Prashanthi
09-04 01:34 PM
HI All,
I currently have 797 approval document from Nov 2009 to Nov 2012 and My current 797 document is valid till Nov 2009.When i was coming back from india last week at POE the immigration officer gave me I 94 dated till Nov 2009.I said to him that as i have 797 till Nov 2012 i should get I 94 till that date.But he insisted saying as the current document is still valid he can only go with that.He cant give me I 94 date on my future 797 starting from Nov 2009.I kept asking him for about 5 min but again dint wanted argue a lot as it was border security immigration.
So what should i do now.Can i stay here after Nov 2009 or i need to go to stamping and come back before Nov 2009.What are my options.I don't have any travel plans at least a year from now.Do let me know is it mandatory for me to leave before Nov 2009.Also my New 797 as I 94 attached do you guys think if it is sufficient for me to stay here without any problems.
The officer can only look at the current I-797, cannot give an i-94 as per the future I-797. The other posters were correct last action rule does apply, however in my interpretation of the last action rule since your I-797 is not effective until November 2009 and your entry was before that, your last action in this case will be the latest I-797 and it will therefore be valid. In my opinion the Officer was correct in informing you that their is no problem for you to use your latest I-797 once the old one expires. Make sure you don't have a gap in the dates between the expiry of the old I-797 and start date of the new one.
I currently have 797 approval document from Nov 2009 to Nov 2012 and My current 797 document is valid till Nov 2009.When i was coming back from india last week at POE the immigration officer gave me I 94 dated till Nov 2009.I said to him that as i have 797 till Nov 2012 i should get I 94 till that date.But he insisted saying as the current document is still valid he can only go with that.He cant give me I 94 date on my future 797 starting from Nov 2009.I kept asking him for about 5 min but again dint wanted argue a lot as it was border security immigration.
So what should i do now.Can i stay here after Nov 2009 or i need to go to stamping and come back before Nov 2009.What are my options.I don't have any travel plans at least a year from now.Do let me know is it mandatory for me to leave before Nov 2009.Also my New 797 as I 94 attached do you guys think if it is sufficient for me to stay here without any problems.
The officer can only look at the current I-797, cannot give an i-94 as per the future I-797. The other posters were correct last action rule does apply, however in my interpretation of the last action rule since your I-797 is not effective until November 2009 and your entry was before that, your last action in this case will be the latest I-797 and it will therefore be valid. In my opinion the Officer was correct in informing you that their is no problem for you to use your latest I-797 once the old one expires. Make sure you don't have a gap in the dates between the expiry of the old I-797 and start date of the new one.
wallpaper Finland Outline Map
paskal
07-18 12:47 AM
the problem is not with his opinions
sure he has a right to them
the problem is with the "facts" he shouts out.
even when he is wrong and is told so, he repeats them
this was nicely shown in the "hansens disease" episode
that time the southern baptists and the national press finally spoke up.
sure he has a right to them
the problem is with the "facts" he shouts out.
even when he is wrong and is told so, he repeats them
this was nicely shown in the "hansens disease" episode
that time the southern baptists and the national press finally spoke up.
factoryman
06-14 07:50 PM
SSN sooner. Kids over 14 can work and earn pocket money.
On Receipt of filing, you can apply for FAFSA (student loan).
You are first in the line.
Six months will pass by and hopefully you will get EAD in 3 months.
If dates retrogress, you still have a sooner AC21.
With filing and FP, all that you need to do are done. No worries.
Peace of mind.
On Receipt of filing, you can apply for FAFSA (student loan).
You are first in the line.
Six months will pass by and hopefully you will get EAD in 3 months.
If dates retrogress, you still have a sooner AC21.
With filing and FP, all that you need to do are done. No worries.
Peace of mind.
2011 Online map with not
reddy77
07-23 08:25 AM
Pittsburg ?? what state CA or PA ?? since there is no "h", I assume you are talking about pittsburg in CA ...
Hi Thanks for your inputs.
But both the employers are consultant.
One is in Fremont CA and other in Pittsburg. Both are offering almost same salary.
So which should be an better option, if they have a similar better client list?
Hi Thanks for your inputs.
But both the employers are consultant.
One is in Fremont CA and other in Pittsburg. Both are offering almost same salary.
So which should be an better option, if they have a similar better client list?
more...
shanti
02-24 10:35 AM
Thank you guys for your replies.
NolaIndian32: I have a question, has your lawyer used the experience previous to filing for Labor as a justification to becoming a supervisor or whatever promotion you got? or did he include the experience post labor application?
Becks/Nolaindian32
Another question, I know that for changing the employer keeping the same labor before the I-485 stage that you need to prove same or similar, if that were the case and this is my info:
I came to US in December 2000 H-1B having 5 ys of previous experience, worked for employer A in U.S. from December 2000 until November 2003, joined employer B in December 2003 (another H-1B) where I am still working, then Employer B applied for my Labor in Feb 2005. IF that was the case for the I-140 stage of same or similar, how many years of experience can I use as gained in US? The three years with my first employer or those 3 plus the year that my current employer took to apply for labor in this case it would be four?
Thank you so much in advance.
NolaIndian32: I have a question, has your lawyer used the experience previous to filing for Labor as a justification to becoming a supervisor or whatever promotion you got? or did he include the experience post labor application?
Becks/Nolaindian32
Another question, I know that for changing the employer keeping the same labor before the I-485 stage that you need to prove same or similar, if that were the case and this is my info:
I came to US in December 2000 H-1B having 5 ys of previous experience, worked for employer A in U.S. from December 2000 until November 2003, joined employer B in December 2003 (another H-1B) where I am still working, then Employer B applied for my Labor in Feb 2005. IF that was the case for the I-140 stage of same or similar, how many years of experience can I use as gained in US? The three years with my first employer or those 3 plus the year that my current employer took to apply for labor in this case it would be four?
Thank you so much in advance.
ivjobs
11-06 06:44 PM
I dont wish to make this a publicity forum for companies or individuals, But it would be heartening to know about other successful entrepreneurs who have been in the similar shoe of this immigration mess. It would be nice if IV members can post their successful ventures in the yahoo group and inspire other members. Please refrain to advertise but feel free to share your experience as an entrepreneur and your successful ventures in the yahoo group.
more...
dpsg
03-25 02:39 AM
We have our own agenda as they have theirs, But We can ask them to
correct information which is not correct. Otherwise we will create a parallel
graph and point their mistakes and they are free to correct ours.
If someone looks up on net, he/she should see correct information, If
someone searches numberUSA it should also see our site with correct graphs.
We should never fudge number to prove our point, Because we are real people with real issues, which affects our lives in real way ... not idealogues .. where ideaology is above everything(even nonrefutable hard facts or humanity).
I request people on this forum to be careful what they write, We should only
question the incorrectness of the statment without becoming personal , dis-respectful or vengeful, because our fight is born from need not from hatred.
All of us need to also further our qualifications and skills to show ourselves in best light and be able to show our achievents in constructive way to get the best deserved treatment from american lawmakers.And beleive me they
have shown time and again that they are pragmatic people, we just need to educate them about our issues..which
IV is doing in a great way.
Also we need to correct what they ahve said about us "guests don't want to go back" to point that we are here on dual intent.
Thanks,
correct information which is not correct. Otherwise we will create a parallel
graph and point their mistakes and they are free to correct ours.
If someone looks up on net, he/she should see correct information, If
someone searches numberUSA it should also see our site with correct graphs.
We should never fudge number to prove our point, Because we are real people with real issues, which affects our lives in real way ... not idealogues .. where ideaology is above everything(even nonrefutable hard facts or humanity).
I request people on this forum to be careful what they write, We should only
question the incorrectness of the statment without becoming personal , dis-respectful or vengeful, because our fight is born from need not from hatred.
All of us need to also further our qualifications and skills to show ourselves in best light and be able to show our achievents in constructive way to get the best deserved treatment from american lawmakers.And beleive me they
have shown time and again that they are pragmatic people, we just need to educate them about our issues..which
IV is doing in a great way.
Also we need to correct what they ahve said about us "guests don't want to go back" to point that we are here on dual intent.
Thanks,
2010 Kids, cricket world map
ahnewGC
07-25 12:19 PM
Hi,
may I know what would be the problem if the name is not mentioned in the birth certificate. It was issued right after I born, without specifying name.
my parents name, date of birth ,date of place are there in the birth certificate.
filed I485 in late june. I guess they might send RFE.
Thank u
regards
ahnewgc
may I know what would be the problem if the name is not mentioned in the birth certificate. It was issued right after I born, without specifying name.
my parents name, date of birth ,date of place are there in the birth certificate.
filed I485 in late june. I guess they might send RFE.
Thank u
regards
ahnewgc
more...
ajju
08-23 01:11 PM
I submitted Proof Of Status along with my I-485 as my lawyer asked for it.. Not sure if everyone does... It was a statement (1 page word doc) with all my H1/I-94 history... I was missing few I-94 numbers, I left it blank... And attached all my H1B copies along with it...
Remember that your I-94 # changes only when you tarvel outside US... So it should be quite simple to keep track... I-94 # is also written on your H1 extension if done while in US... So I was in nutshell able to get most of my I-94 numbers.. except for one duration when I travelled on same H1 twice.. So lost that I-94 #.. But had same H1B for that duration.. SO guess it should be okay...
Remember that your I-94 # changes only when you tarvel outside US... So it should be quite simple to keep track... I-94 # is also written on your H1 extension if done while in US... So I was in nutshell able to get most of my I-94 numbers.. except for one duration when I travelled on same H1 twice.. So lost that I-94 #.. But had same H1B for that duration.. SO guess it should be okay...
hair 2010 world map outline
gparr
July 26th, 2005, 04:20 PM
Well, you got me started on something new Gary.... Since I don't shoot in raw format, I have never processed RAW before in photoshop, so I had to first download the most recent version of the raw plug-in.... and what fun! But since I have never played with it before, I'm still experimenting. Thanks! You've opened up a whole new world for me! :)
Always glad to help you expand your horizons, Queen. Anxious to see your version of my image.
Gary
Always glad to help you expand your horizons, Queen. Anxious to see your version of my image.
Gary
more...
USCISSucks
11-14 01:34 AM
Before 180 Days for those 140 approved
Do a H1 transfer and extension to new company which you like..
(don't use EAD with the new company)
Stay with the present company for some secondary part time job just not to get him mad (or take a vacation)
2 months would fly when you are making now decent money...
do whatever after 180 days.
I spoke with my Lawyer on this approach and says he doesn;t see any issue with this since I140 approved..
otehrs who have answered favourably please let us know if anybody did this?
Do a H1 transfer and extension to new company which you like..
(don't use EAD with the new company)
Stay with the present company for some secondary part time job just not to get him mad (or take a vacation)
2 months would fly when you are making now decent money...
do whatever after 180 days.
I spoke with my Lawyer on this approach and says he doesn;t see any issue with this since I140 approved..
otehrs who have answered favourably please let us know if anybody did this?
hot map, outline map World
go_guy123
08-24 04:52 PM
ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
more...
house OUTLINE MAP UGANDA outline
chapsi29
06-25 10:58 AM
Thanks for your quick response.
As much as I want the W2 ASAP, the issue is what is the amount that should be on the W2 as I did not get paid in 2007. The W2 legally should only contain the wages that you have received in that year.
As much as I want the W2 ASAP, the issue is what is the amount that should be on the W2 as I did not get paid in 2007. The W2 legally should only contain the wages that you have received in that year.
tattoo Outline Map of Turkmenistan
perm2gc
12-03 04:30 PM
hello all,
i attended for visa stamping on dec 1st at Hyderabad consulate so i got 221g yellow form but he retained passport with him. he told to submit all the documents that are mentioned on the yellow form. did any body got same thing. usually how many days they will take for processing after submiting the documents
Thanks,
Praveen
It will take 2 weeks once you submit all the documents.
i attended for visa stamping on dec 1st at Hyderabad consulate so i got 221g yellow form but he retained passport with him. he told to submit all the documents that are mentioned on the yellow form. did any body got same thing. usually how many days they will take for processing after submiting the documents
Thanks,
Praveen
It will take 2 weeks once you submit all the documents.
more...
pictures Storrs,map printable we
prinive
03-27 11:20 AM
Any one... good news on the way in 48 hours... Any one...:rolleyes:
dresses Map+of+the+world+outline+
jthomas
06-09 12:49 PM
When i went to Mumbai last december i got my H1B stamped. while coming to US i showed the POE my H1B stamped visa he asked me for Advanced parol document and i was Parolled.When i asked him i have a H1B stamped in my passport why do i need to be parolled. He answered AP has a higher preference than H1B.
the bottom line is " H1B stamping will not be considered for your entry". Its just a stamp for your satisfaction.
I am not going to stamp my H1B again. 18 months back when i came from Vancouver Canada the POE let me in by AP not by H1B visa. I asked him about my valid H1B and the POE told me you can enter using either one but we prefer AP.
If you are a local from mumbai then its okay to attend a interview and get stamped. They don't ask much in my interview. In my last interview they asked me in the picture you have a mouthstach and now you are clean shaven. So that is the level of questions asked at the interview. Its just 2-3 hours of work or maybe half a day if you wish to do it.
One more proble i went through at mumbai consulte, The dates were posted 1 week in advance and then a local person has to go and submit the document to the consulate. the FEDEX from US to India would be costing around 68 to 150 dollars and it needs to be reached within 1-2 days (i.e. 3 days before the interview). I got it done somehow.
J thomas
the bottom line is " H1B stamping will not be considered for your entry". Its just a stamp for your satisfaction.
I am not going to stamp my H1B again. 18 months back when i came from Vancouver Canada the POE let me in by AP not by H1B visa. I asked him about my valid H1B and the POE told me you can enter using either one but we prefer AP.
If you are a local from mumbai then its okay to attend a interview and get stamped. They don't ask much in my interview. In my last interview they asked me in the picture you have a mouthstach and now you are clean shaven. So that is the level of questions asked at the interview. Its just 2-3 hours of work or maybe half a day if you wish to do it.
One more proble i went through at mumbai consulte, The dates were posted 1 week in advance and then a local person has to go and submit the document to the consulate. the FEDEX from US to India would be costing around 68 to 150 dollars and it needs to be reached within 1-2 days (i.e. 3 days before the interview). I got it done somehow.
J thomas
more...
makeup map+outline+with+countries
syzygy
07-11 06:07 PM
I can make some calls too, I have been away so slightly lost on thread.
Franklin,
Please post once we have enough volunteers for the calls
Franklin,
Please post once we have enough volunteers for the calls
girlfriend Large wall maps of the world
Adam
08-27 04:50 PM
Don't feel too left out, I have no idea either :lol:
those Calvin and Hobbes are great!
those Calvin and Hobbes are great!
hairstyles Blank world map, blank world
Munna Bhai
11-09 09:21 AM
I am collecting all the documents and I will do premium processing but would like to get clarification regarding the rule.
I heard that " Labour should be filed 365 days before, whether approved or not" and that will automatically allow you to have 1 year extension.
Is this correct?
-M
I heard that " Labour should be filed 365 days before, whether approved or not" and that will automatically allow you to have 1 year extension.
Is this correct?
-M
logiclife
06-09 11:06 AM
Uptill 2001/2002 H1B transfer/extensions used to take 15 days to 1 month. Now they take anywhere between 4-8 months. You'll see once the premium I-140 comes into being. The regular I-140 will take forever. Premium processings have implications on regular processing. Basically they are discouraging people to file in regular queue.
I disagree. The introduction of premium processing didnt slow regular H1B transfer down. H1B transfer was slow even before premium processing existed.
It also depends on traffic. Some years, when H1 quota was 195K, obviously the number would slow people down.
I disagree. The introduction of premium processing didnt slow regular H1B transfer down. H1B transfer was slow even before premium processing existed.
It also depends on traffic. Some years, when H1 quota was 195K, obviously the number would slow people down.
ivjobs
11-09 08:33 PM
^^
No comments:
Post a Comment