harivenkat
05-11 03:21 PM
Sent a mail to Senator Leahy at : senator_leahy@leahy.senate.gov
Please send him emails.
Dear Senator Leahy,
This is regarding recent hearing from USCIS Director Mayorkas and his response
to issue of backlog.
The issue of immigration backlog is a ubiquitous one ranging from family to employment.
Employment being really the big issue with 1-2 million legally working applicants waiting
to get greencard.
It is surprising that Mayorkas is not aware of this Burning situation faced
by a million plus legal applicants and that he needs to consult the experts. I wonder
if senate is interested in doing anything better, other than settling in for such a
mediocre explanation from the Head of USCIS.
What Mr Mayorkas could have suggested to mitigate the backlog is : Visa Capture, I-485
Preregistration, senate passing bills to increase visa number and other strategies that will resolve the
backlog issue. May be he can refer to these forums which can give him some thoughts coming from people
who are suffering first hand as result of such services of provided by USCIS :
Analysis Discussion - Immigration Voice (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum108-anal)...
http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i...
USCIS has already shown us their (fiasco)effeciency during filings of 485 for 800000 applicants in
Jul 2007. They already are showing when it is coming to visa allocations every month. One wonders what
gives the confidence to Mr. Mayorkas to admit that USCIS can handle CIR ?
Mr. Senator, senate deserves a better explanation on strategy to reduce backlog while it owes a
greater responsibility of bringing relief to million plus tax paying, law abiding legal living applicants. I request you to set a follow up hearing to get to the root of the issue in resolving the backlog problem for EB category skilled worker applicants especially from India and China.
God bless you Senator !
Your's sincerely,
Please send him emails.
Dear Senator Leahy,
This is regarding recent hearing from USCIS Director Mayorkas and his response
to issue of backlog.
The issue of immigration backlog is a ubiquitous one ranging from family to employment.
Employment being really the big issue with 1-2 million legally working applicants waiting
to get greencard.
It is surprising that Mayorkas is not aware of this Burning situation faced
by a million plus legal applicants and that he needs to consult the experts. I wonder
if senate is interested in doing anything better, other than settling in for such a
mediocre explanation from the Head of USCIS.
What Mr Mayorkas could have suggested to mitigate the backlog is : Visa Capture, I-485
Preregistration, senate passing bills to increase visa number and other strategies that will resolve the
backlog issue. May be he can refer to these forums which can give him some thoughts coming from people
who are suffering first hand as result of such services of provided by USCIS :
Analysis Discussion - Immigration Voice (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum108-anal)...
http://www..com/usa-discussion-forums/i...
USCIS has already shown us their (fiasco)effeciency during filings of 485 for 800000 applicants in
Jul 2007. They already are showing when it is coming to visa allocations every month. One wonders what
gives the confidence to Mr. Mayorkas to admit that USCIS can handle CIR ?
Mr. Senator, senate deserves a better explanation on strategy to reduce backlog while it owes a
greater responsibility of bringing relief to million plus tax paying, law abiding legal living applicants. I request you to set a follow up hearing to get to the root of the issue in resolving the backlog problem for EB category skilled worker applicants especially from India and China.
God bless you Senator !
Your's sincerely,
wallpaper adriana lima victoria secret
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
sam_hoosier
11-15 04:02 PM
Do the following job descriptions qualify for AC21 provided all other factors such as salary and 485 pending for 180+ days have been met
Job A: Techincal Consultant
- Configures and implements risk management solutions using ASP.NET, VB.NET, XML, XSLT/XPATH.
- Basic working understanding of SQL Server, Oracle and related query language and tools
- Consulting development experience in IT or Systems Integration
- Excellent communication skills; written and verbal.
Job B: Project Manager
- Accomplishes project objectives by planning and evaluating project activities.
- Creates and executes project work plans and revises as appropriate to meet changing needs and requirements
- Identifies resources needed and assigns individual responsibilities.
- Manages day-to-day operational aspects of a project and scope.
- Reviews deliverables prepared by team before passing to client.
etc etc.
On promotion with the same employer, i will have responsibilities for job B but i am looking to change employers. can i join new employer with job B and use AC21 ?
Is the SOC/O*NET job code same for both jobs ? If so, you should be fine but double check with your lawyer.
Job A: Techincal Consultant
- Configures and implements risk management solutions using ASP.NET, VB.NET, XML, XSLT/XPATH.
- Basic working understanding of SQL Server, Oracle and related query language and tools
- Consulting development experience in IT or Systems Integration
- Excellent communication skills; written and verbal.
Job B: Project Manager
- Accomplishes project objectives by planning and evaluating project activities.
- Creates and executes project work plans and revises as appropriate to meet changing needs and requirements
- Identifies resources needed and assigns individual responsibilities.
- Manages day-to-day operational aspects of a project and scope.
- Reviews deliverables prepared by team before passing to client.
etc etc.
On promotion with the same employer, i will have responsibilities for job B but i am looking to change employers. can i join new employer with job B and use AC21 ?
Is the SOC/O*NET job code same for both jobs ? If so, you should be fine but double check with your lawyer.
2011 adriana lima victoria secret
GCplease
07-30 09:16 AM
Dear Experts and Attorneys:
Here is my situation:
My employment was terminated by my Manager (no reasons given on paper, and the reasons he gave me were not valid when I discussed with my previous manager even per the company policy)
I am in the process of finalizing between a couple of offers (Hopefully would be able to make a decision by sometime next week). My previous manager is trying to get me into his project after I explained my I-485 application status. My PD is Aug-06 (EB-3), I-140 pending.
My spouse is on H-4. My initial plan before all this drama (Initial withdrawal of July visa bulletin and employment termination), I got all my documents signed and ready to be sent out from my attorney's office.
After this sequence of events, the attorney refuses to submit my I-485 application (because it could be considered Fraud).
Now I need your expert advice on the following situations:
1. Would it be ideal to join the same company in a different department and ask the lawyer to file my I-485? Use the AC21 portability after 180 days of pending application?
2. I read somewhere that for me to use the AC21 portability, I need to be in the same profile and also same pay range that was approved on my initial labor application. Is it true? I am currently being offered 15K more than what I have been making till now.
3. I have 3 more years of H-1B left, so what are the chances of getting a new green card process started under EB-2, and port the Aug-06 priority date after the I-140 is approved? How long would you anticipate it would take for me to get to the I-485 stage? Just a ball park from the experience on the forum would be great!
I have been out of the job for the past 2 weeks. would it be a problem for me while applying for a new labor certification?
I greatly appreciate your responses.
Thank you.
These are just my views. Please do not take them as is. Check with an attorney.
1. Joining the same company would be ideal because you can continue your 485 process. Pay hike of 15 % will not be a problem. your attorney should be able to explain that in case there is a rfe. but make sure that the job title is the same.
2. For AC21 after 6 months, you should be in the same profile. Pay hike is okay I think. A normal 5 % will not be a problem, but 15 % may be. But I still think the attorney will be able to explain. Check with him
3. getting a new job and filing your perm labor and I-140 should be okay. If all goes well, you may reach the 485 stage in 6 months. But the question of retaining your priority date depends on your old company not revoking your current 140. If they do, you lose your old priority date. There will be a lot of uncertainities here. But becasu you still have another 3 years you can try this route.
4. 2 weeks without a job may not be that big of an issue.
Again, these are my personal views. Your attorney can explain things much more concretely.
Good luck.
Here is my situation:
My employment was terminated by my Manager (no reasons given on paper, and the reasons he gave me were not valid when I discussed with my previous manager even per the company policy)
I am in the process of finalizing between a couple of offers (Hopefully would be able to make a decision by sometime next week). My previous manager is trying to get me into his project after I explained my I-485 application status. My PD is Aug-06 (EB-3), I-140 pending.
My spouse is on H-4. My initial plan before all this drama (Initial withdrawal of July visa bulletin and employment termination), I got all my documents signed and ready to be sent out from my attorney's office.
After this sequence of events, the attorney refuses to submit my I-485 application (because it could be considered Fraud).
Now I need your expert advice on the following situations:
1. Would it be ideal to join the same company in a different department and ask the lawyer to file my I-485? Use the AC21 portability after 180 days of pending application?
2. I read somewhere that for me to use the AC21 portability, I need to be in the same profile and also same pay range that was approved on my initial labor application. Is it true? I am currently being offered 15K more than what I have been making till now.
3. I have 3 more years of H-1B left, so what are the chances of getting a new green card process started under EB-2, and port the Aug-06 priority date after the I-140 is approved? How long would you anticipate it would take for me to get to the I-485 stage? Just a ball park from the experience on the forum would be great!
I have been out of the job for the past 2 weeks. would it be a problem for me while applying for a new labor certification?
I greatly appreciate your responses.
Thank you.
These are just my views. Please do not take them as is. Check with an attorney.
1. Joining the same company would be ideal because you can continue your 485 process. Pay hike of 15 % will not be a problem. your attorney should be able to explain that in case there is a rfe. but make sure that the job title is the same.
2. For AC21 after 6 months, you should be in the same profile. Pay hike is okay I think. A normal 5 % will not be a problem, but 15 % may be. But I still think the attorney will be able to explain. Check with him
3. getting a new job and filing your perm labor and I-140 should be okay. If all goes well, you may reach the 485 stage in 6 months. But the question of retaining your priority date depends on your old company not revoking your current 140. If they do, you lose your old priority date. There will be a lot of uncertainities here. But becasu you still have another 3 years you can try this route.
4. 2 weeks without a job may not be that big of an issue.
Again, these are my personal views. Your attorney can explain things much more concretely.
Good luck.
more...
bipin
03-18 12:44 PM
Answers to your Questions:
My first labor was applied with my first company in 2004. In Pre-PERM era separate State and Federal labor approvals were required. My state labor was cleared, and federal pending. When they introduced PERM in June 2005 all the old cases were moved to BRC (Backlog reduction Centre, which was closed in Oct 2007). My labor started rotting in BRC and my then employer was not willing to file a PERM saying, they have to withdraw the current labor and I'll lose my PD. So I was looking for a new employer and got this guy in Aug 2006. Most of us all must have gone with many deals with the employer like 80:20, 95:5 plus payroll tax etc. and in my case the deal was I'll take all immigration related costs hoping for a faster GC.
And now H1 transfer w/o paychecks, yes, it's not possible per law. But it's not always per book, like 3 year degree holders got GC thru EB2 few years back, now they can't even get EB3. So with my current company's attorney I got H1 transferred (Yes, there were RFEs on paycheck!)
Isn't my case shows how this employer based immigration system is completely broken. This guy didn't bring me here, he didn't get me any project, but I had to go to him to get my GC. He must have come here like me few years before and he screwed my life! I'm stranded now after 8 years working here, and he became richer from his cut of my salary.
My question is, he cancelled my H1 in Aug 2008. It's been 19 months since then. Is there an statutory limit after the violation to file a complain? Also now it looks like he closed the company which was in NJ. The company was registered in DE and I worked for him in CA.
Cany Any Attorney/Member suggest?
Dear Friend,
We don't know what was your understanding between you and your ex-employer, It seems to me that you voluntarily paid money when you are not supposed to. I am also not sure how you got an H1 transfer without getting paid... Lot of question marks ??? Its better you talk to a qualified attorney and get their opinion. You can definetly go after the ex-employer for not paying you which they are legally bound too.. You will get all your $$$$.
My first labor was applied with my first company in 2004. In Pre-PERM era separate State and Federal labor approvals were required. My state labor was cleared, and federal pending. When they introduced PERM in June 2005 all the old cases were moved to BRC (Backlog reduction Centre, which was closed in Oct 2007). My labor started rotting in BRC and my then employer was not willing to file a PERM saying, they have to withdraw the current labor and I'll lose my PD. So I was looking for a new employer and got this guy in Aug 2006. Most of us all must have gone with many deals with the employer like 80:20, 95:5 plus payroll tax etc. and in my case the deal was I'll take all immigration related costs hoping for a faster GC.
And now H1 transfer w/o paychecks, yes, it's not possible per law. But it's not always per book, like 3 year degree holders got GC thru EB2 few years back, now they can't even get EB3. So with my current company's attorney I got H1 transferred (Yes, there were RFEs on paycheck!)
Isn't my case shows how this employer based immigration system is completely broken. This guy didn't bring me here, he didn't get me any project, but I had to go to him to get my GC. He must have come here like me few years before and he screwed my life! I'm stranded now after 8 years working here, and he became richer from his cut of my salary.
My question is, he cancelled my H1 in Aug 2008. It's been 19 months since then. Is there an statutory limit after the violation to file a complain? Also now it looks like he closed the company which was in NJ. The company was registered in DE and I worked for him in CA.
Cany Any Attorney/Member suggest?
Dear Friend,
We don't know what was your understanding between you and your ex-employer, It seems to me that you voluntarily paid money when you are not supposed to. I am also not sure how you got an H1 transfer without getting paid... Lot of question marks ??? Its better you talk to a qualified attorney and get their opinion. You can definetly go after the ex-employer for not paying you which they are legally bound too.. You will get all your $$$$.
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
Ashland Inc. (NYSE: ASH) said Tuesday it lost $119 million in its first fiscal quarter, and plans to cut its work force by 1,300 jobs, freeze wages and adopt a two-week furlough program.The chemical company blamed the loss in the first quarter on a severance charge, writedown and the acquisition of Hercules Inc. It said [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1256&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/27/ashland-posts-1q-loss-plans-1300-job-cuts/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/27/ashland-posts-1q-loss-plans-1300-job-cuts/)
more...
rangaswamy
10-25 04:30 PM
Mine still says pending even though i received it 2 weeks ago....
but my spouses status was spot on through the process..
but my spouses status was spot on through the process..
2010 10. Mathias Lauridsen
wandmaker
01-02 06:58 PM
When do you think a person with PD of Nov 2007 ,EB3 from India, would be able to file for 485??
If each and every registered member supports IV with money, time or both then you will be able to file in 3/4 years otherwise 2025. Contributing money is most important task to start with
If each and every registered member supports IV with money, time or both then you will be able to file in 3/4 years otherwise 2025. Contributing money is most important task to start with
more...
james_bond_007
03-13 12:01 AM
Congratulations !!
Looks like TSC abandoned online status updates and emails. My case has been assigned to an officer (again) and enroute to I-485 manager as of Feb 3rd 2008 ( senator feedback ). So far no LUD's or emails.. Looks like instead of checking for emails every other minute , I have to wait for regular mail now.. unfortunately I can do that only once per day !! :( ..
Looks like TSC abandoned online status updates and emails. My case has been assigned to an officer (again) and enroute to I-485 manager as of Feb 3rd 2008 ( senator feedback ). So far no LUD's or emails.. Looks like instead of checking for emails every other minute , I have to wait for regular mail now.. unfortunately I can do that only once per day !! :( ..
hair adriana lima victoria secret
Texascitypaul
02-23 06:15 PM
No necessarily protected. Anyone who overstays their I-94 is removable (deportable). However, some people can contest that in removal proceedings. One basis to contest a removal order is because the foreign national is married to a US citizen and/or has an Adjustment of Status pending.
The problem with VWP entrants is that they sign away their rights to contest a removal order, even if married to a US citizen (unless they claim asylum). Worse - they can be removed without a hearing in immigration court, simply by an order of the local District Director. In theory, a VWP entrant who overstayed could file for permanent residence and be issued a removal order and put in detention when s/he turned up for the marriage interview at the District Office.
I don't mean to terrify you, and most district offices do approve cases filed by VWP entrants, but please check with a local attorney before filing anything.
__________________
Thank you very much for clarifying that for me,ok so first thing is to find a reputable immigration attorney close to me in Texas City.
Thank you for your time it is very much appreciated,
Paul
The problem with VWP entrants is that they sign away their rights to contest a removal order, even if married to a US citizen (unless they claim asylum). Worse - they can be removed without a hearing in immigration court, simply by an order of the local District Director. In theory, a VWP entrant who overstayed could file for permanent residence and be issued a removal order and put in detention when s/he turned up for the marriage interview at the District Office.
I don't mean to terrify you, and most district offices do approve cases filed by VWP entrants, but please check with a local attorney before filing anything.
__________________
Thank you very much for clarifying that for me,ok so first thing is to find a reputable immigration attorney close to me in Texas City.
Thank you for your time it is very much appreciated,
Paul
more...
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
With a second successive quarterly loss on the cards for ING Group NV, the company plans to layoff 7,000 employees, and appoint Jan Hommen - the present chairman of the ING board, and the former chief financial officer of Philips Electronics - as its new CEO in the place of the current chief executive Michel [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1239&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/ing-group-to-layoff-7000-employees/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/ing-group-to-layoff-7000-employees/)
hot adriana lima victoria secret
sr77
09-26 11:45 AM
Hello,
The 485 applications for me and wife are still being processed by USCIS in Los Angeles. My priority date (August 1, 2005) became current almost 3 months ago.
We have waited patiently since the priority date became current. There has been no movement except that they wanted to fingerprint us again, which we completed 2 months ago. My lawyer says he put in two referral inquiries but of no avail.
I have already obtained InfoPass for a couple of weeks from now. I will go and check in with the USCIS office here in LA.
1. What should my next steps be? Write to my senator? Or should I wait until after the InfoPass appointment
2. Am I pushing too hard on USCIS? Is it that they are simply backlogged? Should I just wait more?
I am concerned that the dates will retrogress again. Any advice or comments will be helpful.
Thanks,
SR
The 485 applications for me and wife are still being processed by USCIS in Los Angeles. My priority date (August 1, 2005) became current almost 3 months ago.
We have waited patiently since the priority date became current. There has been no movement except that they wanted to fingerprint us again, which we completed 2 months ago. My lawyer says he put in two referral inquiries but of no avail.
I have already obtained InfoPass for a couple of weeks from now. I will go and check in with the USCIS office here in LA.
1. What should my next steps be? Write to my senator? Or should I wait until after the InfoPass appointment
2. Am I pushing too hard on USCIS? Is it that they are simply backlogged? Should I just wait more?
I am concerned that the dates will retrogress again. Any advice or comments will be helpful.
Thanks,
SR
more...
house adriana lima victoria secret model_10. adriana lima victoria secret model_10
pappu
03-31 03:50 PM
Congrats
tattoo adriana lima victoria secret
desi3933
12-13 06:36 PM
Thank you!
I am not quiting my company but I am moving to India. In that case what will happen ?
Your valuable inputs are greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much!
Well, you have to quit job in USA before moving to India. When you go out of USA, your H1-B status is gone. Read gain, your H1 status is gone. So your spouse can not be on H4.
You should consider getting professional advice both for your immigration issues as well as your personality disorder.
Get a life!!!
________________
Not a legal advice.
I am not quiting my company but I am moving to India. In that case what will happen ?
Your valuable inputs are greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much!
Well, you have to quit job in USA before moving to India. When you go out of USA, your H1-B status is gone. Read gain, your H1 status is gone. So your spouse can not be on H4.
You should consider getting professional advice both for your immigration issues as well as your personality disorder.
Get a life!!!
________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
pictures house victoria#39;s secret
the_googly
08-22 02:14 PM
ND: Jun 26 08
Approved on Aug 19th 08
Don't worry.. they are catching up.
Approved on Aug 19th 08
Don't worry.. they are catching up.
dresses (IMG:http://i411.photobucket.
jonty_11
07-05 12:46 PM
Maybe politicians involved - only when powerful politicians are involved such things happen - USCIS/DOS does not do such things on its own.
How about the fact that it was related to CIR to shut up the Legals asking for Ammendments in CIR, ,,,,as CIR fell apart, they took away our bait too.....
It seems too simple, but only makes sense...
Remember this has never happenned before in the history of VBs
How about the fact that it was related to CIR to shut up the Legals asking for Ammendments in CIR, ,,,,as CIR fell apart, they took away our bait too.....
It seems too simple, but only makes sense...
Remember this has never happenned before in the history of VBs
more...
makeup adriana lima victoria secret
acsouza
03-20 07:15 PM
Yes I believe the HR department is wrong in this case.
The problem according to them is that they need to verify the picture on the document I provide with the picture that the E-verify system will show.
I am researching this further once I get some more information from DHS I will be arguing with HR again.
Thanks Euclid.
The problem according to them is that they need to verify the picture on the document I provide with the picture that the E-verify system will show.
I am researching this further once I get some more information from DHS I will be arguing with HR again.
Thanks Euclid.
girlfriend adriana lima victoria secret
psaxena
06-23 03:11 PM
and how do you know that.. did Rush tell ya???
Still unlikely I would not take a word from Gibbs. He never knows anything.
Still unlikely I would not take a word from Gibbs. He never knows anything.
hairstyles adriana lima victoria secret
raghuram
11-10 12:46 PM
one of my friends took insurance for his parents from
http://.org/page3.html
covers PRE-EXISITING Conditions as well
's plan is from AIG.
Therefore be very careful, given AIG's condition recently. Even today, government gave $40 billion for AIG to survive. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081110/ap_on_bi_ge/aig_bailout
Please note that it is completely misleading when advertises that it is on a non-profit basis. It is like saying Ford Mustang car is sponsored by Ford Foundation, a non-profit organization. Just because Ford owners have a charity organization on the side does not make the entire Ford Motor Company non-profit organization. The same way existance of India Network Foundation does not make 's entire insurance business non-profit.
Find out the complete details and reality of KV Rao Insurance or India Network Insurance at http://visitorsinsuranceusa.wordpress.com/ It is shocking, disturbing but really true.
http://.org/page3.html
covers PRE-EXISITING Conditions as well
's plan is from AIG.
Therefore be very careful, given AIG's condition recently. Even today, government gave $40 billion for AIG to survive. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081110/ap_on_bi_ge/aig_bailout
Please note that it is completely misleading when advertises that it is on a non-profit basis. It is like saying Ford Mustang car is sponsored by Ford Foundation, a non-profit organization. Just because Ford owners have a charity organization on the side does not make the entire Ford Motor Company non-profit organization. The same way existance of India Network Foundation does not make 's entire insurance business non-profit.
Find out the complete details and reality of KV Rao Insurance or India Network Insurance at http://visitorsinsuranceusa.wordpress.com/ It is shocking, disturbing but really true.
eilsoe
10-03 01:59 PM
Absolutely horrific...
gcformeornot
08-21 10:59 AM
Is this anything to do with PD?
please poll here to add your vote...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12603
sorry if did already.
please poll here to add your vote...
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12603
sorry if did already.
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen