yabadaba
06-21 07:35 AM
Although that the rule..I dont think USCIS actively follows it. The reason for that being the ombudsman report that states that the adjudicating officers pick low hanging fruit first (simple strforward cases) and that is reflected on where people have been getting their 485 approved within 90 days (which the ombudsman's report states is uscis's goal). right now the processing date is holding at 9 months. maybe to dissuade people from continously calling the NSC 1800 number.
wallpaper NAMM 2010: New Squier guitars
gcwait2007
06-29 11:58 PM
Chanduv23,
What about RFE without being current? Can it also be taken as Pre-adjudicated? Pls advise.
Thank you
What about RFE without being current? Can it also be taken as Pre-adjudicated? Pls advise.
Thank you
krishmunn
03-27 10:04 AM
I seriously doubt the genuinity of this poster. No authority will hold a valid passport of a foreign country, no country will allow to let one in with a copy of passport heck the airline will not even allow to board without a passport.
This guy may be here just to play some scare tactics.
This guy may be here just to play some scare tactics.
2011 Fender will release its Squier
f1vlad
07-17 02:18 PM
can you provide the link to that blog? I cannot find it.
more...
crazyghoda
06-11 10:06 AM
Now that was some freudian slip :D. Thanks for the early morning humor.
USCIS tops any other US pubic office
USCIS tops any other US pubic office
priderock
05-15 10:35 AM
Wonder how many core group members benefited with this forward movement !!
more...
mbartosik
05-30 01:28 PM
I understand if someone was stuck in BEC, we all got s****ed with that.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
But why given that the H1B is only intended to be for a maximum of 6 years would anyone leave it until the last year to apply.
PERM has been around for a while now, and anyone approaching 6 years should have already filed PERM or be ready to leave after year 6.
2010 Fender Stratocaster Guitar
webpromo
03-25 09:50 AM
they gave the xerox copies of the passport , and hold my passport , I never heard any one in this situation , they are so stupid and racial ,and I don't think they make sense , read this this is real situation in US this is true , because I the victim of this
Guide to US Deportation (http://www.asifism.com/guide-to-us-deportation/)
Guide to US Deportation (http://www.asifism.com/guide-to-us-deportation/)
more...
keerthi
07-14 08:32 AM
Hello Ruben,
I have forwarded my employer's email to you. Also, I have sent it through this forum's private messaging. Please check and let me know.
Thanks.
I have forwarded my employer's email to you. Also, I have sent it through this forum's private messaging. Please check and let me know.
Thanks.
hair Squier Rock Band . Game Guitar
mambarg
08-03 05:18 PM
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. 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.
Question 12. Can the 180 days that an I-485 application must be pending for I-140 portability eligibility accrue during a period when visa numbers are unavailable?
Answer: Yes. The fact that a visa number becomes unavailable after the filing of the I-485 application does not stop the number of days required for I-140 portability eligibility from accruing.
Question 13. Does the alien�s priority date change as a result of porting under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: No. The priority date continues to be determined at the time of the initial labor certification filing with the Department of Labor or at the time the initial I-140 immigrant petition is filed with USCIS (in cases where no labor certification is required).
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for �same or similar� employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?
Answer: An I-140 is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
A. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
B. 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.
Question 12. Can the 180 days that an I-485 application must be pending for I-140 portability eligibility accrue during a period when visa numbers are unavailable?
Answer: Yes. The fact that a visa number becomes unavailable after the filing of the I-485 application does not stop the number of days required for I-140 portability eligibility from accruing.
Question 13. Does the alien�s priority date change as a result of porting under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: No. The priority date continues to be determined at the time of the initial labor certification filing with the Department of Labor or at the time the initial I-140 immigrant petition is filed with USCIS (in cases where no labor certification is required).
Question 14. Must the alien have a new offer of employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the I-140 portability provisions?
Answer: Yes. The alien cannot still be looking for �same or similar� employment at the time the I-485 is being adjudicated under the adjustment portability provisions. The alien must be able to show there is a new valid offer of employment at the time the I-485 is adjudicated.
more...
anilsal
12-20 11:51 PM
I am from IL. I will try to attend. I will request other IL state chapter members to join the call, if they have some free time.
hot Controller. Squier
mdforgc
02-23 05:43 AM
I had the same experience when I was trying to arrange state volunteers for IV to meet the lawmaker, I was asked questions to the same effect.. What and howmuch of IV resources are being spent for labor backlog elimination? It is stated in the agenda on the home page. A webfax for a letter writing campaing was suppsed to start, but has not started yet. I think IV should work onputting up the letter on the site for people to use to send to lawmakers.
more...
house FENDER Squier Stratocaster
IN2US
03-17 11:21 AM
Your flow of logic is correct but you ar ebuilding this palace on soft land...:). Your "numbers" base is way way small... There are thousands of EB2 switch over occured and there are thousands and thousands of applications are waiting in EB2. If you add up thosands and thousands then you can reach million speedly.. right? Only July 2007 filing was around 500000. You just apply crude maths: 500000/3 (Categories) = So EB2 numbers are = 1,66,667.
Now divide 1,66,667/5 ( IN,CHina,MX, Philipines,ROW) = 33333. That is just for July 2007. Now to scare you more let me tell you that there was number around during July 2007 in all immigration boards that around 500000 applications are stuck in the process including Name Check (No claim on accuracy of that number but pretty much bignames were talking about that number so generally you would trust that number.) So now start applying your logic andyou would realize the seriousness of the problem.
no offense but the above doesn't make any sense what so ever, so does majority of your posts.
and stop pretending to be a guru on immigration issues and leave the analysis part to the real experts.
Peace :)
Now divide 1,66,667/5 ( IN,CHina,MX, Philipines,ROW) = 33333. That is just for July 2007. Now to scare you more let me tell you that there was number around during July 2007 in all immigration boards that around 500000 applications are stuck in the process including Name Check (No claim on accuracy of that number but pretty much bignames were talking about that number so generally you would trust that number.) So now start applying your logic andyou would realize the seriousness of the problem.
no offense but the above doesn't make any sense what so ever, so does majority of your posts.
and stop pretending to be a guru on immigration issues and leave the analysis part to the real experts.
Peace :)
tattoo Controller. Squier (by
retropain
09-01 11:08 AM
What's particularly interesting is the number of 'scare words' used in this selected testimony on aspects of the CIR bill. Its a lot like Loo Dobbs "War" on the middle class. Its clear CIS, Nusa, FAIR provide the script to him on immigration matters. I knew Loo wasn't that creative in the first place
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
=---
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL W. CUTLER
SEPTEMBER 1, 2006
HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, Ranking Members Conyers and Jackson Lee, members of Congress, distinguished members of the panel, ladies and gentlemen. It is a distinct honor and privilege to provide testimony at this hearing because the topic of the hearing is of truly critical significance. We are here to avert what I believe would be a catastrophe for the United States. The United States Senate passed a bill, S. 2611, that would provide incentives for a massive influx of illegal aliens, aided, abetted and induced to violate our nation’s immigration laws at a time that our nation is confronting the continuing threat of terrorism and the increasing involvement of violent gangs, comprised predominantly of deportable aliens, in a wide variety of violent crimes committed against our nation’s citizens. It is of critical importance that this hearing and others like it, illuminate why S. 2611 would expose our nation to unreasonable vulnerabilities especially in the post-9/11 world.
A nation’s primary responsibility is to provide for the safety and security of its citizens and yet, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom, the members of the Senate who voted for S. 2611 are seemingly oblivious to the lessons that the disastrous amnesty of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) should have taught us. That piece of legislation lead to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation. Fraud and a lack of integrity of the immigration system not only flooded our nation with illegal aliens who ran our borders, hoping that what had been billed as a “one time” amnesty would be repeated, but it also enabled a number of terrorists and many criminals to enter the United States and then embed themselves in the United States.
A notable example of such a terrorist can be found in a review of the facts concerning Mahmud Abouhalima, a citizen of Egypt who entered the United States on a tourist visa, overstayed his authorized period of admission and then applied for amnesty under the agricultural worker provisions of IRCA. He succeeded in obtaining resident alien status through this process. During a 5 year period he drove a cab and had his license suspended numerous times for violations of law and ultimately demonstrated his appreciation for our nation’s generosity by participating in the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 that left 6 people dead, hundreds of people injured and an estimated one half billion dollars in damage inflicted, on that iconic, ill-fated complex. America had opened its doors to him so that he might participate in the “American Dream.” He turned that dream into our worst nightmare. The other terrorists who attacked our nation on subsequent attacks, including the attacks of September 11, 2001, similarly exploited our generosity, seeing in our nation’s kindness, weakness, gaming the immigration system to enter our country and then, hide in plain sight, among us.
As I recall, when IRCA was proposed, one of the selling points was that along with amnesty for what was believed to have been a population of some 1.5 million illegal aliens would be a new approach to turn off what has been described as the “magnet” that draws the majority of illegal aliens into the United States in the first place, the prospect of securing employment in the United States. In order to accomplish this important goal, IRCA imposed penalties against those unscrupulous employers who knowingly hired illegal aliens. My former colleagues and I were pleased to see that under the employer sanctions of IRCA, the unscrupulous employers of illegal aliens would be made accountable, or so we thought. We were frustrated that we had seen all too many employers hire illegal aliens and treat them horrendously They paid them sub-standard wages and created unsafe, indeed hazardous working conditions for the illegal aliens they hired, knowing full well that these aliens would not complain because they feared being reported to the INS. Meanwhile the employer would not face any penalty for his outrageous conduct. Finally, it seemed that the employer sanctions provisions of IRCA would discourage employers from hiring illegal aliens and would also make it less likely they would treat their employees as miserably as some of these employers did.
Of course, we now know that the relative handful of special agents who were assigned to conduct investigations of employers who hired illegal aliens made it unlikely that employers would face a significant risk of being caught violating these laws and that they would face an even smaller chance of being seriously fined. Furthermore, the way that the amnesty provisions of the law were enacted simply created a cottage industry of fraud document vendors who provided illegal aliens with counterfeit or altered identity documents and supporting documents to enable the illegal alien population to circumvent the immigration laws. Ultimately approximately 3.5 million illegal aliens emerged from the infamous shadows to participate in the amnesty program of 1986. I have never seen an explanation for the reason that more than twice as many aliens took advantage of the 1986 amnesty than was initially believed would but I believe that two factors came into play. It may well be that the number of illegal aliens in the country was underestimated. I also believe, however, that a large number of illegal aliens were able to gain entry into the United States long after the cutoff point and succeeded in making false claims that they had been present in the country for the requisite period of time.
To put this in perspective, I have read various estimates about the number of illegal aliens who are currently present in the United States. These estimates range from a low of 12 million to a high of 20 million. If, for argument sake, we figure on a number of 15 million illegal aliens, or ten times the number that had been estimated prior to the amnesty of 1986, and if the same sort of under counting occurs and if a comparable percentage of aliens succeed in racing into the United States and making a false claims that they had been here for the necessary period of time to be eligible to participate in the amnesty program that the Reid-Kennedy provisions would reward illegal aliens with, then we might expect some 35 million illegal aliens will ultimately participate in this insane program. Once they become citizens they would then be eligible to file applications to bring their family members to the United States, flooding our nation with tens of millions of additional new lawful immigrations while our nation’s porous borders, visa waiver program and extreme lack of resources to enforce the immigration laws from within the interior of the United States would allow many millions of illegal aliens to continue to enter the United States in violation of law.
The utterly inept and incompetent USCIS, which is now unable to carry out it’s most basic missions with even a modicum of integrity would undoubtedly disintegrate. The system would simply implode, crushed by the burden of its vicious cycle of attempting to deal with an ever increasing spiral of rampant fraud thereby encouraging still more fraudulent applications to be filed. Terrorists would not find gaming this system the least bit challenging and our government will have become their unwitting ally, providing them with official identity documents in false names and then, ultimately, providing them with the keys to the kingdom by conferring resident aliens status and then, United States citizenship upon those who would destroy our nation and slaughter our citizens.
I hope that this doomsday scenario will not be permitted to play out.
Insanity has been described as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different result. Where our nation’s security is concerned it would be indeed, insane to ignore the lessons of IRCA.
When I was a boy my dad used to tell me that there were no mistakes in life, only lessons, provided we learn from what goes wrong and make the appropriate changes in the way we do things. However, to repeat the same mistakes was to him and to me, simply unforgivable.
Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler, I commend your leadership in calling this hearing to make certain that these concerns are made public and are taken into account, especially as we approach the anniversary of the fifth anniversary of the attacks of September 11 and our nation continues to grapple with the immigration crisis.
America is at historic crossroads at this moment in time. Courageous decisions need to be made by our nation’s leaders. If our nation fails to select the proper path, there will be no going back. If our nation decides to provide amnesty to millions of undocumented and illegal aliens, I fear that our national security will suffer irreparable harm as we aid and abet alien terrorists who seek to enter our country and embed themselves within it in preparation for the deadly attacks they would carry out. The priority must be clear, national security must be given the highest consideration and priority where the security of our nation’s borders and the integrity of the immigration system are concerned.
more...
pictures Squier guitar by fender a
kondur_007
02-15 06:26 PM
I have the same query:
Permit: using EAD and calling AC21
Role: exactly the same.
Salary: large difference (bayarea vs small city in under developed state) due to the prevailing wage at the new location is far lower.
Experts please advice.
As discussed above with cyrus mehta's blog: This is all discretionary:
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
Permit: using EAD and calling AC21
Role: exactly the same.
Salary: large difference (bayarea vs small city in under developed state) due to the prevailing wage at the new location is far lower.
Experts please advice.
As discussed above with cyrus mehta's blog: This is all discretionary:
My definition f discretionary: "You need a good lawyer which can wrap your sandwich in "golden wrap" and sell it for $45 instead of seeling it in a "brown bag" for $3.75. It's the same sandwich!!" It sounds harsh, but that's the reality when you deal with a demon called "Law and Lawyers".
Simple version: have it worded by a good lawyer to justify it and make it "same or similar". It is the "wrap" that determines the "price".
Good Luck.
dresses Squier by Fender Stratocaster
gapala
04-22 02:53 PM
Think twice before you jump into mistakes. How can you survive in USA if you dont have a job.
I agree with the other post, you probably might be better in India in this economy.
Also US is becoming something else, due to the pressure from "protectionalists" and you need to wait and see what happens in an year or so. This is not 1998, it is 2009.
To answer your question, you chances for 2010 H1B is extremely low.
Though your intention is to help OP, there are certain things that need to be observed especially in this climate where there is lot of backlash against legal immigrants. We have to ensure that we do not provide any ammu to anti's with our comments.
For an employer to sponsor a foreign worker on H1B,
First of all, there needs to be a skilled worker position open and available in US and
2nd that there are no "qualified" US citizens are available to fill that position.
OP's post goes against both these conditions, Forget about the rest such as bad economy, survival etc.. as per law, Employer has to pack the H1B home if the position is knocked off with a flight ticket and a reasonable relocation.
No offense to any one but just calling for more caution as we have seen increased number of posts like these.
I agree with the other post, you probably might be better in India in this economy.
Also US is becoming something else, due to the pressure from "protectionalists" and you need to wait and see what happens in an year or so. This is not 1998, it is 2009.
To answer your question, you chances for 2010 H1B is extremely low.
Though your intention is to help OP, there are certain things that need to be observed especially in this climate where there is lot of backlash against legal immigrants. We have to ensure that we do not provide any ammu to anti's with our comments.
For an employer to sponsor a foreign worker on H1B,
First of all, there needs to be a skilled worker position open and available in US and
2nd that there are no "qualified" US citizens are available to fill that position.
OP's post goes against both these conditions, Forget about the rest such as bad economy, survival etc.. as per law, Employer has to pack the H1B home if the position is knocked off with a flight ticket and a reasonable relocation.
No offense to any one but just calling for more caution as we have seen increased number of posts like these.
more...
makeup Fender Stratocaster Guitar
guygeek007
07-26 09:41 AM
Lapisguy,
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
You can file for 485 concurrently while your 140 application is pending. Your attorney should be advising you accordingly.
girlfriend 2011 Fender® Showcase: Squier® by Fender Stratocaster® Guitar and Controller
andr.in
05-27 03:25 PM
lmao! These are great!
But the one fester made reminds me of the personal pages most estonians have! :P lol
I can't decide! They all suck <-- lol First time i've ever said that meaning that something is done well!
But the one fester made reminds me of the personal pages most estonians have! :P lol
I can't decide! They all suck <-- lol First time i've ever said that meaning that something is done well!
hairstyles Fender Stratocaster Guitar
reddog
04-08 04:19 PM
All i am asking is the media they know and number of users. I dont know what you talking about.
Ok, how do we contact the state representative. Through the county representative, then the city, then street?
We are IV. I believe that is what chandu meant. Core is just a group of people who incidentally reserved the domain name and configured joomla.
Ok, how do we contact the state representative. Through the county representative, then the city, then street?
We are IV. I believe that is what chandu meant. Core is just a group of people who incidentally reserved the domain name and configured joomla.
Nanda
07-11 11:00 PM
I am in Tampa. Let me know if I can help in any way.
voldemar
03-20 11:15 AM
Not sure how withdrawing an approved I140 is good for the employee??
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
And law firm is right, they protect their clients. Search this forum for I-140 revocation by USCIS. I-140 was approved and then revoked by USCIS itself. In that case AC21 does not help, 485 will be denied.
The general feeling is that I140 withdrawal is not necessary for the employer (but H1b is). But employers used to do this for labor substitution - now there is no such incentive. But still some lawyers suggest employers to do this - in my old company which is a large well known software company (with 10k+ employees worldwide) the HR group follows immigration attorneys almost blindly. All immigration issues are handled by a big law firm - many of regular immigration matters are done by paralegals who does not know much (I am not exaggerating when I say I know more than them) - but our HR has a policy that they would follow what those attorney/paralegal is saying. It seems the law firm is suggesting them to withdraw all applications including approved i140 - obviously the law firm would charge them for this so that is their interest.
And law firm is right, they protect their clients. Search this forum for I-140 revocation by USCIS. I-140 was approved and then revoked by USCIS itself. In that case AC21 does not help, 485 will be denied.
No comments:
Post a Comment