saimrathi
07-10 08:42 AM
What if we used so much of our time and energy in finding jobs in India/China and moving back, instead of going after media/govt? :confused:
Some of us have spent $35-40 on sending flowers, if we gave a internet job board that kind of money to send our resumes to prospective employers and headhunters in India, we may have a chance in finding a job in the emerging economy of India/China.. that will be THE biggest impact on US Govt... To add to my opinion, I would like to direct your attention to Microsoft... They didn't waste their resources on fighting the media, govt.. they just moved to Canada.. And believe me, there will be more such instances...
Some of us have spent $35-40 on sending flowers, if we gave a internet job board that kind of money to send our resumes to prospective employers and headhunters in India, we may have a chance in finding a job in the emerging economy of India/China.. that will be THE biggest impact on US Govt... To add to my opinion, I would like to direct your attention to Microsoft... They didn't waste their resources on fighting the media, govt.. they just moved to Canada.. And believe me, there will be more such instances...
wallpaper silver wallpaper
Anna35
09-19 03:20 PM
You know that's my point. do you really think we can't do nothing more?.....
we are highly sklilled smart and great immigrants creating the new America of the 21st century we can't just say, thats it lets wait.....
This country is about money, and we have the tremendous advantage that elections are coming, lets see the big picture.. why dont we jump to the next level from street protesters to work with one of the candidates or 2 or 3 , if they see money they will push our cause. Lets work on that now...
So those guys who attended the hearings or met with senators. what was the result? what did they accomplished? did they get the opportunity to participate with the senator or law maker in an action plan? or we just wasted that opportunity asking for autographs? please those guys post your comments.
I'm no negative just wondering how to measure the success of the rally?
we are highly sklilled smart and great immigrants creating the new America of the 21st century we can't just say, thats it lets wait.....
This country is about money, and we have the tremendous advantage that elections are coming, lets see the big picture.. why dont we jump to the next level from street protesters to work with one of the candidates or 2 or 3 , if they see money they will push our cause. Lets work on that now...
So those guys who attended the hearings or met with senators. what was the result? what did they accomplished? did they get the opportunity to participate with the senator or law maker in an action plan? or we just wasted that opportunity asking for autographs? please those guys post your comments.
I'm no negative just wondering how to measure the success of the rally?
drona
08-31 11:26 PM
Please tell me why you are not going to the Rally? Would really like to see you all there.
2011 Silver wallpaper
CT_Green
07-10 10:16 AM
If everyone agrees we should have a media camapign where we contact all the media outlets and let them know how CNN is providing air time to Lou Dobbs for his own propoganda against legal immigrants.
CNN should be ashamed of themselves for not providing fair reporting based on facts.
CNN should be ashamed of themselves for not providing fair reporting based on facts.
more...
permfiling
02-08 05:44 PM
Having said all this, I think it is safe to stay for a few months and then move on.. Wehave waited for nearly a decade.. what's the problem in staying for 4 months or so.. just take a vacation and go to India.. A month will go while in India, couple of months in planning and another month in recovering from Jet lag.. there you go.. it is 4 months now..
My cousin took a offer from a employer in CA who who did her H1 transfer but the condition mentioned in the agreement is that
In the event the employee voluntarily resigns or her employment is terminated for performance or cause prior to 3 years, employee agrees to reimburse the "Employer" for the full amount of legal, administrative and filing fees associated with the sponsorship of the employee's work visas as permitted by law.
The employer won't do premium processing so my cousin paid $1000 on her own but she had to travel outside the country to canada to get a new I-94. The employer's law firm filed the paper work with canada embassy in US to get a canadian visa.
Now my cousin got her GC through her hubby which her employer does not know .
The employment laws in CA are different in the sense that all these agreements are not valid so how can she move (if moves within 3 yrs) to another company without paying anything or a little fee to the employer. I told her that H1-B fees are not too high maybe around $4000.00 so the employer will have to spend lot of money on the lawyer's to go to court to suit her if she left say after 2 years of employment as she feels that the agreement is one sided considering the time line.
My cousin took a offer from a employer in CA who who did her H1 transfer but the condition mentioned in the agreement is that
In the event the employee voluntarily resigns or her employment is terminated for performance or cause prior to 3 years, employee agrees to reimburse the "Employer" for the full amount of legal, administrative and filing fees associated with the sponsorship of the employee's work visas as permitted by law.
The employer won't do premium processing so my cousin paid $1000 on her own but she had to travel outside the country to canada to get a new I-94. The employer's law firm filed the paper work with canada embassy in US to get a canadian visa.
Now my cousin got her GC through her hubby which her employer does not know .
The employment laws in CA are different in the sense that all these agreements are not valid so how can she move (if moves within 3 yrs) to another company without paying anything or a little fee to the employer. I told her that H1-B fees are not too high maybe around $4000.00 so the employer will have to spend lot of money on the lawyer's to go to court to suit her if she left say after 2 years of employment as she feels that the agreement is one sided considering the time line.
wonderlust
10-03 11:42 PM
Hi, I got two "receipts":
Number 1: received date: July 2nd and notice date: September 4. Receipt number: WAC-XXXXXX, It was sent from CSC
Number 2: this is a "transfer notice" with Receipt Date Aug 31 and Notice date September 7th. It said that my case had been transferred to NSC because I reside in the NSC jurisdiction. Please note that I sent my application to NSC to begin with...
Strangely, the transfer notice was also sent from an envelpe with CA stamping.
So I called yesterday and asked why the case was transferred back and forth and whether the delay in between affect my sequence in the processing time.
Answer: 1.Why did it get transferred? Because NSC center is overwhelmed and need help from CA center. Then CA center was overwhelmed so the case has to go back to NSC.
2. Does the delay affect my sequence in the processing time?
NO, the "Received Date" of July 2nd is recognized.
My thoughts: You can call and verify the information. My first call got to a woman who did not know what she is talking about.:mad: I had to call the second time. Please share your info if you had called or will call. USCIS is unreliable and random. We need to verify a couple times and see whether the answers are consistent--this has been my strategy dealing with them.
Thank you very much.
Wonderlust
Based on my receipt numbers and looking up on USCIS website, it appears my AOS application that was sent to NSC has been sent to California Center. I have not seen anybody's case being sent to CSC. Dunno how good or bad it is and whether it sppeds up/delays my EAD processing. Anybody had experience with CSC and got any of EAD/AP/GC approved from CSC.
Number 1: received date: July 2nd and notice date: September 4. Receipt number: WAC-XXXXXX, It was sent from CSC
Number 2: this is a "transfer notice" with Receipt Date Aug 31 and Notice date September 7th. It said that my case had been transferred to NSC because I reside in the NSC jurisdiction. Please note that I sent my application to NSC to begin with...
Strangely, the transfer notice was also sent from an envelpe with CA stamping.
So I called yesterday and asked why the case was transferred back and forth and whether the delay in between affect my sequence in the processing time.
Answer: 1.Why did it get transferred? Because NSC center is overwhelmed and need help from CA center. Then CA center was overwhelmed so the case has to go back to NSC.
2. Does the delay affect my sequence in the processing time?
NO, the "Received Date" of July 2nd is recognized.
My thoughts: You can call and verify the information. My first call got to a woman who did not know what she is talking about.:mad: I had to call the second time. Please share your info if you had called or will call. USCIS is unreliable and random. We need to verify a couple times and see whether the answers are consistent--this has been my strategy dealing with them.
Thank you very much.
Wonderlust
Based on my receipt numbers and looking up on USCIS website, it appears my AOS application that was sent to NSC has been sent to California Center. I have not seen anybody's case being sent to CSC. Dunno how good or bad it is and whether it sppeds up/delays my EAD processing. Anybody had experience with CSC and got any of EAD/AP/GC approved from CSC.
more...
kshitijnt
07-08 08:32 PM
I do agree with your thoughts to some extent.
1) Unless we get lot more folks involved, it will be a tough task. A small number for a DC rally or a few hundreds doing phone campaign will not achieve much.
2) Indian community (including GC holders, Citizens and highly placed individuals) would need to be involved if this has to become a visible voice.
The best way to achieve these objectives is by taking it upon ourselves and reach out to these people. Unless enough awareness is generated, our campiagns will not generate enough heat to power the bills forward.
Pappu - shall we approach someone like Sant Chatwal? He has promised to raise $10M for Obama and already raised $8M for Clinton. When he met Obama he said, I am doing it for my Indian American community. Maybe the Indian American community that is making this kind of donation needs to be made aware of CHC petty politics.
1) Unless we get lot more folks involved, it will be a tough task. A small number for a DC rally or a few hundreds doing phone campaign will not achieve much.
2) Indian community (including GC holders, Citizens and highly placed individuals) would need to be involved if this has to become a visible voice.
The best way to achieve these objectives is by taking it upon ourselves and reach out to these people. Unless enough awareness is generated, our campiagns will not generate enough heat to power the bills forward.
Pappu - shall we approach someone like Sant Chatwal? He has promised to raise $10M for Obama and already raised $8M for Clinton. When he met Obama he said, I am doing it for my Indian American community. Maybe the Indian American community that is making this kind of donation needs to be made aware of CHC petty politics.
2010 Silver leaf wallpaper
qvadis
12-29 04:03 PM
No one analysed the statue of the language used in 202 5 a.
If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5).
You might have to define what the word "is" is ;-)
Anyway, that paragraph also states: "If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise issued such visas,." but then continues on with: "the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation"
One could interpret this distinction such that the actual number of visas available is not necessarily the same number of visas made available, which is fixed to 28.6% + spill-over. It might, as well, comprise only those unused visas that haven't been passed down to a lower category. 203 (b) (2) / (3) and 202(5) seem to compete over the unused numbers. Not sure which one has preference.
This is the very direct, simple interpretation of 202 5 A.
Therefore one cannot (EB3-ROW) interpret, for their convenience.
Well, that's according to your interpretation. You seem to suggest that USCIS disagrees with your interpretation. We probably have to wait for the next immigration statistics to see what rule USCIS has been following.
Thats why I suggest the IV to discuss with experinced attorney and make a enquiry with law makers or DOS, if required. Otherwise (if it is wrong it is a big blow to India and China). We will get only 2800 per year.
I'd hope IV would focus on increasing the number of GCs available to all of us, instead of fighting for allocation. ACT-21 increased the number of H1B visas without increasing the number of GCs.
If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5).
You might have to define what the word "is" is ;-)
Anyway, that paragraph also states: "If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise issued such visas,." but then continues on with: "the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation"
One could interpret this distinction such that the actual number of visas available is not necessarily the same number of visas made available, which is fixed to 28.6% + spill-over. It might, as well, comprise only those unused visas that haven't been passed down to a lower category. 203 (b) (2) / (3) and 202(5) seem to compete over the unused numbers. Not sure which one has preference.
This is the very direct, simple interpretation of 202 5 A.
Therefore one cannot (EB3-ROW) interpret, for their convenience.
Well, that's according to your interpretation. You seem to suggest that USCIS disagrees with your interpretation. We probably have to wait for the next immigration statistics to see what rule USCIS has been following.
Thats why I suggest the IV to discuss with experinced attorney and make a enquiry with law makers or DOS, if required. Otherwise (if it is wrong it is a big blow to India and China). We will get only 2800 per year.
I'd hope IV would focus on increasing the number of GCs available to all of us, instead of fighting for allocation. ACT-21 increased the number of H1B visas without increasing the number of GCs.
more...
Jimi_Hendrix
06-26 02:38 PM
PD Aug 2001
RD Jan 2005
CSC case transfered to NSC in Feb 07
Senator Inquiry 5 days ago yielded result that cards will be ordered in 30 days.
RD Jan 2005
CSC case transfered to NSC in Feb 07
Senator Inquiry 5 days ago yielded result that cards will be ordered in 30 days.
hair Audi silver Wallpaper gt; HD
stucklabor
04-12 12:39 PM
Guys, these are all good suggestions.
However, it is a fact that EAD/AP etc are given in certain circumstances only. Eg to students on OPT, applicants for Adjustment of Status etc. I dug through INA and it specifically says that the Attorney General shall provide Work permits to applicants waiting for Adjustment of Status applicants. I don't have the time to dig through again and provide a reference, but in any case:
USCIS can't just go give EADs to whomever they please. Legislation is required to authorize these benefits. Students are allowed to work on OPT because Congress legislated that they may, not because USCIS thought it was a good idea.
The bigger point that I am trying to make is that whether we get EAD/AP as a derivative of I485 filing even with retrogression, or as a beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition, is immaterial. Legislation is required to bring about these changes.
If you think about concurrent filers in situations where USCIS takes a long time over immigrant petitions, then you are better off with EAD/AP being a benefit of 485 filing rather than waiting for the I140 approval. You get EAD/AP in a couple months instead of waiting for i140 approval then filing for EAD/AP.
At this point, I am going to go back into hibernation. Thanks.
BTW, please don't quote a whole post if all you are going to say is "I agree".
However, it is a fact that EAD/AP etc are given in certain circumstances only. Eg to students on OPT, applicants for Adjustment of Status etc. I dug through INA and it specifically says that the Attorney General shall provide Work permits to applicants waiting for Adjustment of Status applicants. I don't have the time to dig through again and provide a reference, but in any case:
USCIS can't just go give EADs to whomever they please. Legislation is required to authorize these benefits. Students are allowed to work on OPT because Congress legislated that they may, not because USCIS thought it was a good idea.
The bigger point that I am trying to make is that whether we get EAD/AP as a derivative of I485 filing even with retrogression, or as a beneficiary of an approved immigrant petition, is immaterial. Legislation is required to bring about these changes.
If you think about concurrent filers in situations where USCIS takes a long time over immigrant petitions, then you are better off with EAD/AP being a benefit of 485 filing rather than waiting for the I140 approval. You get EAD/AP in a couple months instead of waiting for i140 approval then filing for EAD/AP.
At this point, I am going to go back into hibernation. Thanks.
BTW, please don't quote a whole post if all you are going to say is "I agree".
more...
Pegasus503
02-20 06:46 PM
The damn thing was taken down before I could save it. Did anyone save the file?
The link just worked for me
I saved it as a pdf and doc, but the upload keeps failing so here's the text:
Office of Communications
Questions & Answers
February 20, 2008
FBI NAME CHECK POLICY
Q. How has USCIS changed its national security reporting and adjudication requirements?
A. USCIS has not changed its background check policies as those policies related to naturalization applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for applications where the immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI name check response is received after approval. For these types of applications, including applications for lawful permanent residence, the adjudicators will approve the application if it is otherwise approvable and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably.
Q. Why is this policy being implemented?
A. This policy change is in response to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security?
A. Yes. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings. Lastly, in general these individuals have been in the United States for some time and have previously been subjected to DHS background checks.
Q. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A. Applications included in this policy are:
• I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
• I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
• I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
• I-698, Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of Public Law 99-603).
Q. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are affected by this policy change?
A. USCIS is currently aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases that are otherwise approvable but for the fact that an FBI name check is pending. In a subset of these case, the FBI name check request that been pending for more than 180 days. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
Q. How long will it take for USCIS to work through these cases affected by the policy change?
A. USCIS has begun identifying the cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
Q. USCIS Director Gonzalez pledged in his January 17, 2008, testimony regarding naturalization backlogs before Congress not to cut corners in the adjudicative process or risk national security in the interest of production? Does this policy comply with the Director’s pledge?
A. Yes. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400), For those applications for permanent residence that are affected by this policy modification, no application will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. USCIS will continue to initiate the FBI name check requests upon receipt of the applications and will review, monitor and track cases approved under this policy until the FBI name check is complete. In the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings.
Q. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A. No.
Q. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if they believe their application meets the criteria of this new policy?
A. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about cases affected by this policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer service line at 1-800-375-5283.
Q10. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center if their fingerprints have expired?
A10. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new/updated fingerprint checks are needed.
in the time it took me to copy and paste it was already posted above
The link just worked for me
I saved it as a pdf and doc, but the upload keeps failing so here's the text:
Office of Communications
Questions & Answers
February 20, 2008
FBI NAME CHECK POLICY
Q. How has USCIS changed its national security reporting and adjudication requirements?
A. USCIS has not changed its background check policies as those policies related to naturalization applications. Recently, the agency did modify its existing guidance for applications where the immigration laws allow for the detention and removal of individuals if actionable information from a FBI name check response is received after approval. For these types of applications, including applications for lawful permanent residence, the adjudicators will approve the application if it is otherwise approvable and the FBI name check request has been pending for more than 180 days. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably.
Q. Why is this policy being implemented?
A. This policy change is in response to a 2005 DHS Inspector General recommendation that USCIS align its background check screening policies with those of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
Q. Is this policy consistent with the national security priorities of USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security?
A. Yes. No application for lawful permanent residence will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. In addition, in the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings. Lastly, in general these individuals have been in the United States for some time and have previously been subjected to DHS background checks.
Q. What applications are affected by this policy change?
A. Applications included in this policy are:
• I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status;
• I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility;
• I-687, Application for Status as a Temporary Resident Under Section 245A of the Immigration and Nationality Act; and
• I-698, Application to Adjust Status from Temporary to Permanent Resident (Under Section 245A of Public Law 99-603).
Q. How many applications for lawful permanent residence are affected by this policy change?
A. USCIS is currently aware of approximately 47,000 applications for permanent residence (I-485) cases that are otherwise approvable but for the fact that an FBI name check is pending. In a subset of these case, the FBI name check request that been pending for more than 180 days. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008.
Q. Does this policy change affect naturalization applications?
A. No. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400),
Q. How long will it take for USCIS to work through these cases affected by the policy change?
A. USCIS has begun identifying the cases affected by this policy modification in each field office and service center. Each office will evaluate the pending cases and will adjust their workload accordingly. USCIS anticipates that the majority of the cases that are subject to this policy modification will be processed by mid-March 2008. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about their cases. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate pending cases.
Q. USCIS Director Gonzalez pledged in his January 17, 2008, testimony regarding naturalization backlogs before Congress not to cut corners in the adjudicative process or risk national security in the interest of production? Does this policy comply with the Director’s pledge?
A. Yes. There is no change in the requirement that FBI name check, FBI fingerprint and IBIS check results be obtained and resolved prior to the adjudication of an Application for Naturalization (N-400), For those applications for permanent residence that are affected by this policy modification, no application will be approved until a definitive FBI fingerprint check and Interagency Border Inspection Services (IBIS) check are completed and resolved favorably. USCIS will continue to initiate the FBI name check requests upon receipt of the applications and will review, monitor and track cases approved under this policy until the FBI name check is complete. In the unlikely event that DHS receives actionable information after the application is approved, it will initiate removal proceedings.
Q. The memorandum identifies I-485, I-601, I-687 and I-698 forms. Is there a plan to include other forms, specifically nonimmigrant and naturalization, in this policy?
A. No.
Q. Should customers contact USCIS through the 1-800 customer service number or make an INFOPASS appointment to visit their local office if they believe their application meets the criteria of this new policy?
A. We recommend that customers wait until mid-March before inquiring about cases affected by this policy modification. This will allow each office sufficient time to identify and adjudicate the relevant pending cases. If no action is taken by mid-March, we recommend inquiring with the USCIS customer service line at 1-800-375-5283.
Q10. Will USCIS automatically notify an applicant to appear at an Application Support Center if their fingerprints have expired?
A10. Applicants will be notified through an appointment notice if new/updated fingerprint checks are needed.
in the time it took me to copy and paste it was already posted above
hot A Wall Of Silver Wallpaper
murali77
08-05 12:34 PM
poorslumdog
Please email me at win77in@gmail.com for the CSCP material.
thanks
Murali
Please email me at win77in@gmail.com for the CSCP material.
thanks
Murali
more...
house wallpaper lack silver
wellwishergc
04-12 07:57 AM
Thanks werc, for this posting.. It makes things very clear!!!
The only leeway USCIS has w.r.t EADs are the duration of the EADs and not the timing of the issue of the EAD. The fact that the EAD can be given only after the I485 is filed is governed by the INA.
Further the grant of EADs in all the eligible categories is more or less the same. Even if the timing of the grant of the EAD were in USCIS hands ,it is hard to request an alternative interpretation of the regulation in some cases (eg after I-140) while retaining the same interpretation for other categories (eg EAD after completion of Education). This just opens up a lot of loopholes.
ON top of all this we have to take into consideration the huge inherent inertia of the USCIS to change. As already pointed out the only recourse available would be to change the law of the land, on which path we are already traversing.
The only leeway USCIS has w.r.t EADs are the duration of the EADs and not the timing of the issue of the EAD. The fact that the EAD can be given only after the I485 is filed is governed by the INA.
Further the grant of EADs in all the eligible categories is more or less the same. Even if the timing of the grant of the EAD were in USCIS hands ,it is hard to request an alternative interpretation of the regulation in some cases (eg after I-140) while retaining the same interpretation for other categories (eg EAD after completion of Education). This just opens up a lot of loopholes.
ON top of all this we have to take into consideration the huge inherent inertia of the USCIS to change. As already pointed out the only recourse available would be to change the law of the land, on which path we are already traversing.
tattoo black silver wallpaper. lack
whitecollarslave
02-12 06:41 PM
He sent me an email to pay $3500, do you think he will go legal for this, I did not sign any contract with him.
If he goes to court will i loose(he may create documents) or will i be in trouble if he wins the case.
Please suggest.
All this for $3500? Its going to cost him a lot more if he wants to file a lawsuit.
I don't think anybody will tell you for sure what the court will rule. Even if you pay a lawyer he will not tell you that - not in writing. Chances are that this will not even go to court and based the discussion on this thread its very unlikely if this will hold in any court.
BTW, how did he come up with the figure 3500? Is that the salary that was paid to you while you were working for another company? As somebody pointed out earlier if this was the money paid to you as compensation when you did not work for him then he might be reasonable in asking you to re-pay.
Let us know if you any information on what the 3500 figure is for.
An email does not mean anything. You can just ignore it. Unless you have a certified notice from court you have nothing to worry about.
If he goes to court will i loose(he may create documents) or will i be in trouble if he wins the case.
Please suggest.
All this for $3500? Its going to cost him a lot more if he wants to file a lawsuit.
I don't think anybody will tell you for sure what the court will rule. Even if you pay a lawyer he will not tell you that - not in writing. Chances are that this will not even go to court and based the discussion on this thread its very unlikely if this will hold in any court.
BTW, how did he come up with the figure 3500? Is that the salary that was paid to you while you were working for another company? As somebody pointed out earlier if this was the money paid to you as compensation when you did not work for him then he might be reasonable in asking you to re-pay.
Let us know if you any information on what the 3500 figure is for.
An email does not mean anything. You can just ignore it. Unless you have a certified notice from court you have nothing to worry about.
more...
pictures Damask Ladies Silver Wallpaper
md2003
09-10 01:27 PM
Even if i-140 is not approved one can still invoke ac21 (after fileing i485 and after 180 days) . But, your original employer has to answer if there is any i-140 rfe. And original employer can withdraw i-140 at any time until it get approved. So bottomline is, don't try to invoke ac21 until i-140 approved and your i485 is 180 days over.
dresses free iphone wallpaper:silver
eb3retro
10-26 03:02 PM
Finally after repeated expedite requests, SR, etc, I just received a call from my local congressman that NSC mentioned to them that AP renewal has been approved. I just saw a LUD update yesterday and today in my and my spouse's AP online case status. Its still sitting in initial review only. Hopefully it will show me approved in a day or two. Local congressman told that they will keep my case open until I call back and let them know its approved. Hoping to see an approval soon, will keep you all updated.
more...
makeup TDI Sport Silver Wallpaper
tnite
08-09 10:51 PM
http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html
Miss. Murthy reports that LS was rejected for some folks.
How does one get to know if his Labor Substitution was rejected? If a Receipt Notice was received does that mean that it was accepted? And, can they reject it later?
you missed the word "wrongly" rejected.
Miss. Murthy reports that LS was rejected for some folks.
How does one get to know if his Labor Substitution was rejected? If a Receipt Notice was received does that mean that it was accepted? And, can they reject it later?
you missed the word "wrongly" rejected.
girlfriend lack silver wallpaper.
suresh.emails
10-21 08:25 PM
Sanju,
There are two issues that I have posted on this thread.
1. Interpretation/understanding a post.
2. RED DOT issue ( this is not my priority) . If you read the post keenly.
You, .. your self have made a mistake in Interpretating / understanding the post and reacted overly on the second issue by cornering the actual post.
Do you call this as a Interpretation issue?. Did you get what am I saying. First , read and understand what others meant to be. Don't JUMP on it.
If IV cannot fix this RED DOT issue, how could some one believe in IV would fight for FIXING broken immigration system?.
Perspective is not always matters, there are times .... some thing else matter too. Which is called "Self Respect"
When few people are spending time and knowledge on sharing their thoughts/ideas, how good it would to use F***words against them?.
There are many BAD words ... that some members have used against of my friends. Who no more wanted to participate in IV?.
Did you get what am I saying?
There are two issues that I have posted on this thread.
1. Interpretation/understanding a post.
2. RED DOT issue ( this is not my priority) . If you read the post keenly.
You, .. your self have made a mistake in Interpretating / understanding the post and reacted overly on the second issue by cornering the actual post.
Do you call this as a Interpretation issue?. Did you get what am I saying. First , read and understand what others meant to be. Don't JUMP on it.
If IV cannot fix this RED DOT issue, how could some one believe in IV would fight for FIXING broken immigration system?.
Perspective is not always matters, there are times .... some thing else matter too. Which is called "Self Respect"
When few people are spending time and knowledge on sharing their thoughts/ideas, how good it would to use F***words against them?.
There are many BAD words ... that some members have used against of my friends. Who no more wanted to participate in IV?.
Did you get what am I saying?
hairstyles Pokemon Soul Silver Wallpaper
palemguy
08-19 11:15 AM
PD: April 20, 2004
service center:NSC
I -140 approval date: Jan 8, 2007
I-485 RD: July 3, 2007
LUD on 140: 4/9/2008
LUD on AP: 8/8/2008
I-485 Approval: Hope to see it very soon
I have opened an SR as my case is out side the normal processing time. I have infopass appointment on Aug 27, 2008.
I will post my experience once I am done with my infopass or if I hear anything from NSC.
service center:NSC
I -140 approval date: Jan 8, 2007
I-485 RD: July 3, 2007
LUD on 140: 4/9/2008
LUD on AP: 8/8/2008
I-485 Approval: Hope to see it very soon
I have opened an SR as my case is out side the normal processing time. I have infopass appointment on Aug 27, 2008.
I will post my experience once I am done with my infopass or if I hear anything from NSC.
gccube
09-09 02:27 PM
Requirements to change employer when GC is pending:
- I-140 should be approved
- More than 180 days should have passed after filing I-485. The clock for 180 days starts from 485 receipt.
- Approved EAD
Significance of 180 days barrier
If you have approved I-140 and EAD, you can change employer without having to wait for 180 days. But then your employer can revoke the I-140 which invalidates the 485 application. After 180 days from I-485 receipt, I-140 cannot be revoked so that is why it is always recommended to invoke AC-21 after 180 days from the 485 receipt.
After 180 days, you cannot change jobs, you can only change employers
When you invoke AC-21, you have o fulfill two conditions:
1.) You new jobs has the same or similar job description as mentioned in the green card labor certification application
2.) You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application
This means, you have to continue to stay in the same job title and job description till the time your GC is approved. If you fulfill the requirements mentioned above, you do not have to inform USCIS when invoking AC-21. You just switch employer. At some point USCIS will send you a query asking for the information of the employer who continues your green card application. It is best to take up job where the job title and job description is exactly the same as specified in your GC labor certification application. Any variance in the job title or job description could be extremely damaging to the GC application processing.
It is best to not to change to an employer offering you anything less than the wage rate specified in the GC labor certification. On the higher side, it is better not to take up a job that offers more than 4% more salary of that specified in the GC labor certification. It is hard to resist 20-30K higher salary, but one would have to resist the temptation for taking the job offering higher salary. Otherwise, there is a risk of USCIS denying the GC application.
USCIS doesn�t account for dollar appreciation or devaluation. USCIS also doesn�t account for annual inflation when calculating the wage rate. So even if your labor certification was applied in 2003, you still have to continue at the job with the salary specified in the GC labor certification. If GC application takes another 5-7 years, then you have to continue with the salary specified in GC labor certification application.
Hope this is useful.
"You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application or it should not be more than 4% more than what is mentioned in the LC"?
- I-140 should be approved
- More than 180 days should have passed after filing I-485. The clock for 180 days starts from 485 receipt.
- Approved EAD
Significance of 180 days barrier
If you have approved I-140 and EAD, you can change employer without having to wait for 180 days. But then your employer can revoke the I-140 which invalidates the 485 application. After 180 days from I-485 receipt, I-140 cannot be revoked so that is why it is always recommended to invoke AC-21 after 180 days from the 485 receipt.
After 180 days, you cannot change jobs, you can only change employers
When you invoke AC-21, you have o fulfill two conditions:
1.) You new jobs has the same or similar job description as mentioned in the green card labor certification application
2.) You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application
This means, you have to continue to stay in the same job title and job description till the time your GC is approved. If you fulfill the requirements mentioned above, you do not have to inform USCIS when invoking AC-21. You just switch employer. At some point USCIS will send you a query asking for the information of the employer who continues your green card application. It is best to take up job where the job title and job description is exactly the same as specified in your GC labor certification application. Any variance in the job title or job description could be extremely damaging to the GC application processing.
It is best to not to change to an employer offering you anything less than the wage rate specified in the GC labor certification. On the higher side, it is better not to take up a job that offers more than 4% more salary of that specified in the GC labor certification. It is hard to resist 20-30K higher salary, but one would have to resist the temptation for taking the job offering higher salary. Otherwise, there is a risk of USCIS denying the GC application.
USCIS doesn�t account for dollar appreciation or devaluation. USCIS also doesn�t account for annual inflation when calculating the wage rate. So even if your labor certification was applied in 2003, you still have to continue at the job with the salary specified in the GC labor certification. If GC application takes another 5-7 years, then you have to continue with the salary specified in GC labor certification application.
Hope this is useful.
"You salary should be almost the same as the wages mentioned in GC labor certification application or it should not be more than 4% more than what is mentioned in the LC"?
psk79
10-27 04:32 PM
The service request is usually a waste of time. They will send a generic response to everyone when case is pending w/o visa numbers. I and almost all of my friends received a response that additional information was needed for processing your case and hence additional delay blah blah.. I think this guy just decided to use security message for your responses. I wouldn't worry about it. If you want to really check this, you can definitely make an appointment at local office and talk to the IO there. But it was even a bigger waste of time in my case. The IO at local office looked at his system/systems and told me that if it is a green card application its faster(just another month or so) and if it is a h visa there is a few month delay:confused: Go figure..
No comments:
Post a Comment