Anders �stberg
March 15th, 2004, 04:30 AM
I'm a geek and like tech toys a lot, but when it comes to phones I just want it to be a good phone. I don't want it to include a poor PDA, or a lousy camera. I can see how it could be handy for some people and a fun toy for others, but personally I prefer to carry separate and fully functional phone, Palm Pilot and camera. It's great if they communicate though. I did get a new phone recently because I like the Bluetooth concept, for a wireless headset and for dial-up from my Palm or laptop. Other than that I don't like any of the new features yet. On top of being fiddly to use and low quality the prices here for using any picture or video based services are silly. It also often requires you to sign up for at least a year with a phone that's locked to a specific operator, even after the contract expires, a business model I really don't like.
wallpaper Medium length hair styles men.
Winner
05-21 12:31 PM
Good post
Pappu, Can this post be moved to "Ask lawyers" area of forum to get other lawyers opinion as well?
I've seen many companies trying their best to convince their employees to use their EAD instead of paying 10 times more for the H1B extension. This is very valid from company's stand point.
But it will be helpful for fellow immigrants to know exactly what they are getting into when they decide to when they abandon their H1B visa.
Pappu, Can this post be moved to "Ask lawyers" area of forum to get other lawyers opinion as well?
I've seen many companies trying their best to convince their employees to use their EAD instead of paying 10 times more for the H1B extension. This is very valid from company's stand point.
But it will be helpful for fellow immigrants to know exactly what they are getting into when they decide to when they abandon their H1B visa.
DallasBlue
07-17 12:15 AM
Depending upon the uscis announcement in a day or two (i.e,7/17 or 7/18)things may change for the short term so we will plan any specific action item after that.
But for now lets continue to urge everyone we know in Texas to join IV to continue pursuing our efforts as much intelligent, elite and vivid group for acheiving our goals and objectives.
Guys,
Just recently moved from Milwaukee, WI to Plano, TX (DFW) area. Just let me know what need to be done from my side. Awaiting eagerly.
- BharatPremi
But for now lets continue to urge everyone we know in Texas to join IV to continue pursuing our efforts as much intelligent, elite and vivid group for acheiving our goals and objectives.
Guys,
Just recently moved from Milwaukee, WI to Plano, TX (DFW) area. Just let me know what need to be done from my side. Awaiting eagerly.
- BharatPremi
2011 hair Hairstyles For Men With
aamchimumbai
12-08 12:16 PM
Vik352,
I am in the same situation as yours. I am assuming that this is your first AP application and not renewal, right?
In my case, I am on H1 and my wife is on H4. For both, visa is NOT stamped in our passports. We received a letter from NSC saying that both our AP applications were approved on 10/21/08. I received my approved AP application but we never received hers. We followed up with the NSC and local USCIS office both confirmed that our application were approved. Therefore, she left US to visit India on 11/15/08. Two days later after her departure we received RFE on photos. Weird. Anyways. We did respond her RFE few days ago.
But now the question is can she return with her approved AP, which may have a later date than her departure OR we need to go for H1/H4 stamping. I am not sure what will happen at the POE when we show up with our APs.
Anyone in similar situation?
Thanks.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
I am in the same situation as yours. I am assuming that this is your first AP application and not renewal, right?
In my case, I am on H1 and my wife is on H4. For both, visa is NOT stamped in our passports. We received a letter from NSC saying that both our AP applications were approved on 10/21/08. I received my approved AP application but we never received hers. We followed up with the NSC and local USCIS office both confirmed that our application were approved. Therefore, she left US to visit India on 11/15/08. Two days later after her departure we received RFE on photos. Weird. Anyways. We did respond her RFE few days ago.
But now the question is can she return with her approved AP, which may have a later date than her departure OR we need to go for H1/H4 stamping. I am not sure what will happen at the POE when we show up with our APs.
Anyone in similar situation?
Thanks.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
more...
buehler
01-31 12:04 PM
If you get married before your GC is approved you're fine. You have something like 6 months grace period after your GC is aprroved to file for her I-485. It is better to keep all of her records ready so that you can file as soon as your PD becomes current.
pns27
06-28 03:26 PM
Did any one heard of EB3 India 485 Approved after June 26? Looks like EB3 visa numbers for this quarter for India is exhausted! If so then who many will be available in next quarter?
When will the 40K unused EB quota of visa numbers will be available /open? In mid September? Can any of the Gurus explain this?
My friend took info-pass and he was told that the EB3 India visa numbers are over for now and his case may be approved in next quota.
Looks like the first 40K in the 485 queue whose processing is done will get there 485�s approved in late September.
For some one like me who files 485 in June chances of approval in this year is less.:confused:
I just want to set the expectations real so that we will not be subjected to perpetual checking of online LUD/Status, forums and also avoid huge disappointment.
Pns27
***********************
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No
PD June 2002-non-RIR
I-140 approved from NSC
I485:--
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Receipt Date: 06/07/07
Notice Date: 06/22/07
FP Noticed Received on:?
When will the 40K unused EB quota of visa numbers will be available /open? In mid September? Can any of the Gurus explain this?
My friend took info-pass and he was told that the EB3 India visa numbers are over for now and his case may be approved in next quota.
Looks like the first 40K in the 485 queue whose processing is done will get there 485�s approved in late September.
For some one like me who files 485 in June chances of approval in this year is less.:confused:
I just want to set the expectations real so that we will not be subjected to perpetual checking of online LUD/Status, forums and also avoid huge disappointment.
Pns27
***********************
Concurrent I-140/I-485: No
PD June 2002-non-RIR
I-140 approved from NSC
I485:--
Mailed to (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Received at (state NSC/TSC): NSC
Receipt Date: 06/07/07
Notice Date: 06/22/07
FP Noticed Received on:?
more...
phillyag
07-20 02:14 PM
Any expected timelines for getting the receipt notice from USCIS? I filed on Jul17th.
2010 Long Curly Hair Men Styles.
bkarnik
04-18 09:21 AM
Guys:
Before we get all excited and start signing petitions, please check to confirm whether you are legally safe by doing so. For more information please see this link from Murthy website http://www.murthy.com/news/n_parele.html
I write this because the petition is sponsored by a campaign manager for Kennedy. Please be very careful in signing such petitions. I would recommend discussing any such petition on this forum and getting input from the IV folks or from your lawyers before signing any petition that supports an individual or any particular political party.
Before we get all excited and start signing petitions, please check to confirm whether you are legally safe by doing so. For more information please see this link from Murthy website http://www.murthy.com/news/n_parele.html
I write this because the petition is sponsored by a campaign manager for Kennedy. Please be very careful in signing such petitions. I would recommend discussing any such petition on this forum and getting input from the IV folks or from your lawyers before signing any petition that supports an individual or any particular political party.
more...
gc_chahiye
08-05 11:01 PM
One of my friends AOS got rejected just because his attorney rescheduled his interview. Somehow, USCIS local office did not acknowledge his request for interview reschedule and they sent a rejection letter saying that, he did not appear for the interview so they are rejecting his application. So the bottomline is 1) Try your best to not to reschedule it 2) If you have to, make sure that USCIS acknowledges your application to reschedule it.
did your friend then file a MTR?
did your friend then file a MTR?
hair curly long hair styles men.
GCwaitforever
04-15 01:05 PM
You are not loosing anything. Continue on H-1B with current salary as long as it satisfies LCA made for H-1B petition.
You do not have to say anything to DOL. Your LC might be approved after the audit process. Then comes I-140, where the ability to pay comes into question. This could be difficult to get approved based on the situation you described.
If you have more time on H-1B, try to switch to different employer and restart the Greencard process.
You do not have to say anything to DOL. Your LC might be approved after the audit process. Then comes I-140, where the ability to pay comes into question. This could be difficult to get approved based on the situation you described.
If you have more time on H-1B, try to switch to different employer and restart the Greencard process.
more...
waitin_toolong
11-18 04:47 PM
the new FP EAD will be the one that you file for renewal, they will not automatically issue a new one.
They stand to gain $340 from it.
For the person worried about his EAD dont go by what the customer rep said, they are forever giving out incorrect information, majority of EADs issued in the last 3 months have been without biometrics.
Wait for 10 days or get infopass appointment.
They stand to gain $340 from it.
For the person worried about his EAD dont go by what the customer rep said, they are forever giving out incorrect information, majority of EADs issued in the last 3 months have been without biometrics.
Wait for 10 days or get infopass appointment.
hot long hairstyles for men with
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
house curly long hair styles men.
guyfromsg
07-17 09:50 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
Lawyer says that should not be a problem. My 140 is pending in TSC, could that be a reason don't know.
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
Lawyer says that should not be a problem. My 140 is pending in TSC, could that be a reason don't know.
tattoo 1920 s hair styles
reddymjm
05-27 12:56 PM
You probably won't get a FP notice if you have done biometrics done before for I-485.
So may just have to wait for approval.
This is not consistent. I filed on Apr 18th. Last LUD on apr 27th.They received the documentation that day. My fried filed 3 weeks ago. He got a FP notice. Both were efiles. He has also done his FP along for 485.
So may just have to wait for approval.
This is not consistent. I filed on Apr 18th. Last LUD on apr 27th.They received the documentation that day. My fried filed 3 weeks ago. He got a FP notice. Both were efiles. He has also done his FP along for 485.
more...
pictures short long curly hair styles
kirupa
06-04 09:20 AM
Golgi's site was one of the worst sites I have ever seen - the intro was long and the midi was annoying. Good job! :)
dresses Curly Mens Hairstyles 2009
dan19
10-18 12:22 PM
One of my friends got a similar one. In that case the DOL pointed to one another candidate(say Mr.A's) who applied for the same job, and was more qualified than my friend in terms of years of experience. The DOL asked why Mr.A wasn't hired.
My friend's company sent a new letter to Mr.A asking whether he was still available. Mr.A did not reply back.
Since Mr.A did not reply back, the company understood that Mr.A is no longer interested in the job.
The company then sent back the rebuttal stating the new efforts made.
The DOL then approved:) the case.
I received a letter from BEC and it says
This Notice of Findings is the Department’s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750’s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750’s. The other set of 750’s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750’s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750’s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer’s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
My friend's company sent a new letter to Mr.A asking whether he was still available. Mr.A did not reply back.
Since Mr.A did not reply back, the company understood that Mr.A is no longer interested in the job.
The company then sent back the rebuttal stating the new efforts made.
The DOL then approved:) the case.
I received a letter from BEC and it says
This Notice of Findings is the Department’s statement of its intent to deny the application.
The following reasons were attached in the document:
1. - The job opportunity has been and is clearly open to any qualified U.S worker.
The case file indicates that telephone calls were placed made to U.S. applicants but the calls failed to reach the following applicants: A,B,C (name of the applicants)
Although telephone calls were unsuccessfully places to the three U.S. applicants, no certified mailing or other attempts were made to contact the applicants. An employer must prove that its overall recruitment efforts were in good faith.
The employer may rebut this finding by:
Providing documentation that certified mail was sent to the four applicants which demonstrates the employer made the minimally acceptable effort to recruit U.S. applicants.
2. The department of labor requires that when submitting an Application for Alien Employment Certification the case file must contain two sets of original ETA 750’s Parts A and B. your case file contains only one set of original ETA750’s. The other set of 750’s in the case file are photocopies. ETA 750’s with photocopied signatures are not acceptable for processing. In order to continue processing the Application for Alien Employment Certification you must send an additional set of original ETA 750’s.
A copy of the Form ETA 750, parts A and B, have been returned in the event that any changes are necessary. The amended copies must be returned with your resubmission. Any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part A, must be initialed and dated by the employer: and any amendments made to the ETA 750, Part B, must be initialed by the alien, as appropriate.
It is the employer’s responsibility to submit the rebuttal in a timely manner directly to the certifying officer.
I got already my 7th year extension and it valid till Nov 2007. I spoke with my attorney and he seems to be positive, but he could only able to find two of the three candidates email correspondence.
Please let me know if you have faced similar situation or any suggestions. What is the possibility of my case gets approved?
more...
makeup Photo of Long Hairstyles For
aadimanav
02-08 10:32 AM
Ok. So if I summarize, you guys are providing the following ranges:
22 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs
20 Lakhs to 35 Lakhs
12 Lakhs to 15 Lakhs
3 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs
That means, 3 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs. :)
Wow! what a huge difference
22 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs
20 Lakhs to 35 Lakhs
12 Lakhs to 15 Lakhs
3 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs
That means, 3 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs. :)
Wow! what a huge difference
girlfriend Promise to hairstyle is not
hopefulgc
07-31 04:10 PM
interested in charter/car pool
hairstyles hairstyles for men with curly
FinalGC
11-06 11:43 AM
Here is a crutch for you.
You have an employee agreement which says that you will be paid health benefits. All you need to tell your Company A (if he comes after you), that you will report them to USCIS that you have exploited him and gave the wrong information before joining the company. This will prevent any desi..staffing company to advance to you, since all their future H1's will be heavily scrutinized and possibly his company will be shut down. He will have his own battle with USCIS. This will prevent him to come after you.
If I were you, I would have all kinds of written emails and documents ready for me to show the old employer that you have proof that the old employer was exploiting you.....I am sure you can come up with tons of things, like not paying on bench. Don't ever talk such matter, always write emails and ask feedback.
Email trails are the best way to keep all these staffing and desi companies at bay and prevent them from exploiting employees......I am speaking from experience buddy.....I had one guy after me and being a PM, by profession I saved all such email trails and he knew that. When I left him he gave me back the $11K, that he had taken from me illegally.
Yes, it is a good idea to spend 100-200 bucks with a reputed attorney like Murthy or Khanna or Shusterman to check your status before you jump. This will give you additional confidence to jump ship.
I get sad and angry at these desi employers who exploit their employees....I am sure some day they will reap what they have harvested....tears and pain of these exploited employees.....
My suggestion to my fellow colleagues is...those of have gone through this struggle...please do not become like them when you too come out of this GC maze.....
You have an employee agreement which says that you will be paid health benefits. All you need to tell your Company A (if he comes after you), that you will report them to USCIS that you have exploited him and gave the wrong information before joining the company. This will prevent any desi..staffing company to advance to you, since all their future H1's will be heavily scrutinized and possibly his company will be shut down. He will have his own battle with USCIS. This will prevent him to come after you.
If I were you, I would have all kinds of written emails and documents ready for me to show the old employer that you have proof that the old employer was exploiting you.....I am sure you can come up with tons of things, like not paying on bench. Don't ever talk such matter, always write emails and ask feedback.
Email trails are the best way to keep all these staffing and desi companies at bay and prevent them from exploiting employees......I am speaking from experience buddy.....I had one guy after me and being a PM, by profession I saved all such email trails and he knew that. When I left him he gave me back the $11K, that he had taken from me illegally.
Yes, it is a good idea to spend 100-200 bucks with a reputed attorney like Murthy or Khanna or Shusterman to check your status before you jump. This will give you additional confidence to jump ship.
I get sad and angry at these desi employers who exploit their employees....I am sure some day they will reap what they have harvested....tears and pain of these exploited employees.....
My suggestion to my fellow colleagues is...those of have gone through this struggle...please do not become like them when you too come out of this GC maze.....
vallabhu
01-02 01:53 PM
I am in my 8th year extension which is ending in April, My attorney think its 100% win case for one main reason
my labor is filed EB3 Skilled worker
he mentioned with in EB3 there are 2 categories Skilled and professional
for EB3 professional USCIS has complete authority to deny based educational requirements and they can define educational requirements based on job profile.
but for eb3 skilled employer has complete discretion of defining edu requirements.
mine was filed in eb3 skilled and ETA clearly says client will accept 3 year foreign degree.
h thinks any second eye would have approved this but it was unfortunate to be processed by a adjudicator who does have comeplete knwledge and does not know difference between eb3 prof and eb3 skilled
his plan of action is to send them evaluations from multiple academies as you guys have mentioned.
and it looks very fishy from the denial letter
denial states I have now taken any maths courses in graduation but course in physics and chemistry in graduation, and one math course in intermediate which is not sufficient.
and maths is mentioned between physics and chemistry we don't know how he could miss that, Intermediate transcripts does mention mathematics.
I can paste exact content of denial by tomorrow.
my labor is filed EB3 Skilled worker
he mentioned with in EB3 there are 2 categories Skilled and professional
for EB3 professional USCIS has complete authority to deny based educational requirements and they can define educational requirements based on job profile.
but for eb3 skilled employer has complete discretion of defining edu requirements.
mine was filed in eb3 skilled and ETA clearly says client will accept 3 year foreign degree.
h thinks any second eye would have approved this but it was unfortunate to be processed by a adjudicator who does have comeplete knwledge and does not know difference between eb3 prof and eb3 skilled
his plan of action is to send them evaluations from multiple academies as you guys have mentioned.
and it looks very fishy from the denial letter
denial states I have now taken any maths courses in graduation but course in physics and chemistry in graduation, and one math course in intermediate which is not sufficient.
and maths is mentioned between physics and chemistry we don't know how he could miss that, Intermediate transcripts does mention mathematics.
I can paste exact content of denial by tomorrow.
sledge_hammer
04-22 08:41 PM
You will get zero supportes for your anti-immigration comments on this forum!
Go back to your own forum to preach hatred!
So go to these sites: VDARE, FAIRUS, JUDICIALWATCH, NUMBERSUSA, AMERICANPATROL, CAPSWEB & ALIPAC. The stakes are sky high because Amnesty means, thousands more will swamp the border looking for yet a 3rd---AMNESTY.
Go back to your own forum to preach hatred!
So go to these sites: VDARE, FAIRUS, JUDICIALWATCH, NUMBERSUSA, AMERICANPATROL, CAPSWEB & ALIPAC. The stakes are sky high because Amnesty means, thousands more will swamp the border looking for yet a 3rd---AMNESTY.
No comments:
Post a Comment