chi_shark
07-16 10:55 AM
now this is weird... aside from the poster's main question: why does uscis want proof of *continuous employment* since the poster filed for 485? all they should care about is the future job... isnt that right? why do they want employment history?
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
Hi Friends,
I received an RFE last week. There were 3 points in the RFE.
The first point in the RFE says,
Submit a current and properly completed form G-325A biographic information sheet for yourself. Please Note: Answer all questions in the form 325a. If any information has changed such as your employer or marital status you must submit the required supporting evidence as indicated in the instructions for Form I-485.
Second Point and Third point are respectively
Proof of continuous employment and maintaining status since Oct 1st 2007 to till date. ( Interestingly my I-485 notice date was in the month of October 07)
Employment verification letter stating the offer still stands as per EB visa petition.
A quick brief abt my case: I'm a July 07 filer. I was single when I filed my I-485. My I-140 was approved in the beginning of 2008. I'm with the same company. I got married last year end, my wife is here with me on H4.
My question is concerning the first point.
Does the marriage certificate and my wife's H4 Visa sufficient enough to provide proof of marital status change as per I-485. In this case, Do I need to include affidavit of support etc. for my spouse now? Also do I need to provide birth certificate of my spouse?
Has any of you who were single when filing I-485 received a similar RFE ? How did you respond to the same?
Appreciate your suggestions
Thanks in advance.
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
Hi Friends,
I received an RFE last week. There were 3 points in the RFE.
The first point in the RFE says,
Submit a current and properly completed form G-325A biographic information sheet for yourself. Please Note: Answer all questions in the form 325a. If any information has changed such as your employer or marital status you must submit the required supporting evidence as indicated in the instructions for Form I-485.
Second Point and Third point are respectively
Proof of continuous employment and maintaining status since Oct 1st 2007 to till date. ( Interestingly my I-485 notice date was in the month of October 07)
Employment verification letter stating the offer still stands as per EB visa petition.
A quick brief abt my case: I'm a July 07 filer. I was single when I filed my I-485. My I-140 was approved in the beginning of 2008. I'm with the same company. I got married last year end, my wife is here with me on H4.
My question is concerning the first point.
Does the marriage certificate and my wife's H4 Visa sufficient enough to provide proof of marital status change as per I-485. In this case, Do I need to include affidavit of support etc. for my spouse now? Also do I need to provide birth certificate of my spouse?
Has any of you who were single when filing I-485 received a similar RFE ? How did you respond to the same?
Appreciate your suggestions
Thanks in advance.
wallpaper house justin bieber cardboard
gcformeornot
04-08 11:59 AM
Its time to file for my EAD. I was wondering what option people prefer most these days. Online or Paper?
Please vote.
Please vote.
billu
08-20 02:10 PM
4. An apology from USCIS for the delay!!
i think we should have USCIS director come home personally to deliver sincere apology in both verbal and written for making people from india file GC and provide detailed explaination for reasons of the delay....thats the only way for him to keep getting our business in future...
i think we should have USCIS director come home personally to deliver sincere apology in both verbal and written for making people from india file GC and provide detailed explaination for reasons of the delay....thats the only way for him to keep getting our business in future...
2011 New+justin+ieber+cardboard+cutout Teenage pop sensation justin bieber
lostinbeta
10-03 12:18 PM
I replied to that thread :)
more...
H1bslave
11-14 10:27 AM
At the time of 485 approval if future employer (B) is responging to RFE then yes you must work for long-term with B, however, in today's world 6 months is considered long-term.
Well, are you sure I would need to work for this "future employer" for 6 months?
AC21 does not have a limit on the number of times you switch employers. Technically, if you were working for Employer A at the time of the RFE and submit a EVL from Employer A, you could then switch to Employer B immediately on AC21. In this scenario, I haven't worked with A for 6 months.
Is this scenario different because A is not a future employer?
Well, are you sure I would need to work for this "future employer" for 6 months?
AC21 does not have a limit on the number of times you switch employers. Technically, if you were working for Employer A at the time of the RFE and submit a EVL from Employer A, you could then switch to Employer B immediately on AC21. In this scenario, I haven't worked with A for 6 months.
Is this scenario different because A is not a future employer?
gc_maine2
03-26 09:11 AM
Does anyone have experience flying in Qatar airlines, My mother in law is planing to fly by Qatar airlines. Any info would be great.
Thanks
Sree
Thanks
Sree
more...
GCNirvana007
03-30 08:18 AM
Thank you guys for helping me.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
Make sure its some sort of emergency given today's scenario.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
Make sure its some sort of emergency given today's scenario.
2010 a Justin Bieber cardboard
vdlrao
10-26 09:53 AM
I have observed the same thing.
more...
raysaikat
07-30 07:18 PM
I am stuck out side of US for my name check for last 9 months when I applied for my H-1. I have approved I 140. is there any way I can file my I 1485 and Advance parole or any thing to get back into US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
You cannot file I-485 unless you are physically present in the US. You can request a consular processing; i.e., for getting the green card when your PD is current, you will have to be in your home country where the IO in the US consulate will interview you (just like H1-B interview) and make a decision regarding whether to give you green card or not. Applying for CP or anything else connected to GC will not make you eligible to enter US. You must have a visa (or green card) for that.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
You cannot file I-485 unless you are physically present in the US. You can request a consular processing; i.e., for getting the green card when your PD is current, you will have to be in your home country where the IO in the US consulate will interview you (just like H1-B interview) and make a decision regarding whether to give you green card or not. Applying for CP or anything else connected to GC will not make you eligible to enter US. You must have a visa (or green card) for that.
hair Ryan Seacrest Cardboard Cut
eb3_nepa
11-05 10:28 PM
Hello everyone,
Can anyone shed more light on what kind of jobs qualify for NON-Cap H1B jobs?
A few months ago people had floated the term "Non Cap H1bs".
Thanks
Can anyone shed more light on what kind of jobs qualify for NON-Cap H1B jobs?
A few months ago people had floated the term "Non Cap H1bs".
Thanks
more...
sgorla
06-05 06:36 PM
I remember reading in the I-765 instructions that EAD card application should be sent to the service center where I-485 application is pending. So, in your case it could be TSC. If you file your EAD online, the system automatically generates the service center address where your supporting documents need to be sent.
Can someone please respond to my question. Thanks.
Can someone please respond to my question. Thanks.
hot Justin Bieber Cardboard
axp817
07-04 09:55 AM
Why would doing anything legal have implications on becoming a citizen?
And to answer your question, No, your owning a gun legally, has no implications whatsoever on getting your citizenship.
There are many legal gun owners who don't even have their green card yet, and no, they are not going to face any problems during 485 approval either.
Look through some of my old posts, and you'll find a thread with information on legal aliens owning guns in America, although a lot of the information on that thread pertains to non-immigrant aliens. You being a permanent resident, have it much easier. Go through that thread and if you still have questions, ask, and I'm sure you'll get an answer.
Good luck, be a safe, responsible, and proud gun owner.
And to answer your question, No, your owning a gun legally, has no implications whatsoever on getting your citizenship.
There are many legal gun owners who don't even have their green card yet, and no, they are not going to face any problems during 485 approval either.
Look through some of my old posts, and you'll find a thread with information on legal aliens owning guns in America, although a lot of the information on that thread pertains to non-immigrant aliens. You being a permanent resident, have it much easier. Go through that thread and if you still have questions, ask, and I'm sure you'll get an answer.
Good luck, be a safe, responsible, and proud gun owner.
more...
house to Justin Bieber cardboard
mhathi
08-22 11:04 AM
Did you efile or paper-file? Most of the E-filed applications are taking ~90 days to get to Card Production Ordered (CPO) status. Mine took exactly ninety days.
tattoo Check out my Justin Bieber
sasimks75
08-23 06:10 PM
To aarzoo, did you apply the I140 again in EB2? i am in the same boat. My lawyer said the samething and applied another i140 in Eb2. Can you please let me know your experience? Mine is applied in July 6th 2010.
more...
pictures Justin Bieber Cardboard
alterego
12-12 07:09 PM
How there could be demand for visa numbers for EB2 India between the years 2000 & 2002. The possible sources of such visa number demand would be from BEC or LC substitution. Both require filing a new I-140 recently, which most likely would not have been approved yet. Are visa numbers alloted even before I-140 is approved??
Unless there were some real unlucky ones with PD earlier than 2002 that got through 'namecheck' just recently.
You forget that BECs were clearing up since some time now, and that 140PP was available until late July. Which person in his/her right mind having endured the BEC nightmare would not have done the 140PP, and if they did that and filed concurrently, then if all goes well 485 could easily get wrapped up in 4-6 months. I know of a person from EB2 ROW who got his green card start(PERM) to finish(485 approval) in 8mths flat. Similar examples, if a little slower abound at . To him this can seem an efficient system!
Unless there were some real unlucky ones with PD earlier than 2002 that got through 'namecheck' just recently.
You forget that BECs were clearing up since some time now, and that 140PP was available until late July. Which person in his/her right mind having endured the BEC nightmare would not have done the 140PP, and if they did that and filed concurrently, then if all goes well 485 could easily get wrapped up in 4-6 months. I know of a person from EB2 ROW who got his green card start(PERM) to finish(485 approval) in 8mths flat. Similar examples, if a little slower abound at . To him this can seem an efficient system!
dresses justin bieber mother and
ArkBird
12-12 04:22 PM
Yes. If the company financials are problem, you may have the same problem with EB3. I suggest, get paid consultation from some reputed lawyers.
Refile as what lawyer says, get new H1. That will give you some breathing room. If you see that current financial problem may jeopardize the new GC process as well, then you should switch over.
I assume this lawyer is hired by the company. So he will never advise you to make a move. It is you who have to look at all the options and see if it makes sense.
Refile as what lawyer says, get new H1. That will give you some breathing room. If you see that current financial problem may jeopardize the new GC process as well, then you should switch over.
I assume this lawyer is hired by the company. So he will never advise you to make a move. It is you who have to look at all the options and see if it makes sense.
more...
makeup Maybe my Justin Bieber cutout
roseball
05-02 02:09 PM
It shouldn't be a problem if you get into a financially sound company and hire a good attorney...PERM and I-140 shouldn't take more than 6 months if you hire a good attorney.....
girlfriend cardboard cutout justin
bestin
10-23 06:09 PM
Appreciate your dedication WD/CC.I am kind of busy this week.Will get back to u this weekend.
hairstyles I think I have a Justin Bieber
June05
08-06 11:33 AM
Congratulations!
Quick question: Do you know what your online receive date was before the application got approved? This is the date the USCIS website states that they received your application on. Thx
Quick question: Do you know what your online receive date was before the application got approved? This is the date the USCIS website states that they received your application on. Thx
smuggymba
08-10 08:48 AM
Friends
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
We did the COS from H4 (stamped) to F1 for my wife ourselves. It was easy, no lawyer but we got an RFE on the dollar amount so we replied again ourselves (giving an excel sheet etc). You can do it yourself.
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
We did the COS from H4 (stamped) to F1 for my wife ourselves. It was easy, no lawyer but we got an RFE on the dollar amount so we replied again ourselves (giving an excel sheet etc). You can do it yourself.
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo1JDGy_Uwof0pywWBRSW0i2bnbKzWwtDtML6DT66m_-Y82lP8FHzMwL96jbgO7UZE4s_DpKBHbyqupS0L-u3HlcITJQ99Cpj22fueYlO6RgF67A4ySg8ffLzd8d7vcsHYmmnSomhj9n4/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo1JDGy_Uwof0pywWBRSW0i2bnbKzWwtDtML6DT66m_-Y82lP8FHzMwL96jbgO7UZE4s_DpKBHbyqupS0L-u3HlcITJQ99Cpj22fueYlO6RgF67A4ySg8ffLzd8d7vcsHYmmnSomhj9n4/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo1JDGy_Uwof0pywWBRSW0i2bnbKzWwtDtML6DT66m_-Y82lP8FHzMwL96jbgO7UZE4s_DpKBHbyqupS0L-u3HlcITJQ99Cpj22fueYlO6RgF67A4ySg8ffLzd8d7vcsHYmmnSomhj9n4/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo1JDGy_Uwof0pywWBRSW0i2bnbKzWwtDtML6DT66m_-Y82lP8FHzMwL96jbgO7UZE4s_DpKBHbyqupS0L-u3HlcITJQ99Cpj22fueYlO6RgF67A4ySg8ffLzd8d7vcsHYmmnSomhj9n4/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)