD extension got delayed I have applied H1-B Renewal August 1st week of 2010 and got a RFE now asking for proof how beneficiary qualify to extend beyond six years?
Question
I think the I140 revoked and 485 denial back in 2008 triggered the RFE. (Though MTR approved and 485 is pending)
1)I have EAD approved and it�s valid until 2012 September .Is it possible can we withdraw HI-B Petition application when they request RFE?
2)Can I have any chance of explain USCIS, by this rule below?
��USCIS has also specifically stated that if an approved I-140 is withdrawn after an I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days, the I-140 remains valid for purposes of AC21 � 106(c) portabilty:
"If the Form I-140 has been approved and the Form I-485 has been filed and remained unadjudicated for 180 days or more (as measured from the form I-485 receipt date), the approved Form I-140 will remain valid even if the alien changes jobs or employers as long as the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation." AFM Sec. 20.2(c) ��
Thanks
KPR
skarthy
08-12 05:47 PM
They sent an biometric appointment on 8/10. Not sure if it was becasue I called them or the address change.
also it went to the old address. wonder why ? I have to call them and confirm again.
Also got an email from CRIS saying "additional info needed" not sure if they mean the biometrics or they need something else.
anyways, just wanted to let you know that its taking time but its comming. saw a lot of people inmy same boat.
also it went to the old address. wonder why ? I have to call them and confirm again.
Also got an email from CRIS saying "additional info needed" not sure if they mean the biometrics or they need something else.
anyways, just wanted to let you know that its taking time but its comming. saw a lot of people inmy same boat.
Rockford
09-10 11:13 AM
What about the consultants who work on three client places in a week. Three LCAs in a week ?
No comments:
Post a Comment