gandalf_gray
06-08 11:36 PM
Here is what I would do:
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Thanks AMGC. need one clarification.
do you mean to say that because my L1 is expiring in September, the COS will not be allowed, but the H1 itself will be approved ?
or will it be like because L1 expires before Oct1, the entire h1B petiton will be rejected outright ?
I have this thread on this topic.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=253917
- Fast track the H-1B application using premium processing so that you know for sure whether you have it or not.
- If they approve your petition, it will have a start date of Oct 1. Since your L1 is expiring in Sept, they will not approve the change of status. So, you will get the approval notice without the attached I-94.
- Once you have the approval notice in hand, set up an appointment for your H-1B visa in your home country. Leave the country before your L1 I-94 expires.
- Get the H-1B visa and come back in Oct to work for your new employer.
If you decide to do the L1 extension now, then you get into issues of which petition was approved last by the USCIS - last action rule. Keep it straightforward with minimal complications so that your future applications, such as GC, are also less complicated.
Also, a word to the wise - make sure you are not unpaid/on bench, no nonsensical bonds etc. when you come in on H-1. These things create unnecessary complications in the future.
Thanks AMGC. need one clarification.
do you mean to say that because my L1 is expiring in September, the COS will not be allowed, but the H1 itself will be approved ?
or will it be like because L1 expires before Oct1, the entire h1B petiton will be rejected outright ?
I have this thread on this topic.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=253917
wallpaper is the difference between
vdlrao
07-19 12:11 AM
We need a realistic estimate of how many applications are pending with PD in 2004. Another thing to bear in mind is the conversion from EB3->EB2. That is also going to hinder the movement of EB2. There are a lot of people trying to use that route.
Yes there would be definetely jumpings from EB3 India to EB2 India. But having allotment of 10 times more of VISA numbers for EB2 India, I presume time is very near by for EB2 India to be current.
Yes there would be definetely jumpings from EB3 India to EB2 India. But having allotment of 10 times more of VISA numbers for EB2 India, I presume time is very near by for EB2 India to be current.
nomi
12-11 04:12 PM
I think the act says that the alien should have filed an application, only after which does the question of available visa comes into picture.
http://www.americanlaw.com/aos.html
I think this act is not the applicable one.
So I think we are still green to discuss this. Do you interpret the same?
so let`s see what does core team `s opinion about it ?? Core Team, please throw some light on it.
Thx.
http://www.americanlaw.com/aos.html
I think this act is not the applicable one.
So I think we are still green to discuss this. Do you interpret the same?
so let`s see what does core team `s opinion about it ?? Core Team, please throw some light on it.
Thx.
2011 The difference lies in two
senthil1
02-19 12:28 AM
What do you wish? You need gc the moment you enter the country? If anyone who stays 5 years get green card.That is excellent if legal or illegal immigrant. This is apart from 140K regular quota. This will reduce backlog substantially.
If you are lazy enough to contact your representative and Obama, you should not complain for not getting your voice heard. Each and every email matter. Also contact Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] on her website. contact all. It wont take 5 minutes.
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
If you are lazy enough to contact your representative and Obama, you should not complain for not getting your voice heard. Each and every email matter. Also contact Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee [D, TX-18] on her website. contact all. It wont take 5 minutes.
Dear (Congressman/woman, Pres. Obama):
Recently an immigration bill was presented in the congress. The HR 264 is embarrassing for legal immigrants.
1) People who are illegal here for more than 5 years will get green card/path to citizenship but people who are legally here for 4 years and 11 months gets nothing.
2) HR 264 says "continuous presence of 5 years". Of course illegal immigrants can't leave the country and they will fulfill this requirement, but legal immigrants can leave country so might have left country for even 3 or 4 months in last 5-6 years to visit home country or any other reason including business. Although brief discontinuity is said to be okay but what if some legal immigrant leave country to be his/her parents for 2 months in last 5 years? So, this continuous presence rule is tailor cut to include illegal immigrants and exclude legal immigrants.
Is this what law abiding get when they follow rules? I request you to make sure that legal immigrants are ahead of illegals in every way. An illegal should not be awarded for being in US for 5 years while a legal, law abiding, tax paying legal immigrant is offered nothing for being in US for 3 or 4 years.
Kind regards
(Your name)
https://writerep.house.gov/htbin/wrep_save
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
Now click on the links above and copy paste this stuff there. IT IS IMPORTANT....
more...
file485
01-30 01:19 PM
again from H1 to H4 ..if u dont find a job will be another major horror story if u want to change your status from H1 to H4 as you have 2 show atleast 2 paystubs to show u maintained your H1...or go back home and get a H4 stamping...
all is a horror story..either u take a H1 and only look forward..even if u want to change your H1 to another company u need paystubs... so living in the USA is no joke,bottomline..
all is a horror story..either u take a H1 and only look forward..even if u want to change your H1 to another company u need paystubs... so living in the USA is no joke,bottomline..
mmk123
06-10 04:06 PM
done. thanks!
more...
pappu
07-01 10:22 PM
Info on the lawsuit by AILA:
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
==============
USCIS VISA BULLETIN/
VISA AVAILABILTY LAWSUIT
Frequently Asked Questions about Participating in this Lawsuit
AILF is considering filing a lawsuit in federal district court against the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) over its rejection of otherwise properly filed adjustment of status applications for the alleged reason that a visa was not available, even though the Visa Bulletin from the Department of State (DOS) states that a visa was available at the time of filing.
Any foreign national who is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status and whose adjustment of status application has been or will be returned or rejected solely on this basis may be eligible to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit. If you are considering being a participant in this lawsuit, you may find the following frequently asked questions and answers helpful.
Q: What is AILF?
A: The American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of immigrants and refugees and to securing fair and just application and administration of the U.S. immigration laws. In order to achieve these goals, AILF sometimes files lawsuits involving various aspects of immigration law.
Q: What is this lawsuit about?
A: This lawsuit will be filed by plaintiffs who have been harmed because USCIS rejected or returned or is expected to reject or return a properly submitted adjustment of status application for the alleged reason that no visa was immediately available even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that a visa was available at that time.
To be eligible for adjustment to lawful permanent resident status, a foreign national must show that a visa number is “immediately available.” USCIS regulations state that the DOS Visa Bulletin is used to determine whether a visa number is immediately available. This Bulletin is published once a month and lists the visa availability dates for all categories of immigrants for the following month. Thus, for example, the July 2007 bulletin, listing visa availability dates for the entire month of July, was published in June 2007.
AILF has learned that USCIS has refused to allow certain adjustment of status applications to be filed even though the DOS Visa Bulletin states that visa numbers are available for the immigrant category at that time. USCIS rejected these applications because DOS informed it in an internal communication that no visa numbers remained for that category of immigrants. To date, this has happened only in the employment-based “other worker” category. We anticipate that it may happen in a number of other types of employment-based immigrant categories beginning in July 2007.
We believe USCIS violated the law when it failed to apply the visa availability dates listed in the Visa Bulletin, as required by a federal regulation, and instead rejected properly filed adjustment applications. Through this lawsuit, we will challenge the rejection of adjustment of status applications on this basis. We will ask the court to order USCIS to accept the rejected adjustment applications and treat them as being filed as of the date they originally would have been filed had USCIS not rejected them.
Q: What is a “plaintiff” and how do I know if I am eligible to be a “plaintiff” in this lawsuit?
A: A plaintiff is a person who files a lawsuit against someone else. We are still determining the categories of plaintiffs but an eligible plaintiff for this lawsuit may include:
[other worker category]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in the “other worker” category for receipt by USCIS in June 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
[other employment-based categories]
A foreign national who:
Submitted an adjustment of status application in any employment-based category other than “other worker” for receipt by USCIS in July 2007; and
Is otherwise eligible for adjustment of status; and
Did not receive a receipt notice, cancelled check, or notice of approval of the adjustment application.
Q: Why should I be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
2
A: If the lawsuit is successful, USCIS should accept your adjustment application and treat it as if it had been filed as of the date that you originally tried to file it. Because your adjustment application will then be considered to be pending before the agency, you may be eligible for interim benefits, including an employment authorization document, advance parole, and others.
What the lawsuit will not do is make a visa number immediately available to you if none is available. If the visa numbers have in fact been used for the current fiscal year, the court does not have the authority under the law to make a new number available to you. However, if the court orders that USCIS accept your adjustment application as of the date that you originally tried to file it, you will be at an earlier place in line when visa numbers become available again in the next fiscal year, October 1, 2007. Additionally, as mentioned, you may be eligible for interim benefits while you are waiting.
Q: What is likely to happen because of the suit?
A: Lawsuits are uncertain by nature. We cannot predict the exact outcome. However, other efforts to resolve these problems with USCIS have not succeeded. For this reason, we believe that a lawsuit is the only remaining possible way to resolve these problems.
Q: Will being a plaintiff in this lawsuit hurt my chances for permanent residence?
A: If an individual is otherwise legally entitled to have an application granted, the government cannot lawfully deny that application on the basis that the person is participating or participated in a lawsuit. If we believed the government was taking such action, we would complain to the lawyers representing the government and to the judge handling the case. In our experience, this retaliation has not happened.
Please be aware, though, that USCIS is likely to examine plaintiffs’ adjustment of status applications more closely than it otherwise might. It may ask the plaintiffs questions and ask for additional information about their adjustment applications or immigration status. See below regarding “discovery.”
Q: How much time must plaintiffs spend on this lawsuit?
A: Plaintiffs will have to provide us with the information and documentation we need in order to prepare the lawsuit. AILF will do most of the work in the lawsuit on paper. Depending on how the case proceeds, the government and its attorneys may want to ask the plaintiffs some questions about their case, either through written questions and answers or in person. This is called “discovery.” One type of discovery is a “deposition,” which is an interview where parties are asked questions about their cases.
Depositions are possible but not common in this type of case. In the event that discovery and/or depositions were required, an AILF attorney or an attorney working with us would assist plaintiffs to comply with any discovery requests, and would appear with plaintiffs at any deposition at no charge (see below). At a later stage, a plaintiff may be required to be present at
3
a hearing or a trial and possibly be asked to testify about their particular case, but this is quite rare.
Q: Will it cost me anything to be a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: AILF and any co-counsel will not charge any attorney’s fees for representing individuals in this lawsuit. AILF and any co-counsel also will pay the costs and expenses associated with the lawsuit, such as filing fees, copying, long distance calls, travel expenses for AILF attorneys and staff, depositions, transcripts, etc. In the unlikely event that an individual should be required to be present at a deposition, hearing or a trial, we may ask that he/she pay their own travel and lodging expenses, if any. Those expenses would be reimbursed if the lawsuit is successful and we recover costs.
Q: Will anyone know that I am a plaintiff in this lawsuit?
A: Lawsuits are public information, and are available as a public court document. Many courts now have lawsuits and other documents available electronically, accessible via the internet. Also, USCIS will, of course, know the identity of the plaintiffs. We also will discuss plaintiffs’ cases with any other lawyers working with us on the lawsuit. It also is possible that the media – newspapers, radio, or TV reporters – will see the court documents and decide to do a story on the lawsuit.
Q: What should I do if I am eligible and interested in being a plaintiff in the lawsuit?
A: Please quickly submit the Questionnaire for Potential Plaintiffs and send us the documents requested. If you do not have the Questionnaire, please send an email to visabulletin@ailf.org, and we will send it to you. You may also fax a request to AILF LAC at (202) 742-5619. Please indicate this is a question about the visa bulletin litigation.
If you have any questions that are not answered by this FAQ or the questionnaire, please send them to visabulletin@ailf.org or fax to (202) 742-65619, and we will respond. Thank you!
===============
2010 The Street Food Experts never
tikka
07-03 09:34 PM
What IV will do different than what AILF is planning to do? They are not asking for any money for participating in litigation. What will happen if you don't reach your target of $5000 before you do something? (may be lawsuit).
Nobody takes money for filing lawsuit in any case, atleast not in advance.
No offense, but i thought you need to be little bit more clear in what exactly you plan to do with $5000.
I don't care if you get offended with my asking. But I am trying to unsderstand if i am missing something.
No one is offended but you might get more info if you pm core.
thank you
Nobody takes money for filing lawsuit in any case, atleast not in advance.
No offense, but i thought you need to be little bit more clear in what exactly you plan to do with $5000.
I don't care if you get offended with my asking. But I am trying to unsderstand if i am missing something.
No one is offended but you might get more info if you pm core.
thank you
more...
JazzByTheBay
09-26 10:17 AM
That's what Ron Hira said would happen - by aligning with Compete America, we do run the risk of getting the IV message obfuscated.
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/18/experts-tech-companies-h1b-visa-demands-could-obscure-immigrationvoices-more-specific-call-for-green-cards/
jazz
Oh My God, CNN is screwing us in different way now. They are telling american people the Rally last week at SC was for increse in H1B and not for Incresed GCs.
I am getting freakled out by such American politics. I thought USA is different than INDIA atleast in this regard.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/smbusiness/h1b_cap.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2007092606
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/18/experts-tech-companies-h1b-visa-demands-could-obscure-immigrationvoices-more-specific-call-for-green-cards/
jazz
Oh My God, CNN is screwing us in different way now. They are telling american people the Rally last week at SC was for increse in H1B and not for Incresed GCs.
I am getting freakled out by such American politics. I thought USA is different than INDIA atleast in this regard.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/smbusiness/h1b_cap.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2007092606
hair images cheetah food chain
Madhuri
04-23 08:50 PM
as Always logiclife rocks.....so precise and neat. Core members like him is the ultimate reason I have full faith and confidence in IV leadership.
Its not like you are going to threaten to vote against them. YOU HAVE NO VOTING power for next 15 years.[/QUOTE]
Logic Life -- YOU ROCK MAN !![/QUOTE]
Its not like you are going to threaten to vote against them. YOU HAVE NO VOTING power for next 15 years.[/QUOTE]
Logic Life -- YOU ROCK MAN !![/QUOTE]
more...
jsquare
08-19 04:45 PM
Hi,
This is for EAD Renewal (I-765)
I was working on H1 till May 08 now I am working on EAD
What should I write in column 15.(Current Immigration Status) in I-765 form
When I was on H1 in 2007, during first time EAD appliaction I filled with H1B
Please advice.
Thanks
JSQUARE
This is for EAD Renewal (I-765)
I was working on H1 till May 08 now I am working on EAD
What should I write in column 15.(Current Immigration Status) in I-765 form
When I was on H1 in 2007, during first time EAD appliaction I filled with H1B
Please advice.
Thanks
JSQUARE
hot on the food chain helps
snathan
04-06 08:23 PM
right..ok..today at work I heard from my colleague that his friend was sent back from airport
My colleague's friend's story.
Went to india for 3 weeks vacation..at POE, officer called his employer and asked "do you need him(a H1B) to work for this position? Cant you find any US Citizen?".
Apparently, the response from employer ( I think Desi consulting)is, "Yes..we dont need him..can find a USC"..
The poor guy is sent back.
Now, I asked my friend to inform his colleague to come forward and post his story at IV..but I doubt if he cares Rat's as** now that he is kicked out.
hmmm...I have a travel coming up in Nov/Dec...with all adventurous luck going on with me, I have other plans now :confused::confused:
hmmm...strange. I heard the same story from my colleague. He said his brother was in airport and one guy who returned from India after vocation asked why he needs the H1B. The IO called his employer/client and asked if he can be replaced by USC/GC holder. The employer responded Yes...So he was sent back...
Is it just coincident or new kind of rumor...I was thinking it might be possible. Afte reading your post...its confirmed. Its rumor.
My colleague's friend's story.
Went to india for 3 weeks vacation..at POE, officer called his employer and asked "do you need him(a H1B) to work for this position? Cant you find any US Citizen?".
Apparently, the response from employer ( I think Desi consulting)is, "Yes..we dont need him..can find a USC"..
The poor guy is sent back.
Now, I asked my friend to inform his colleague to come forward and post his story at IV..but I doubt if he cares Rat's as** now that he is kicked out.
hmmm...I have a travel coming up in Nov/Dec...with all adventurous luck going on with me, I have other plans now :confused::confused:
hmmm...strange. I heard the same story from my colleague. He said his brother was in airport and one guy who returned from India after vocation asked why he needs the H1B. The IO called his employer/client and asked if he can be replaced by USC/GC holder. The employer responded Yes...So he was sent back...
Is it just coincident or new kind of rumor...I was thinking it might be possible. Afte reading your post...its confirmed. Its rumor.
more...
house hair desert animals food chain
somegchuh
03-15 08:51 PM
I have been waiting for my GC on purpose. I really wanted it to take 6 years.
I really wanted to get my Labor to rot in PBEC and then I intentionally wanted to get stuck in Namecheck.
On a serious note, do you have any idea about how this systems works? Do you have any idea what BEC's were or what namecheck is.
We will talk about "what the hell have you have been doing for so long" in 4 years when you are moaning about how retrogression has affected you for the last 5 years.
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
I really wanted to get my Labor to rot in PBEC and then I intentionally wanted to get stuck in Namecheck.
On a serious note, do you have any idea about how this systems works? Do you have any idea what BEC's were or what namecheck is.
We will talk about "what the hell have you have been doing for so long" in 4 years when you are moaning about how retrogression has affected you for the last 5 years.
C'mon guys, what the hell have you been doing for so long?
I mean look at the archived Visa Bulletins, you observe the following:
1. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2003
2. EB2 was current for India ALL THROUGH 2004
3. EB2 was current for India till August 2005
4. After the retrogression in 2005, EB2 India moved up quickly through 2003-2004 to April 2004 by the beginning of 2007
5. Even after the summer 2007 fiasco (EB2 Current fro July, August 2007), the priority date for EB2 India moved to April 2004 and stayed there for 3 months
What more do you wish for?
I don't understand how there any can be anyone from 2004-2005 India still left in the EB2 category.
This is pathetic. What the hell have you been waiting for?
tattoo 2011 animal food chain pyramid
pcs
07-05 02:13 PM
They will be happy...
all the best
all the best
more...
pictures makeup cheetah food chain
gsc999
07-03 03:55 PM
Here is my $99 by paypal.
Amount: $99.00 USD
Transaction ID: 5DB90775US5552631
Amount: $99.00 USD
Transaction ID: 5DB90775US5552631
dresses ocean food chain worksheet.
Legal
07-20 10:38 PM
I'm having less and less faith in the claims made by members that USCIS is inefficient and clueless. ok, they have been and continue to be in many areas:):). However, they have a game plan this time. In retrospect, we know they had a game plan in June 07 also.
There are several unknown variables (repeatedly and extensively discussed here)which make accurate prediction impossible for us. However, USCIS has the numbers of RIPE CASES. And they moved the dates based on the availability of remaining GC numbers for this fiscal AND the ripe cases.
They could have moved it to just Dec 2005, instead they moved it all the way to June 2006.
Best\ optimistic scenario- Most EB-2-I cases upto June 2006 will be adjudicated before Oct 1st.
Conservative scenario-Upto at least Dec 2005 PD all cases will be adjudicated , and a few CP cases into early 2006 will be adjudicated. With spillovers happening in each quarter, the PD should continue to move.
There are several unknown variables (repeatedly and extensively discussed here)which make accurate prediction impossible for us. However, USCIS has the numbers of RIPE CASES. And they moved the dates based on the availability of remaining GC numbers for this fiscal AND the ripe cases.
They could have moved it to just Dec 2005, instead they moved it all the way to June 2006.
Best\ optimistic scenario- Most EB-2-I cases upto June 2006 will be adjudicated before Oct 1st.
Conservative scenario-Upto at least Dec 2005 PD all cases will be adjudicated , and a few CP cases into early 2006 will be adjudicated. With spillovers happening in each quarter, the PD should continue to move.
more...
makeup wallpaper simple food chain
getgreensoon1
05-23 02:22 PM
Thank You ! That was a good peek into your level of knowledge and understanding. No wonder you are always jealous of IT guys.
I am not jealous of computer workers, I pity their life, their overall ignorance about things around and their unwarrented arrogance.
I am not jealous of computer workers, I pity their life, their overall ignorance about things around and their unwarrented arrogance.
girlfriend desert food chain web.
jonty_11
06-13 01:33 PM
Guys, We understand its frustrating ...and the anxiety is growing day by day...but infighting wont help....ignore irrellevant posts..and kindly concentrate on educating the senators, media people abt our issues...Keep drilling home the point until we hear from IV core....thats the best we can do...
hairstyles The differences between the
greyhair
06-10 07:30 PM
For whatever reason, rumors are flying all over the Internet that the end of H1B and EAD employment authorization is at hand. This is complete nonsense. The purported basis for these rumors is an amendment offered in the Senate (S. Amdt. 4319) to a tax bill previously passed by the House (HR 4213). As written, this proposal would prohibit companies from filing H1B petitions if the company has laid off any employees in the last year. It would also void all existing H petitions for a company if the company lays off personnel.
Let's put this in context. Microsoft decides to lay off some of its loading dock personnel because they want to outsource that work. Under this proposal, they would then have to terminate all of their H1B engineers. That simply doesn't pass the laugh test.
Like most of Grassley's proposals, this amendment is pure idiocy. I suppose that's what happens when your parents are siblings. This bill has absolutely no chance of ever becoming law. .
It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. Pandering to the client base will not help the clients, it will only help the service provider.
Let's put this in context. Microsoft decides to lay off some of its loading dock personnel because they want to outsource that work. Under this proposal, they would then have to terminate all of their H1B engineers. That simply doesn't pass the laugh test.
Like most of Grassley's proposals, this amendment is pure idiocy. I suppose that's what happens when your parents are siblings. This bill has absolutely no chance of ever becoming law. .
It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. Pandering to the client base will not help the clients, it will only help the service provider.
reddymjm
10-15 01:58 PM
I will mail it today or tomorrow.
nonimmi
03-14 05:42 PM
We sent a letter to USCIS to revoke the existing G-28.
We just sent a letter and 485 receipt for me and my husband.
Just wanted to let u know.
Thanks for sharing the info. Did you get any new attorney?
We just sent a letter and 485 receipt for me and my husband.
Just wanted to let u know.
Thanks for sharing the info. Did you get any new attorney?