das0
04-08 10:11 AM
Check with a good attorney but as far i know, if you get paid by the for-profit consulting company (even if they place you at non-profit org), you will be subjected to H1B cap.
If your H1B paperwork (i-765) is directly from a non-profit org (like Univ, Govt, etc), then only are you cap exempt.
Also remember, if you ever want to txfr from non-profit to for-profit, you will be again subjected to cap. This assumes you were never counted against the for-profit company cap in any fiscal year quota.
If your H1B paperwork (i-765) is directly from a non-profit org (like Univ, Govt, etc), then only are you cap exempt.
Also remember, if you ever want to txfr from non-profit to for-profit, you will be again subjected to cap. This assumes you were never counted against the for-profit company cap in any fiscal year quota.
wallpaper Here#39;s a peanut butter and
kumar2203
11-09 09:21 PM
Hello gurus,
I have one doubt abt requirements to port EB2.
my EB3 priority date is Aug 2005, now i am planning to apply EB2 with different employer. do i need 5 yrs experience as of my Eb3 priority date in order to port Eb3 priority date to Eb3 ? my lawyer is saying i need 5 yrs experience as of Aug 2005 is it true ?
thanks a lot for your help
I have one doubt abt requirements to port EB2.
my EB3 priority date is Aug 2005, now i am planning to apply EB2 with different employer. do i need 5 yrs experience as of my Eb3 priority date in order to port Eb3 priority date to Eb3 ? my lawyer is saying i need 5 yrs experience as of Aug 2005 is it true ?
thanks a lot for your help
gcadream
03-04 08:24 AM
Thanks a lot Rakson for updating the forum with valuable question and answers with the lawyer. Really appreciate it !!
It cleared lot of my doubts as well but regarding point 'C'
[C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?]
I have heard lawyers saying in this forum itself that it can be a problem if the previous employer revokes the approved I-140, irrespective whether it was fraud or not. I don't have the links saved for that discussion, otherwise I would have pasted it.
But are you very sure about point 'C' that what ever ur lawyer said is correct and final ?
It cleared lot of my doubts as well but regarding point 'C'
[C. Can new company (B) transfer Priority date even if existing company(A) revokes their I-140?]
I have heard lawyers saying in this forum itself that it can be a problem if the previous employer revokes the approved I-140, irrespective whether it was fraud or not. I don't have the links saved for that discussion, otherwise I would have pasted it.
But are you very sure about point 'C' that what ever ur lawyer said is correct and final ?
2011 peanut butter jelly
coopheal
11-26 03:11 PM
I am contributing $100 monthly. I will contribute additional $100 for the rally.
We are expecting our baby in March end so will not be able to come to DC.
We are expecting our baby in March end so will not be able to come to DC.
more...
saileshdude
04-27 10:11 PM
a lot of people who applied during July 2007 are getting RFE on 485, I guess this because of pre processing but 99% of these people who are getting RFE are from NSC. I same only one or two people from TSC who got RFE. From this seems like NSC is pre processing but TSC is not.
No TSC is not. TSC goes by priority date and not processing date. TSC I have seen follows different processing style. For e.g. if your namecheck/security check or some kind of check is pending they dont send you FP notice. Also they process applications if your PD is current/close to recent bulletin.
No TSC is not. TSC goes by priority date and not processing date. TSC I have seen follows different processing style. For e.g. if your namecheck/security check or some kind of check is pending they dont send you FP notice. Also they process applications if your PD is current/close to recent bulletin.
wandmaker
05-14 02:19 PM
This is not a joke, we have received this querry, and are seeking some helpful advice.
If you have worked on location other than what's mentioned in the certified LCA, it will be considered as an unauthorized employment, eventually application for adjustment of status will be denied on the basis of you engaged in unauthorized employment.
If you have worked on location other than what's mentioned in the certified LCA, it will be considered as an unauthorized employment, eventually application for adjustment of status will be denied on the basis of you engaged in unauthorized employment.
more...
wa_Saiprasad
01-02 01:08 PM
I have sent you a private message.
2010 Peanut Butter and Jelly 12 x12
fingerscrossed
11-14 03:20 PM
Letstalklc,
Thanks! Good luck with yours too.
No, my application is not filed by Fragoman.
Apparently, there are some fellow in my law firms, who got audited before September 2007 (mine is November 2007), and they havent been approved. So apparently, it is more random than FIFO.
It really sucks.
it would be very helpful if you entered your info on the t-r-a-c-k-i-t-t website.
Congrats!
Thanks! Good luck with yours too.
No, my application is not filed by Fragoman.
Apparently, there are some fellow in my law firms, who got audited before September 2007 (mine is November 2007), and they havent been approved. So apparently, it is more random than FIFO.
It really sucks.
it would be very helpful if you entered your info on the t-r-a-c-k-i-t-t website.
Congrats!
more...
leoindiano
07-09 01:45 PM
Buddy,
Why you are so angry??. I know more than you about immigration and all the rules. you try to understand the English properly and the meaning. I hope you are from a very remote place in India. So for you to understand better, Here is the meanign fo my message.
GUYS, YOUR PRIORITY DATE IS 2006 and why you are asking for the premium processing when many of your friends are still waiting to file their I 140 or I 485.
Don't try to put harsh words in public forums. You will get them back as a Boomerang...... Understand?:mad:
Needless to respond...but cant stay calm....
We were trying to track what is going on? 15 days was the published deadline. Priority date of mine is Nov 2004. You can check my previous posts. You are the one who was harsh to start with. Now you are talking about english. You got the boomarang.. good luck
Why you are so angry??. I know more than you about immigration and all the rules. you try to understand the English properly and the meaning. I hope you are from a very remote place in India. So for you to understand better, Here is the meanign fo my message.
GUYS, YOUR PRIORITY DATE IS 2006 and why you are asking for the premium processing when many of your friends are still waiting to file their I 140 or I 485.
Don't try to put harsh words in public forums. You will get them back as a Boomerang...... Understand?:mad:
Needless to respond...but cant stay calm....
We were trying to track what is going on? 15 days was the published deadline. Priority date of mine is Nov 2004. You can check my previous posts. You are the one who was harsh to start with. Now you are talking about english. You got the boomarang.. good luck
hair In this category I might also
pappu
08-10 04:09 PM
My GC is approved but still I want to continue my contribution (in steps of $20) for this good cause....However, I dont see any $20 contributions for last couple of weeks..Is it possible to start contribution of $20 for guy like me who have GC & wants to help for this cause?
Congrats on your GC and thanks for your support.
We took out the $20 per month option. We had that option for $20 per month for 6 months and only 200+ people signed up out of several thousand members who visit the site everyday. This happened when we announced that we may have to close this site and our work for lack of funds. After seeing lack of appreciation from members, running an organization and putting effort then seems useless to us in the core team. Why should we spend so much time and energy on something that only few people appreciate out of thousands in this community? Why should we run an organization where only a handful want to help out and everyone else is only interested in asking questions, complaining , picking up fights with others, criticizing IV?
Many people wrote to us saying $20 is too high and it should be reduced to $10 or even $1 per month and then everyone will contribute.
So pls tell us how we can survive with such amounts when others are spending hundreds or thousands and millions to prevent our bill?
Lack of funds affect our ability to go all out and get the work done. Lobbying is no charity. So unless each and every member feels to contribute from his/her heart contributions will not happen.
Previously people used to ask our achievements and say that they will contribute only after they see some results. We have given a few results till now and demonstrated commitment to the cause. If people are still not going to contribute, then such people will never contribute. We value everyone that has contributed and anyone who contributes in times of need.
Congrats on your GC and thanks for your support.
We took out the $20 per month option. We had that option for $20 per month for 6 months and only 200+ people signed up out of several thousand members who visit the site everyday. This happened when we announced that we may have to close this site and our work for lack of funds. After seeing lack of appreciation from members, running an organization and putting effort then seems useless to us in the core team. Why should we spend so much time and energy on something that only few people appreciate out of thousands in this community? Why should we run an organization where only a handful want to help out and everyone else is only interested in asking questions, complaining , picking up fights with others, criticizing IV?
Many people wrote to us saying $20 is too high and it should be reduced to $10 or even $1 per month and then everyone will contribute.
So pls tell us how we can survive with such amounts when others are spending hundreds or thousands and millions to prevent our bill?
Lack of funds affect our ability to go all out and get the work done. Lobbying is no charity. So unless each and every member feels to contribute from his/her heart contributions will not happen.
Previously people used to ask our achievements and say that they will contribute only after they see some results. We have given a few results till now and demonstrated commitment to the cause. If people are still not going to contribute, then such people will never contribute. We value everyone that has contributed and anyone who contributes in times of need.
more...
jthomas
01-10 08:41 PM
What are the options for a H1B holder when he/she gets laid off during this present economy?
I voted as yes, I know my friends who had been laid off from work.
J thomas
I voted as yes, I know my friends who had been laid off from work.
J thomas
hot stock photo : peanut butter
sunny1000
06-11 05:39 PM
Sunny1000,
Please be careful before replying. If you do not know, don't answer.
I have seen numerous posts that say, you can get a 3 yrs H-1 based on your previous company's I-140. (of course, it should not have been revoked). This is based on peoples experience. So don't confuse other people if you are not sure.
Don't tell me what I need to do. This is not a "lawyers only" forum where I have to give the legally correct answer. Based on what he described, I gave the best answer I could think of, that too after nobody answered and he bumped it up.
Re-read my post. As I said, it was my view and of course, there are better answers than mine (desi3933 for instance). If you don't like my answer, ignore and move on.
Please be careful before replying. If you do not know, don't answer.
I have seen numerous posts that say, you can get a 3 yrs H-1 based on your previous company's I-140. (of course, it should not have been revoked). This is based on peoples experience. So don't confuse other people if you are not sure.
Don't tell me what I need to do. This is not a "lawyers only" forum where I have to give the legally correct answer. Based on what he described, I gave the best answer I could think of, that too after nobody answered and he bumped it up.
Re-read my post. As I said, it was my view and of course, there are better answers than mine (desi3933 for instance). If you don't like my answer, ignore and move on.
more...
house Later on “Peanut Butter Jelly
linuxra
07-23 03:10 PM
I heard from some other people if they are in vsg their GCs are not getting approved as it is not @ our fault why we need to bear this...I am coming to conclusion that vsg case is affecting employees...any solution u are trying....
tattoo It#39;s Peanut Butter Jelly Time
venky08
09-25 05:00 PM
you have till december to find a job. thats 2-3 months. put all your energy to find a new job and ask the new employer to file H1B. if you can find a job in a good company you will have another stab at it. stay away from consultancies this time if thats what causing the rejection...you need to elaborate more on your situation to exactly know what your options are (field of study/experioence etc)....
I am a Master's student and had applied for H1B through a consultant under master quota 2007. I was devastated when the consultant told me today that my H1B was not approved. When i checked online with my WAC no, as expected it said that a decision was mailed to the employer which in most cases means H1B denied.
I have OPT left until dec 07. I haven't yet found a job while on OPT but have been applying for jobs rigorously. I was really banking on the H1B visa for getting a job and then transferring it over to whoever hires me.
With my H1B not approved, I am totally clueless now. Please advice if my H1B application can be reconsidered/re-appealed/ resubmitted. Any other options/suggestions welcome.
I am a Master's student and had applied for H1B through a consultant under master quota 2007. I was devastated when the consultant told me today that my H1B was not approved. When i checked online with my WAC no, as expected it said that a decision was mailed to the employer which in most cases means H1B denied.
I have OPT left until dec 07. I haven't yet found a job while on OPT but have been applying for jobs rigorously. I was really banking on the H1B visa for getting a job and then transferring it over to whoever hires me.
With my H1B not approved, I am totally clueless now. Please advice if my H1B application can be reconsidered/re-appealed/ resubmitted. Any other options/suggestions welcome.
more...
pictures Peanut Butter Jelly Time!
santosh19
10-31 02:08 PM
What confuses me is or are you saying that calfornia service center no more process the H1-B extension. But when you go to processing time in USCIS website it still shows you that they process H1-B extension
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=CSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=CSC
dresses Peanut Butter and Jelly
RamBharose
03-13 06:34 PM
hey kris
i really wanted to know if it was illegla before reporting someone, you can refer to jaylenos reply where he quoted my previous post and you will know my real issue is with people that do fraud.
And i am not that stupid to write in a forum like this accepting that i am doing a fraud ehn i can be tracked.
I wasnt sure and i didnt know how to go about it.
try to follow law in its technicality and spirit. A lot of us may face delay in their app processing for uscis to figure out fraudsters among us. We should keep our program defensible not only in the court of law but also in the court of (american) public opinion.
i really wanted to know if it was illegla before reporting someone, you can refer to jaylenos reply where he quoted my previous post and you will know my real issue is with people that do fraud.
And i am not that stupid to write in a forum like this accepting that i am doing a fraud ehn i can be tracked.
I wasnt sure and i didnt know how to go about it.
try to follow law in its technicality and spirit. A lot of us may face delay in their app processing for uscis to figure out fraudsters among us. We should keep our program defensible not only in the court of law but also in the court of (american) public opinion.
more...
makeup Peanut Butter and Jelly
aristotle
01-31 01:48 PM
Where?
Let me explain in a bit more detail..
Suppose you have an approved I140 from company A and got the 3 year H1 extension because of it. Now you transfer to Company B and got the full 3 years of H1 transferred. And Company A revoked your I140 after you left.
You cannot transfer to Company C at this point as there is no approved I140 to support your transfer. You cannot extend your H1 with Company B unless
A) your labor has been pending for more than a year OR
B) your I140 is approved
One your I140 is approved with Company B, you are in a good position again.
Crystal?
aren't u contradicting urself?
Let me explain in a bit more detail..
Suppose you have an approved I140 from company A and got the 3 year H1 extension because of it. Now you transfer to Company B and got the full 3 years of H1 transferred. And Company A revoked your I140 after you left.
You cannot transfer to Company C at this point as there is no approved I140 to support your transfer. You cannot extend your H1 with Company B unless
A) your labor has been pending for more than a year OR
B) your I140 is approved
One your I140 is approved with Company B, you are in a good position again.
Crystal?
aren't u contradicting urself?
girlfriend Peanut Butter and Jelly
hoolahoous
03-18 10:51 AM
i am switching job using ac21. my current employer trusts immigration attorneys. and as expected attorneys suggested (since they get paid) that company should withdraws both H1 and I-140 after I leave. I know I am safe, however USCIS will definitly send me an RFE at time of processing my application and I will have to answer that. So I am trying to put my side to them saying that if it is optional, they should not.
So my question is, does the Law say that an employer has to withdraw all (or some) immigration petitions after employee leaves ? I was trying to search but I couldn't find anywhere where it said that it is mandated.
Also as far I could tell from forum posts, there is no set form which needs to be filled by employeers to withdraw the application. That would seem to suggest that it is not mandated.
On flip side, if it is mandated, then why most of the employers do not withdraw the application ?
So my question is, does the Law say that an employer has to withdraw all (or some) immigration petitions after employee leaves ? I was trying to search but I couldn't find anywhere where it said that it is mandated.
Also as far I could tell from forum posts, there is no set form which needs to be filled by employeers to withdraw the application. That would seem to suggest that it is not mandated.
On flip side, if it is mandated, then why most of the employers do not withdraw the application ?
hairstyles Peanut Butter Jelly Time
bigboy007
12-10 02:31 PM
bump^^^^^^^^^^^
gccube
04-21 03:19 PM
Congratulations on getting your GC !!!
I need to ask you a question as I don't see on LUD after FP in 485. However LUD changed on my approved I-140.
Was there any LUD on I-140 case after your FP?
Regards
last summer. The only two LUDs I have noticed on my I-485 are
1. 8/22/2007 :: This is after my FP
2. 04/21/2008 (Today) :: This is after my I-485 is approved.
I have not noticed an LUD even late last night.
Interestingly, the TSC processing dates have moved to June 29 2007 in the newly released processing times and my RD (06/21/2007) fall with in this period. So my approval could be a result of the progressed processing dates for this month.
I need to ask you a question as I don't see on LUD after FP in 485. However LUD changed on my approved I-140.
Was there any LUD on I-140 case after your FP?
Regards
last summer. The only two LUDs I have noticed on my I-485 are
1. 8/22/2007 :: This is after my FP
2. 04/21/2008 (Today) :: This is after my I-485 is approved.
I have not noticed an LUD even late last night.
Interestingly, the TSC processing dates have moved to June 29 2007 in the newly released processing times and my RD (06/21/2007) fall with in this period. So my approval could be a result of the progressed processing dates for this month.
raju123
06-26 02:51 PM
Numberusa reported following possible 24 amendments and Cantwell/Kyl amendment is not there. I hope this news is not right.
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
Democratic Amendments
* Dodd-Menendez S.A. 1199: would increase the annual cap on green cards for parents and extend the parent visitor visa.
* Webb S.A. 1313: Community ties for [amnesty]
* Baucus-Tester S.A. 1236: would strike all reference[s] to REAL ID.
* Sanders-Grassley S.A. 1332 : prohibits companies that have announced mass lay-offs from receiving any new visas, unless these companies could prove that overall employment at their companies would not be reduced by these lay-offs.
* Byrd-Gregg-Cochran S.A. 1344: adds a $500 fee to obtain [amnesty] and sets aside the revenues collected in order to fund border and interior enforcement.
* Menendez-Obama-Feingold S.A. 1317: increases family points in merit system
* Brown S.A. 1340: requires that before employers can be approved to employ Y-1 workers, they must have listed the specific job opportunity with the state employment service agency.
* McCaskill S.A. 1468: increases ban on federal contracts, grants or cooperative agreements to employers who are repeat violators of hiring immigrants who are not authorized to work
* Levin-Brownback S.A.1486: gives access to Iraqis to apply for refugee status under existing U.S. law.
* Leahy S.A. 1386: protect scholars who have been persecuted in their home countries on account of their beliefs, scholarship, or identity.
* Schumer: provides for tamper-proof biometric social security cards
* Boxer S.A. 1198: reduces Y visa cap by number of Y workers who overstay
Republican Amendments
* Alexander S.A. 1161: requires DHS and the Department of State to notify a foreign embassy when one of their nationals has become a U.S. citizen
* Bond S.A. 1255: prohibits green cards for [illegal aliens granted amnesty]
* Coleman S.A. 1473: outlaws state and local policies that prevent public officials * including police and health and safety workers (except for emergency medical assistance)*from inquiring about the immigration status of those they serve if there is �probable cause� to believe the individual being questioned is undocumented.
* Domenici S.A. 1335/1258: increases Federal judgeships
* Ensign S.A. 1490: redetermines work history for current beneficiaries of social security depending on their citizenship status
* Graham S.A. 1465: enforcement. Still being drafted.
* Grassley-Baucus-Obama S.A. 1441: strikes and replaces Title III on employer enforcement
* Hutchinson S.A. 1440: changes the �touchback� requirement from the time of applying for adjustment of status, as it currently stands in the Senate proposed bill, to the time of applying for the Z visa. Increases the number of individuals required to touchback
* Thune S.A. 1174: prevents [illegal aliens] from [being granted amnesty] until all triggers have been met.
* Chambliss S.A. 1318: Totalization agreements
* Isakson S.A. 1282: Preemption/Home Depot
* Graham: Criminal penalties/mandatory minimums for overstays
There is a news in news article thread that Senators Cantwell & Kyl have proposed a amendment which will open up a parallel employer sponsored GC path. Anyone has information regarding this amendment?
No comments:
Post a Comment