jsb
11-26 02:27 PM
Hello
I dont have access to the certified labor copy , I am just wondering if we need it for AC21 purposes. I am not sure how to get it from my desi employer/ desi lawyer. I have a job offer with a fortune 200 company which is willing to do H1b transfer/extension so I am opting for H1b instead of EAD. I am pretty sure about the job description will satisfy the same/similar test.
Is the job title and job description mentioned on the labor cert? Mine is a pre perm case. Is it good to have copy of labor cert for AC21?
I-485 filing package should include a Letter of Reconfirmation of job-offer from your sponsor. This letter should describe what was in the LC. If you get a copy of this letter, you know what you need from your new employer. I-485 is your filing, therefore, you should not have difficulty in getting a copy of full set of what was filed.
I dont have access to the certified labor copy , I am just wondering if we need it for AC21 purposes. I am not sure how to get it from my desi employer/ desi lawyer. I have a job offer with a fortune 200 company which is willing to do H1b transfer/extension so I am opting for H1b instead of EAD. I am pretty sure about the job description will satisfy the same/similar test.
Is the job title and job description mentioned on the labor cert? Mine is a pre perm case. Is it good to have copy of labor cert for AC21?
I-485 filing package should include a Letter of Reconfirmation of job-offer from your sponsor. This letter should describe what was in the LC. If you get a copy of this letter, you know what you need from your new employer. I-485 is your filing, therefore, you should not have difficulty in getting a copy of full set of what was filed.
wallpaper Bethenny Frankel On
mirage
03-06 03:10 PM
Just a little update, Called up my Senator's office this morning..Started talking about country Cap issue, the guy knew everything about it, he took notes & promised he will pass it on to the Senator. Here's what I suggested him
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
1) Lift the Country Cap for Temporary period of time, may be just for 2 years.
2) Limit the Maximum waiting time, say if one applicant is waiting for 5 years than country cap should be exempted and he should be given a preference over a person who�s PD is just 1 year old.
He specifically told me 'your second point is very good, I'll certainly share these with the Senator'...
I urge you guys to contact your senators & Congressmen/Congresswomen
We have a group which is focusing on this issue, if you want to join us here's the link
Prashant
07-10 10:00 AM
A very good reply.
Thank you.
Thank you.
2011 #42Bethenny Frankel
vrkgali
03-26 11:13 AM
My PD is Sep 2002. There are different limits:
Break even limit
Fatigue limit
Endurance limit
I am on last one :)
Ditto here..My PD also sept2002 .
And my I-140 also pending for the past 19 months..
and I dont know what limit I should cross before I get GC ..
may be the country limits and go back to India.
Break even limit
Fatigue limit
Endurance limit
I am on last one :)
Ditto here..My PD also sept2002 .
And my I-140 also pending for the past 19 months..
and I dont know what limit I should cross before I get GC ..
may be the country limits and go back to India.
more...
khaidhi786
09-24 04:57 PM
Congrats Dude !!
snowshoe
06-15 08:23 AM
My attorney sent our apps on June 1st, I do not have receipt # yet. Also I just gave the attorney one payment for the entire app, hence cannot figure out if the checks were cashed or not.
more...
gjoe
10-08 06:46 PM
Though I don't agree with you on all that you said about the goverment and what I know about it, your approach was right in replying. I wish all the senior members had these qualities.
Coming back to horse and donkeys, you didn't read my post properly. The essence of the story was to convey everyone of the members can't do everything you ask them to do. A leader ( if you are in a managment postion making decision you will understand better what I am saying here) should know how to make best out of the group he has.
I would also thank whomever who brought my star color back to green :) after sometime in the red zone.
Again, you have this approach of "This should be done, that should be done" or "What is wrong with this...why not work like this to avoid waste and be more efficient etc etc".
I believe that you work for the Government. But I dont think you have talked to the government ever about fixing any of the issues. Big difference.
All the big brilliant ideas that we come up with, in our heads, are pretty much meaningless to administration and congress and they wont do it unless they have other reasons to do it.
You are like a person saying "What's wrong with doing assignment of visa numbers and then approving based FIFO..bla bla bla". Its like saying "What's wrong with passing electric current thru a tungsten filament in a glass ball of vaccum to create light". That is DIFFERENT from commercial production of electric bulb. That bridge - between and idea and its production - takes a lot of initiative and faces a lot of roadblocks.
I will give you an example, and since you work for Government, I believe you will understand this easily.
I was in a recent meeting with administration officials along with our lobbyist and 4 other IV members. One of the issues, that is purely and administrative issue and doesnt need congressional act is In country visa revalidation. Prior to 2002, St. Louis had an office where you can mail your passport for restamping after H1 extensions and dont have to travel out of country. We asked them why that cant be restarted.(just like your style of why this cant be done and why that cant be done, its so simple and makes so much sense...bla bla bla). You know what their reply was..."We dont have a problem in doing that, and the issue is not security. Its just that if we reject someone, that someone is already in USA and would drag the rejection thru an immigration lawyer, file motions for re-appeal and re-consideration, and take us to court...and we have to fight that and spend money from DHS coffers to do that. If we reject someone's visa stamp in Mumbai consulate, we dont have to worry about it as that someone cannot take us to court and its cheaper for us".
Now, WHO would have thought about that? You see what I am saying. Here we are, speculating that they stopped visa restamping in USA (St. Louis) because of security reasons. And the real reason is - An attempt by DHS to save money on litigation it would face from rejections. Could you have known or imagined that? And who would have found the answer from IV forums. If I had posted that question here on forums, would I ever know that? No. It takes effort just to know the answers to questions. And then it takes some more effort to suggest more solutions and answers to their concerns. And then some more effort to get it done once they agree.
Its very easy to sit in your cubicle and spin brilliant ideas out of your head and say "Why cant that happen?" and "Why cant this be done like that and like that?".
And all your ideas are brilliant and they all have answers too. But sitting on IV forums and posting brilliant ideas isnt worth a bucket of warm spit if you are not willing to go out, travel and talk to people in authority and run your ideas and requests with them.
And yes, talking about donkeys and horses, the problem isnt that I am expecting wrong things from the wrong animals. The problem is that donkeys expect to be treated like horses not because they can run fast like horses but because they think they can run as fast as horses.
Coming back to horse and donkeys, you didn't read my post properly. The essence of the story was to convey everyone of the members can't do everything you ask them to do. A leader ( if you are in a managment postion making decision you will understand better what I am saying here) should know how to make best out of the group he has.
I would also thank whomever who brought my star color back to green :) after sometime in the red zone.
Again, you have this approach of "This should be done, that should be done" or "What is wrong with this...why not work like this to avoid waste and be more efficient etc etc".
I believe that you work for the Government. But I dont think you have talked to the government ever about fixing any of the issues. Big difference.
All the big brilliant ideas that we come up with, in our heads, are pretty much meaningless to administration and congress and they wont do it unless they have other reasons to do it.
You are like a person saying "What's wrong with doing assignment of visa numbers and then approving based FIFO..bla bla bla". Its like saying "What's wrong with passing electric current thru a tungsten filament in a glass ball of vaccum to create light". That is DIFFERENT from commercial production of electric bulb. That bridge - between and idea and its production - takes a lot of initiative and faces a lot of roadblocks.
I will give you an example, and since you work for Government, I believe you will understand this easily.
I was in a recent meeting with administration officials along with our lobbyist and 4 other IV members. One of the issues, that is purely and administrative issue and doesnt need congressional act is In country visa revalidation. Prior to 2002, St. Louis had an office where you can mail your passport for restamping after H1 extensions and dont have to travel out of country. We asked them why that cant be restarted.(just like your style of why this cant be done and why that cant be done, its so simple and makes so much sense...bla bla bla). You know what their reply was..."We dont have a problem in doing that, and the issue is not security. Its just that if we reject someone, that someone is already in USA and would drag the rejection thru an immigration lawyer, file motions for re-appeal and re-consideration, and take us to court...and we have to fight that and spend money from DHS coffers to do that. If we reject someone's visa stamp in Mumbai consulate, we dont have to worry about it as that someone cannot take us to court and its cheaper for us".
Now, WHO would have thought about that? You see what I am saying. Here we are, speculating that they stopped visa restamping in USA (St. Louis) because of security reasons. And the real reason is - An attempt by DHS to save money on litigation it would face from rejections. Could you have known or imagined that? And who would have found the answer from IV forums. If I had posted that question here on forums, would I ever know that? No. It takes effort just to know the answers to questions. And then it takes some more effort to suggest more solutions and answers to their concerns. And then some more effort to get it done once they agree.
Its very easy to sit in your cubicle and spin brilliant ideas out of your head and say "Why cant that happen?" and "Why cant this be done like that and like that?".
And all your ideas are brilliant and they all have answers too. But sitting on IV forums and posting brilliant ideas isnt worth a bucket of warm spit if you are not willing to go out, travel and talk to people in authority and run your ideas and requests with them.
And yes, talking about donkeys and horses, the problem isnt that I am expecting wrong things from the wrong animals. The problem is that donkeys expect to be treated like horses not because they can run fast like horses but because they think they can run as fast as horses.
2010 I mean, Bethenny Frankel?
mannan74
08-27 10:42 PM
I-140 Filed 7/12/07 (Pending)
I-485, I-765, I-131 Filed 7/25/07 (Ofcourse pendin)
Dont know if checks cashed as it was sent by my company lawyers.
No Reciepts yet for either of them, atleast not yet updated in my employee profile in company.
Thanks
I-485, I-765, I-131 Filed 7/25/07 (Ofcourse pendin)
Dont know if checks cashed as it was sent by my company lawyers.
No Reciepts yet for either of them, atleast not yet updated in my employee profile in company.
Thanks
more...
simple1
05-02 03:12 PM
thanks IVcore for looking into the request.
I would like to know your response. Could you please post it in this thread ? possibly with references you received from the attorney ?
I think IV core has some concerns regarding the correctness of the legal advise that you received from your attorney. Let us wait for them to clarify.
I would like to know your response. Could you please post it in this thread ? possibly with references you received from the attorney ?
I think IV core has some concerns regarding the correctness of the legal advise that you received from your attorney. Let us wait for them to clarify.
hair Bethenny Frankel makes Forbes
gcseeker2002
07-05 12:09 PM
my 485 also reached Nebraska on July 2nd at 9:01 am
by FEDEX.
Is my boat Sinking or floating
All boats have been sunk by the USCIS torpedo , one massive torpedo that sank 300000 boats to the bottom of the ocean, some even below that
by FEDEX.
Is my boat Sinking or floating
All boats have been sunk by the USCIS torpedo , one massive torpedo that sank 300000 boats to the bottom of the ocean, some even below that
more...
jindhal
09-24 11:42 PM
Guys this year's party is pretty much over :rolleyes:....whts the point debating something whether right or wrong which pretty much nobody can do anything about except went frustration from whichever side of the isle one sits on.....
As per Mr C.O. of USCIS I guess they have sent out the party invitation for the year so I guess there is no point sniping at each other. New inivitations will start from July next yr...;)
Take a chill pill guys....its a weekend.....get a beer....enjoy life( beleive me GC or no GC these days will not come by:make the most) :D
I agree..
As per Mr C.O. of USCIS I guess they have sent out the party invitation for the year so I guess there is no point sniping at each other. New inivitations will start from July next yr...;)
Take a chill pill guys....its a weekend.....get a beer....enjoy life( beleive me GC or no GC these days will not come by:make the most) :D
I agree..
hot Tickreel: Bethenny Frankel:
immigrationaccount
08-31 12:13 PM
When we tried to schedule infopass (for sep) we found only one are two dates and appointments start from 6 AM. Is this correct? Will the office be open so early? We got a slot at 7.30 AM.
Also once you book an appoinment, I see only 'cancel' option, how to get to modify option?
Thank you for all the help.
Also once you book an appoinment, I see only 'cancel' option, how to get to modify option?
Thank you for all the help.
more...
house #42Bethenny Frankel
darslee
07-07 12:32 AM
The South African family is "staying tuned". July 14th is my daughter's birthday and we have a party planned (We live 3 hours drive away from San Jose) but any other day, you can count on us being there!
tattoo Forbes has published its
coolcat
06-17 12:18 PM
Mailed to NSC on: May 31st.
Mailed From State: AZ
Received at NSC on: June 1st
Transferred to TSC on: ?
140 approved from : CSC
Receipt Date :?:confused:
Notice date :?
Mailed to NSC on: May 31st.
Mailed From State: AZ
Received at NSC on: June 1st
140 approved from : CSC
Receipt Date : Received (by lawyers) on Jun 16th.
Mailed From State: AZ
Received at NSC on: June 1st
Transferred to TSC on: ?
140 approved from : CSC
Receipt Date :?:confused:
Notice date :?
Mailed to NSC on: May 31st.
Mailed From State: AZ
Received at NSC on: June 1st
140 approved from : CSC
Receipt Date : Received (by lawyers) on Jun 16th.
more...
pictures mogul Bethenny Frankel
shankar_thanu
03-25 04:20 PM
Mani_r1,
Went to the Washington DC office in Fairfax (Prosperity Ave). Got an appointment for finger printing scheduled for April8
Went to the Washington DC office in Fairfax (Prosperity Ave). Got an appointment for finger printing scheduled for April8
dresses #42Bethenny Frankel
mike_2000_la
06-15 06:48 PM
Folks, when you send/ask about details, it'd help if you could post your details like this (format borrowed from another post):
Here are the details:
Mailed to NSC on May 31st.
Received at NSC on June 1st.
Transferred to TSC (I-140 was Approved from TSC)
Receipt Date - June 01
Notice date - June 08
suggestion to add one more piece of info which maybe useful..
MailedFromState:
here is mine....
Mailed to NSC on: Jun 1st.
Mailed From State: CA
Received at NSC on: ?
Transferred to TSC on: ?
140 approved from : CSC
Receipt Date :?
Notice date :?
Here are the details:
Mailed to NSC on May 31st.
Received at NSC on June 1st.
Transferred to TSC (I-140 was Approved from TSC)
Receipt Date - June 01
Notice date - June 08
suggestion to add one more piece of info which maybe useful..
MailedFromState:
here is mine....
Mailed to NSC on: Jun 1st.
Mailed From State: CA
Received at NSC on: ?
Transferred to TSC on: ?
140 approved from : CSC
Receipt Date :?
Notice date :?
more...
makeup #42Bethenny Frankel
simple1
05-02 01:04 AM
Families will never get separated. Please don't use emotional wordings without basis.
GC holder's marriage (regardless of their stream) to indian citizen (derivative) will make the indian citizen wait for atleast 5 years ( based on current vb date for fb2a or gc sponsor becoming citizen in 5 years ). Why are you tying N400 eligibility with this ? regardles of the interpretation any gc have to show ( 5years presence, atleast 6+ months a year, 30 months etc) to become eligible to become USC ? You could be referring to a special and/or complex case of lot or large reentry permit ?
Expect for some rare special cases of long reentry permits, This interpretation I am suggesting will neither enhance their condition or make it worse for any derivative already-in or newly-entering FB2A.
I read some were 88k visas are available for FB2A. I think they are safe.
Look at the EB3 mess. Is it in any way fair for EB-primary to wait that long ?
The analysis on the FB movement by simple1, et al is based on the current VB. This will result in severe retrogression in the FB categories. Are you willing to assume the burden that comes with classification in the FB category - separation of family while waiting for PD to be current? Think of what it will do to someone who comes to US on GC through the FB category and later gets married to an Indian citizen. The current wait time for that individual is 5+ years and the individual cannot stay with spouse for a long stretch otherwise he/she loses the GC or does not meet minimum residency requirement for citizenship.
GC holder's marriage (regardless of their stream) to indian citizen (derivative) will make the indian citizen wait for atleast 5 years ( based on current vb date for fb2a or gc sponsor becoming citizen in 5 years ). Why are you tying N400 eligibility with this ? regardles of the interpretation any gc have to show ( 5years presence, atleast 6+ months a year, 30 months etc) to become eligible to become USC ? You could be referring to a special and/or complex case of lot or large reentry permit ?
Expect for some rare special cases of long reentry permits, This interpretation I am suggesting will neither enhance their condition or make it worse for any derivative already-in or newly-entering FB2A.
I read some were 88k visas are available for FB2A. I think they are safe.
Look at the EB3 mess. Is it in any way fair for EB-primary to wait that long ?
The analysis on the FB movement by simple1, et al is based on the current VB. This will result in severe retrogression in the FB categories. Are you willing to assume the burden that comes with classification in the FB category - separation of family while waiting for PD to be current? Think of what it will do to someone who comes to US on GC through the FB category and later gets married to an Indian citizen. The current wait time for that individual is 5+ years and the individual cannot stay with spouse for a long stretch otherwise he/she loses the GC or does not meet minimum residency requirement for citizenship.
girlfriend #42Bethenny Frankel
raghav0
09-24 01:03 PM
I cant believe that this kind of "Crab Mentality" would still exist especially now when we need to stop cribbing about these petty issues and unite to fight for our cause...Please GROW UP!!!
hairstyles #42Bethenny Frankel
simple1
05-01 12:00 PM
gc_on_demand ,
I am not anti at all. I am trying to understand the law.
How does a (I485) spouse doesnt have EAD and AP on hand (even if not using it and in H4/L2 etc)?
Wont they have problem when the dates become current and GC is issued to primary.
I am not anti at all. I am trying to understand the law.
How does a (I485) spouse doesnt have EAD and AP on hand (even if not using it and in H4/L2 etc)?
Wont they have problem when the dates become current and GC is issued to primary.
rameshvaid
11-18 08:04 AM
Done!!!!
nixstor
07-08 11:24 AM
no it will not be voilation of the law at all. consider this scenario thats been going on for the last 30+ years. For example July 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was jan 2003 and the August 2006 visa bulletin for EB2 india was unavailable. EB2 india visa numbers might have already been used up when the August 2006 visa bulletin was released but they still accepted the AOS petitions filed until the end of July 2006, they did not issue an updated visa bulletin or a revised visa bulletin saying eb2 india numbers are used up and they will not accept eb2 india aos applications, they continued accpeting AOS applications until the end of july 2006.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
Absolutely, Those who filed in June 2006 had a visa number available which were exhausted by the month of Aug 2006. I am not saying that there is a one to one match between availability of visa number and adjudication of visa number. To be more clear, DOS and USCIS might have took 30K applications when there were 20k visa numbers. I am totally aware of this. How ever, all these went unnoticed because there was not a deluge of applications like this and USCIS did not care much about the extra 10K, who will wait until they are available. It could also be possible that they were doing this so randomly like they have done right now, with out proper communication and have not hurt each other. But the deluge of applications sure did bothered USCIS and hence they worked over time to exhaust numbers. As we all know, there is no rule to say that if there are 20K visa numbers, stop accepting applications once you reach 20K, they have to honor the VB for that month even though they get 200k applications. Thats why they exhausted the number by July 1st and when they could not complete by Jun 30th. I feel that USCIS will have a tough time answering
a) How USCIS used the numbers before the start of the quarter, even though they are not authorized to?
b) How USCIS approved some folks on July 1st , when the July VB is already effective?
c) lastly the poor communication between agencies and the grievances suffered by every one involved, if at all.
If you have the patience you can go through the visa bulletin archieves and find many such examples. The point is for the last 30+ years USCIS\DOS accepted applications according to the visa bulletin even when visa numbers were used up, they could have just followed the same precedent that they themselves set for the last 30+ years and accepted the applications this time as well without issuing a revised visa bulletin. I am no legal expert but that is how i see it.
Absolutely, Those who filed in June 2006 had a visa number available which were exhausted by the month of Aug 2006. I am not saying that there is a one to one match between availability of visa number and adjudication of visa number. To be more clear, DOS and USCIS might have took 30K applications when there were 20k visa numbers. I am totally aware of this. How ever, all these went unnoticed because there was not a deluge of applications like this and USCIS did not care much about the extra 10K, who will wait until they are available. It could also be possible that they were doing this so randomly like they have done right now, with out proper communication and have not hurt each other. But the deluge of applications sure did bothered USCIS and hence they worked over time to exhaust numbers. As we all know, there is no rule to say that if there are 20K visa numbers, stop accepting applications once you reach 20K, they have to honor the VB for that month even though they get 200k applications. Thats why they exhausted the number by July 1st and when they could not complete by Jun 30th. I feel that USCIS will have a tough time answering
a) How USCIS used the numbers before the start of the quarter, even though they are not authorized to?
b) How USCIS approved some folks on July 1st , when the July VB is already effective?
c) lastly the poor communication between agencies and the grievances suffered by every one involved, if at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment