wandmaker
03-15 11:02 AM
is appreciated at IV. This is in addition to any other contributions (either time or money) to IV. :)
I meant "Recurring monthly Contribution" :)
Let us setup a recurring contribution funding drive -
Needhelp / janilsal - can you guys set one up, I will keep bumping with my pledges as usual.
I meant "Recurring monthly Contribution" :)
Let us setup a recurring contribution funding drive -
Needhelp / janilsal - can you guys set one up, I will keep bumping with my pledges as usual.
wallpaper love sayings and quotes for
maddipati1
08-20 03:58 PM
i traveled to India and went for stamping when my PP was expiring within couple of months and got VISA stamped successfully and traveled back safely.
the initial screening officer at Chennai consulate commented with a smile 'you know, your passport is expiring in couple of months'. but the main immi officer didnt mention anything about it. this proves that there is no such law that says, u have to have a PP valid for six months.
but, when u r applying for a stamping appointment, the system says, 'its recommended to have a PP valid for at least six months'.
in your case i guess its just travel and no stamping involved and so u r in much better shape.
but, THIS WAS JUST MY EXPERIENCE. I WOULDN'T RELY ON THIS.
EVER SINCE I STRONGLY FEEL I WAS SUPER STUPID TO TAKE THAT KIND OF A RISK.
coz, i found out couple of things after wards :-)
in SFO consulate i could get PP in less than 7 business days. i guess urs is Chicago, so might not apply for u.
but, in India u can get new PP very fast under Tatkal scheme. do this,
be prepared with required dox and stuff before going there, ask ur relative/friend there to talk to local Tatkal officer to make it ready for ur PP renewal, soon as u land in India apply for PP renewal under Tatkal, u will get ur new PP before ur Jet lag is over. this leaves a buffer of ur vacation time, for contingencies.
finally, what GCCOVET said is absolutely right, u will get I-94 only until the expiry date of old PP. u would need to renew it again. not worth it. luckily i live close to border so i drove and came back to extend my I-94 after getting new PP.
the initial screening officer at Chennai consulate commented with a smile 'you know, your passport is expiring in couple of months'. but the main immi officer didnt mention anything about it. this proves that there is no such law that says, u have to have a PP valid for six months.
but, when u r applying for a stamping appointment, the system says, 'its recommended to have a PP valid for at least six months'.
in your case i guess its just travel and no stamping involved and so u r in much better shape.
but, THIS WAS JUST MY EXPERIENCE. I WOULDN'T RELY ON THIS.
EVER SINCE I STRONGLY FEEL I WAS SUPER STUPID TO TAKE THAT KIND OF A RISK.
coz, i found out couple of things after wards :-)
in SFO consulate i could get PP in less than 7 business days. i guess urs is Chicago, so might not apply for u.
but, in India u can get new PP very fast under Tatkal scheme. do this,
be prepared with required dox and stuff before going there, ask ur relative/friend there to talk to local Tatkal officer to make it ready for ur PP renewal, soon as u land in India apply for PP renewal under Tatkal, u will get ur new PP before ur Jet lag is over. this leaves a buffer of ur vacation time, for contingencies.
finally, what GCCOVET said is absolutely right, u will get I-94 only until the expiry date of old PP. u would need to renew it again. not worth it. luckily i live close to border so i drove and came back to extend my I-94 after getting new PP.
bhushansd
07-12 03:45 PM
Please change the name of this thread, it sounds that some got a rejection notice.
2011 i love you like a sister
mrajatish
03-24 04:31 PM
I like the idea - any takers, I am ready to work with that person.
more...
sky7
07-26 11:17 AM
Dear all
First of all..THANKS SO MUCH for taking the time to answer my questions!!! I needed that support! :)
Sorry i confused u all...here are my GC Filling details:
LC State: NJ
LC Category: EB2
LC PD: 24 SEP 02
I-140 FD: 15 JUNE 06
I-140 RD: 16 JUNE 06
I-140 LUD: 03 JULY 06
I-140 Receipt# : LIN-06-191-XXXXX
I-140 AD (If any): Still waiting!!!
Concurrent filing: NO
So my PD is 9/24/02. Yeah, i also read 180 days after filling I485 b4 i can leave my current company under AC21.
I guess the best option for me is to
** wait till my get my I140 approves,
** get my H1B extended for another 3 years (instead of 1 stupid year),
** Wait for at least 180 days
then move to another company (if i still get another job offer by then) Correct?? So by then, the new company should be able to transfer my H1B and finish up my GC process? But..but can my old company do anything to jeapodize my GC filling? eg: revoke my LC or I140???
More suggestions and opinions??? :o
Given my PD is 9/2002 (EB2), I won't be affected by the retrogression right? if i am not an India or China citizen.
Pls advise
Sky
First of all..THANKS SO MUCH for taking the time to answer my questions!!! I needed that support! :)
Sorry i confused u all...here are my GC Filling details:
LC State: NJ
LC Category: EB2
LC PD: 24 SEP 02
I-140 FD: 15 JUNE 06
I-140 RD: 16 JUNE 06
I-140 LUD: 03 JULY 06
I-140 Receipt# : LIN-06-191-XXXXX
I-140 AD (If any): Still waiting!!!
Concurrent filing: NO
So my PD is 9/24/02. Yeah, i also read 180 days after filling I485 b4 i can leave my current company under AC21.
I guess the best option for me is to
** wait till my get my I140 approves,
** get my H1B extended for another 3 years (instead of 1 stupid year),
** Wait for at least 180 days
then move to another company (if i still get another job offer by then) Correct?? So by then, the new company should be able to transfer my H1B and finish up my GC process? But..but can my old company do anything to jeapodize my GC filling? eg: revoke my LC or I140???
More suggestions and opinions??? :o
Given my PD is 9/2002 (EB2), I won't be affected by the retrogression right? if i am not an India or China citizen.
Pls advise
Sky
maco
08-10 10:56 AM
Hello All
My employer paid me for my 485 application,he gave me his personal checks in the name of uscis, i applied with those checks, now i hear that
"The Address Printed On your checks Must Match the adress given in work sheets[in 485]"
I am confused,will they accept the application,checks are not cashed yet,applied on july18th
Please Help
My employer paid me for my 485 application,he gave me his personal checks in the name of uscis, i applied with those checks, now i hear that
"The Address Printed On your checks Must Match the adress given in work sheets[in 485]"
I am confused,will they accept the application,checks are not cashed yet,applied on july18th
Please Help
more...
go_guy123
08-24 04:52 PM
ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
by Cyrus D. Mehta
As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).
Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.
Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.
A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.
In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.
At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�
The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8
Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.
Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10
�Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�
Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:
1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�
It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
2010 MY SISTER AND I SOMETIMES
lvaka
07-18 10:58 AM
I read some where that filing is allowed to Aug-17, but the new fees will effected on 01-Aug although July filers.
Correct me If I'm wrong.
Here is the Actual update link from USCIS.gov
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
You can go to USCIS.gov page and look for the press releases.
New fees will apply to the ppl whose labor gets approved after July 31st. For all the guys who are eligible according to the June 12th Visa Bulletin, though they apply till Aug 7th, only old fees applies.
Good luck.
Correct me If I'm wrong.
Here is the Actual update link from USCIS.gov
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
You can go to USCIS.gov page and look for the press releases.
New fees will apply to the ppl whose labor gets approved after July 31st. For all the guys who are eligible according to the June 12th Visa Bulletin, though they apply till Aug 7th, only old fees applies.
Good luck.
more...
ss1026
02-07 12:44 AM
The immigrant visa dates for EB-2 ROW (France is part of ROW - Rest Of the World) are current. That means if you convince your company to apply for a EB-2 GC, it could be approved quickly, probably within a year or two. Just for comparision, EB-2 dates for India are in Early 2004 (that is a five year wait). It makes sense to go with EB-2 employment GC. I am an India and the wait for us is the longest across the board. In the current economic scenario, it might be prudent to wait a bit before starting your employment GC. It is best to follow your attorney/firms advice on the timing.
I am not sure if you have the patience or the desire to wait for your future daughter to grow to 21 and apply for a family GC. I am not sure what the wait times are for family based GC for ROW but they are not as attractive as employment based Green card. There is no comparision in the wait times though so I imagine the other person was probably kidding. And for clarification, the longest wait for employment based GC for EB-3 India which is currently at Oct 2001 (about 7.5 years).....and that is my category :-( . It certainly aint a decade yet though it seems headed that way.
I am not sure if you have the patience or the desire to wait for your future daughter to grow to 21 and apply for a family GC. I am not sure what the wait times are for family based GC for ROW but they are not as attractive as employment based Green card. There is no comparision in the wait times though so I imagine the other person was probably kidding. And for clarification, the longest wait for employment based GC for EB-3 India which is currently at Oct 2001 (about 7.5 years).....and that is my category :-( . It certainly aint a decade yet though it seems headed that way.
hair quotes for your sister.
Sampath7768
10-15 01:40 PM
Hello Friends,
I have recently seen an excellent summary on this but now I am not able to find it. Below are my doubts and would appreciate some inputs or please direct me to that link...
1) Have a Job on H1B
2) Received EAD.
My Question is "Can I take up a second job on EAD and continue using H1B for my first job?"
Pl adice.
Thanks much.
PD: Feb 2005, EB2
RD: 20th July 07
ND: 17 th Aug 07
I have recently seen an excellent summary on this but now I am not able to find it. Below are my doubts and would appreciate some inputs or please direct me to that link...
1) Have a Job on H1B
2) Received EAD.
My Question is "Can I take up a second job on EAD and continue using H1B for my first job?"
Pl adice.
Thanks much.
PD: Feb 2005, EB2
RD: 20th July 07
ND: 17 th Aug 07
more...
Shawn
August 9th, 2005, 11:09 AM
Times Square, this process would allow you to clear out all the people and if needed one could bring back the original colors of neon lights in Photoshop, also remove trailing & headlights of cars.
hot i love you like a sister
GCBy3000
02-06 05:09 PM
I have seen lots of thread talking about filing 485 and getting EAD and having the opportunity to jump jobs. I faced a unique situation where I realized being on H1 is lot better than having EAD and invoking AC21. Correct me if I am wrong.
H1B:
1. Spouse cannot work.
2. Do not worry about 485 rejection.
3. Jump companies and go up the ladder as you are in H1 and not in EAD and still port the PD. THIS IS VERY USEFUL. CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG.
4. No expenses for the employee for H1 related issues ( legally).
5. Stamping required. But only once in three years if you get 3 year extn after 140 approval.
EAD / AC21:
1. Spouse can work.
2. Invoke AC21, but you have to switch to similar job. This is very frustrating if you are looking to go up the ladder.
3. If you dont have any time left in your first 6 years of H1, you will be in big trouble if your 485 gets rejected for unknown reasons.
4. No stamping, but advance parole required.
5. Spend yearly on parole, EAD.
Anything else to be added to the above list?
H1B:
1. Spouse cannot work.
2. Do not worry about 485 rejection.
3. Jump companies and go up the ladder as you are in H1 and not in EAD and still port the PD. THIS IS VERY USEFUL. CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG.
4. No expenses for the employee for H1 related issues ( legally).
5. Stamping required. But only once in three years if you get 3 year extn after 140 approval.
EAD / AC21:
1. Spouse can work.
2. Invoke AC21, but you have to switch to similar job. This is very frustrating if you are looking to go up the ladder.
3. If you dont have any time left in your first 6 years of H1, you will be in big trouble if your 485 gets rejected for unknown reasons.
4. No stamping, but advance parole required.
5. Spend yearly on parole, EAD.
Anything else to be added to the above list?
more...
house quotes about your sister. quotes for your sister. escape
abhisam
07-09 06:31 PM
You said your employer is agreable, in that case, If you did not get your EAD before your current EAD expires, you can choose to work for free for those days and try to get paid for it after your EAD comes in effect.
Or even if you don't get paid for it, you are building some good will and you are not jeopardizing your job. It will definitely keep you in the good books of this employer.
Yes Augustus, thats a good idea. my employer will understand and I will continue to work. but will ask him not to pay me for the duration.
Or even if you don't get paid for it, you are building some good will and you are not jeopardizing your job. It will definitely keep you in the good books of this employer.
Yes Augustus, thats a good idea. my employer will understand and I will continue to work. but will ask him not to pay me for the duration.
tattoo love you sister quotes.
MKT79
07-02 05:00 PM
Application Support Center Appointment Rescheduling - July 6 - 10, 2009
System errors caused a number of Application Support Centers to be overscheduled during the week of July 6-10, 2009. As a result, some applicants may receive cancellation notices for appointments originally scheduled during this timeframe.
If you do not receive a cancellation notice, please appear at your ASC appointment as scheduled. If you do receive a cancellation notice, you will soon receive an ASC appointment notice for a new date and time, typically for an appointment within the next two to four weeks.
USCIS Alert (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3e9815ecdd732210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4b18dc4d88889010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
System errors caused a number of Application Support Centers to be overscheduled during the week of July 6-10, 2009. As a result, some applicants may receive cancellation notices for appointments originally scheduled during this timeframe.
If you do not receive a cancellation notice, please appear at your ASC appointment as scheduled. If you do receive a cancellation notice, you will soon receive an ASC appointment notice for a new date and time, typically for an appointment within the next two to four weeks.
USCIS Alert (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=3e9815ecdd732210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=4b18dc4d88889010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD)
more...
pictures tattoo quotes for your sister.
mdipi
10-21 06:37 PM
i heard that steve ODed on drugs, thats why he left. almost dieed.:evil:
dresses girlfriend tattoo Quotes About
andy garcia
07-30 08:45 PM
Let's hope everyone will be all right.
My son will turn 21 in December 07 and I stuck in name check for who knows how long.
My son will turn 21 in December 07 and I stuck in name check for who knows how long.
more...
makeup quotes about your sister. Photobucket est friend quotes
leoindiano
08-28 02:56 PM
apume,
I am just asking why i lost my Donor Access? Not begging.
They opened a thread, "Good News on preadjudication"...I just wanted to take a look at it.
If you count how many people contributed more than me, you will not find more than 100 members. If top 100 contributers dont have access, who will have accesss to Donor Forums.... What is the freaking use? Why even have Donor Threads?
No Accountability results in No Credibility.
I am not against donating (have done it myself) but do you guys really think they are giving out GCs to the donors?
Or is someone giving out the secret to a quicker GC in the donor forum?
Or is there the address of the shop selling GCs?
Whatever appears in RED color - supposedly for donors - to me seems to be a marketing trick to attract more donation (sadly, they had to resort to this) - but remember that if there is a big news that is relevant to us - it will be flashed everywhere, even in Indian newspapers!
Don't go begging access to the donor forum or start salivating at the thought of accessing it... just seems kinda childish to me.
Don't gimme reds for this, it was only worth 0.02 - not enough for donation!
Chill, Peace!
I am just asking why i lost my Donor Access? Not begging.
They opened a thread, "Good News on preadjudication"...I just wanted to take a look at it.
If you count how many people contributed more than me, you will not find more than 100 members. If top 100 contributers dont have access, who will have accesss to Donor Forums.... What is the freaking use? Why even have Donor Threads?
No Accountability results in No Credibility.
I am not against donating (have done it myself) but do you guys really think they are giving out GCs to the donors?
Or is someone giving out the secret to a quicker GC in the donor forum?
Or is there the address of the shop selling GCs?
Whatever appears in RED color - supposedly for donors - to me seems to be a marketing trick to attract more donation (sadly, they had to resort to this) - but remember that if there is a big news that is relevant to us - it will be flashed everywhere, even in Indian newspapers!
Don't go begging access to the donor forum or start salivating at the thought of accessing it... just seems kinda childish to me.
Don't gimme reds for this, it was only worth 0.02 - not enough for donation!
Chill, Peace!
girlfriend quotes for your sister; quotes for your sister. quotes about your sister.
Gravitation
12-19 12:32 AM
There's a quite a misconception that if h1 is canceled, it cannot be extended. It's nothing like that. Your friend can file for visa transfer (pay extra for premium processing) and get it in two weeks.
The only time you have to file a new H1 is when you leave US and remain outside for a year. Otherwise an transfer is all you need. This misconception is very widespread. Rajiv Khanna was at pains to try to exterminate this in one of his tele-conferences.
Anyhow, at this point, your friend should be talking to an attorney instead of having you make a post at this forum.
The only time you have to file a new H1 is when you leave US and remain outside for a year. Otherwise an transfer is all you need. This misconception is very widespread. Rajiv Khanna was at pains to try to exterminate this in one of his tele-conferences.
Anyhow, at this point, your friend should be talking to an attorney instead of having you make a post at this forum.
hairstyles funny love quotes for your
.JPG "quotes about your sister. quotes for your sister. quotes for your sister")
desi3933
03-01 10:38 PM
Hi,
I am working for company A and I applied for H1 transfer to company B. They applied for premium processing on 25th and on 27th feb i got RFE.
RFE is
All payroll summaries (W-2 ) evidencing wages paid since you began work in H-1B status.
I came to US on 2006 feb, the attorney is submitting my W2s on Monday. But my 2006 W2 is not good i have only 20K on 2006 W2, 2007 and 2008 W2S are good.
As my 2006 W2 is not good , does it effect my H1B transfer.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Thanks
When was your last entry into the US on H1-B visa? You need to prove that you are maintaining status since last entry only.
____________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
I am working for company A and I applied for H1 transfer to company B. They applied for premium processing on 25th and on 27th feb i got RFE.
RFE is
All payroll summaries (W-2 ) evidencing wages paid since you began work in H-1B status.
I came to US on 2006 feb, the attorney is submitting my W2s on Monday. But my 2006 W2 is not good i have only 20K on 2006 W2, 2007 and 2008 W2S are good.
As my 2006 W2 is not good , does it effect my H1B transfer.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Thanks
When was your last entry into the US on H1-B visa? You need to prove that you are maintaining status since last entry only.
____________________
Not a legal advice
US citizen of Indian origin
mmanurker
10-17 03:36 PM
Payroll tax is same as employer tax. There are 2 or 3 components of the taxes that employer pays such as Social security ( employer portion), unemployment tax, Medicare ( employer portion)
also employer will need to pay for payroll company such as ADP a fee to maintain payroll, do filings
Thanks Surabhi......So does my assumption correct in terms of the percent tax an employer pays which is between 8 to 12% depending on the state he is operating which inlcudes all the components you mentioned except the payroll company fee(i,e ADP or intuit or etc)? The reason I ask this is b'coz I am also planning to work on W2.
also employer will need to pay for payroll company such as ADP a fee to maintain payroll, do filings
Thanks Surabhi......So does my assumption correct in terms of the percent tax an employer pays which is between 8 to 12% depending on the state he is operating which inlcudes all the components you mentioned except the payroll company fee(i,e ADP or intuit or etc)? The reason I ask this is b'coz I am also planning to work on W2.
GCBatman
04-13 10:03 AM
I have recently switched the job using AC21. I have to move my 401K from my old previous company but here is the issue: in my new company I will not be eligible for the 401 till I complete 6 months with the new company.
If thinking of moving it to IRA account, please let me know what is the procedure involved?
I will really appreciate if some can suggest me what are my other options.
Thanks,
If thinking of moving it to IRA account, please let me know what is the procedure involved?
I will really appreciate if some can suggest me what are my other options.
Thanks,
No comments:
Post a Comment