nissan_1
11-30 09:30 AM
I have also applied for the canadian PR 1.5 months ago. Yesterday I got a letter from canadian consulate to sit for IELTS as I am clamming 16 points on language skill with supporting documents. Now, I do not want to sit for IELTS..is there any way out? Do you guys know any small consulting firm in canada who can give me a HRSDC approved job offer? I will not mind to work for them for a year if I get my PR (it's better then waiting for GC for another 10 years)...
thepaew
02-08 10:35 AM
This shouldn't surprise you, should it? In the US too, some engineers make 50K and others make 200K. It depends both on prevailing standards and the individual's skills/luck/location. I do know people making ridiculous sums in India, but they are worth every cent to their employers.
It basically depends on how much value some people can add and how well they can negotiate.
I think the 3 to 4 lakh comment was meant for people "who could not get a job at Microsoft or IBM." I think that the author qualified his/her comments by stating "Not everyone gets into Microsoft or IBM india. You have to compete with MS/PhD in computer science for the same job that needs BS in big companies due to high rate of competition and unemployment."
Ok. So if I summarize, you guys are providing the following ranges:
22 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs
20 Lakhs to 35 Lakhs
12 Lakhs to 15 Lakhs
3 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs
That means, 3 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs. :)
Wow! what a huge difference
It basically depends on how much value some people can add and how well they can negotiate.
I think the 3 to 4 lakh comment was meant for people "who could not get a job at Microsoft or IBM." I think that the author qualified his/her comments by stating "Not everyone gets into Microsoft or IBM india. You have to compete with MS/PhD in computer science for the same job that needs BS in big companies due to high rate of competition and unemployment."
Ok. So if I summarize, you guys are providing the following ranges:
22 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs
20 Lakhs to 35 Lakhs
12 Lakhs to 15 Lakhs
3 Lakhs to 4 Lakhs
That means, 3 Lakhs to 40 Lakhs. :)
Wow! what a huge difference
chanduv23
11-10 03:35 PM
--- bump ---
so many views but no replies yet :(
Yes, you can, but must not get paid. the work must be volunteer work only. My wife was involved in cardiology research for 3 months while on h4. She was not paid - she was just a volunteer.
I would recommend - not to get into unpaid work stuff. This is from personal experience. My wife was unpaid volunteer at Emory Cardiology research , and was being exploited - they found her to be good at work and started dumping all work to her - she was completing charts of paid employees and was working like hell because they set deadlines for her. We were furious and I pulled her out.
When she requested that they give her a recommendation letter for all the work she did - they were reluctant to do it and started yelling at her and were extremely rude so that she wont ask again - they bullied her into signing a document that would strip her name off all publications. Finally after a lot of persistence and insisting, they gave a letter of recommendation.
The reason I write this stuff is - to warn you all - do not get into this kind of stuff. The world is very exploitative and we cannot trust workplaces or people around us.
Use time on H4 for some good stuff - volunteer for IV or there are so many things you can do.
so many views but no replies yet :(
Yes, you can, but must not get paid. the work must be volunteer work only. My wife was involved in cardiology research for 3 months while on h4. She was not paid - she was just a volunteer.
I would recommend - not to get into unpaid work stuff. This is from personal experience. My wife was unpaid volunteer at Emory Cardiology research , and was being exploited - they found her to be good at work and started dumping all work to her - she was completing charts of paid employees and was working like hell because they set deadlines for her. We were furious and I pulled her out.
When she requested that they give her a recommendation letter for all the work she did - they were reluctant to do it and started yelling at her and were extremely rude so that she wont ask again - they bullied her into signing a document that would strip her name off all publications. Finally after a lot of persistence and insisting, they gave a letter of recommendation.
The reason I write this stuff is - to warn you all - do not get into this kind of stuff. The world is very exploitative and we cannot trust workplaces or people around us.
Use time on H4 for some good stuff - volunteer for IV or there are so many things you can do.
maddipati1
12-03 03:24 PM
there are lot of threads abt this topic. search it.
read form I-131 instructions, where it clearly says, AP appl. is considered abandoned if you leave US before its approval. this is for sure.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
read form I-131 instructions, where it clearly says, AP appl. is considered abandoned if you leave US before its approval. this is for sure.
My wife is not H4, she is working on EAD and we applied her I-485 last July. She has to travel to India for an emegency. We applied for AP last month, have the receipt but it is not approved. Is it okay if she travels to India without AP approval? I will be here and I can take her approved AP when I go there after two months.
I heard that if she travels without AP, her I-485 is considered abonded. Is this true? Can we apply for her H4 (as I am still on H1). Any advice on how to get her back?
Thanks!
more...
vallabhu
11-13 04:35 PM
I am done with Finger Prints on sep25th which i received on sep6th.
guygeek007
11-06 02:17 PM
Hang in there my friend. My 140 was first filed in Jan 2006 and was RFE'd for ability to pay. This 140 was withdrawn and was refiled by my company's sister concern in June 2006. We waited for a year and then in June 2007, applied for premium processing just before that was closed down. The check and request for premium were returned with the reason that the original labor app was not provided. Then we received an RFE for ability to pay yet once again in Sept 2007. This was addressed in a very detailed fashion by the HR & CPA working closely with my attorney. Finally on Oct 31st there was the approval notice. Thus, my advice to you would be stay put and patient and it'll all work out. Good Luck!
Congrats...I see hope from your case.
My case still remains stuck in security check at USCIS TSC...395 days and counting :)
Congrats...I see hope from your case.
My case still remains stuck in security check at USCIS TSC...395 days and counting :)
more...
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
iman.karta
11-07 11:30 AM
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.
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.
more...
thomachan72
09-13 12:02 PM
I appreciate the original post. I also request the moderators to come up IMMEDIATELY with strict rules and regulations for posting on this website. Posts that go against the principles that IV stands for should be IMMEDIATELY deleted. We dont need such posts here. This is not about EB3 or EB2. Given that the backlog for EB3 is bigger than EB2 we are seeing great deal of frustration among our folks but we have to approach this issue carefully. The question is, have we specifically aimed at getting anything for any spefic catagory? the answer is NO. I believe most of the administrators including pappu and previous guys were EB3. whether a person applies in EB3 or EB2 depends entirely on the job specifications and not the qualifications also since lot of the software jobs currently fall under specifications for EB3 we are seeing lot more applicants in EB3. I however believe that once we get through the next couple of years there is certainly going to be a faster movement in all catagories. Meanwhile we have to stand united and not allow FALSE prophets to post hate on this site. The poster you are refering to is CLEARLY A COMPLETE FRAUD. look at his/her language and how many of our members have you ever noticed to use such language. Even our most angry members never use such words so ELOQUENTLY!!! He/she is apparently a person who has lost a job and is angry about immigration as a whole and takes pride in posting such material on immigration related websites. So our members should immediately take notice of such posts and either ignore them or report them to the moderators.
purgan
09-18 11:54 PM
The Other Immigration
More information. May 7, 2006, Sunday
By CHRISTOPHER CALDWELL (NYT); Magazine
Late Edition - Final, Section 6, Page 15, Column 3, 876 words
If you were to set out to design a story that would inflame populist rage, it might involve immigrants from poor countries, living in the United States without permission to work, hiring powerful Washington lobbyists to press their case. In late April, The Washington Post reported just such a ...
==
This is part of an abstract from the NY Times TimesSelect Article. I could not read the whole article because I don't have access to the "TimesSelect", a paid subscription. If anyone has it, could you post the artcile here...I believe it mentions the efforts of ImmigrationVoice.
More information. May 7, 2006, Sunday
By CHRISTOPHER CALDWELL (NYT); Magazine
Late Edition - Final, Section 6, Page 15, Column 3, 876 words
If you were to set out to design a story that would inflame populist rage, it might involve immigrants from poor countries, living in the United States without permission to work, hiring powerful Washington lobbyists to press their case. In late April, The Washington Post reported just such a ...
==
This is part of an abstract from the NY Times TimesSelect Article. I could not read the whole article because I don't have access to the "TimesSelect", a paid subscription. If anyone has it, could you post the artcile here...I believe it mentions the efforts of ImmigrationVoice.
more...
waitingnwaiting
02-11 12:00 PM
I suggest IV not sharing any more information to free members like us. Sensitive information should not be shared. Even anti immigrants read our forums. We will know if IV thinks it is okay to share. Let people who give their time and money to IV to help us have it as an incentive for helping all of us. Getting a bill passed is more important than knowing about the bill.
MONCYS
01-20 03:50 PM
My I-140 got approved in EB2 category in USA. My spouse who is on H4, born in U.A.E (Dubai) holds an Indian passport.
I would like to know that whether possible to apply for 485, EAD and AP using my spouse's Country of Birth.
Apprecite any help.
I would like to know that whether possible to apply for 485, EAD and AP using my spouse's Country of Birth.
Apprecite any help.
more...
Illuminae
06-05 12:48 PM
i was sending out a resume today, and i was EVER so tempted to stick this site in my portfolio..
then i realized i really need this job despite the enourmos amount of laughter i would get from the deal...
then i realized i really need this job despite the enourmos amount of laughter i would get from the deal...
vishal
04-21 03:38 PM
hi friends,
even my PD is current. but my case is transferred from texas to vermont. though my PD is current my processing date is not current. what is the reason for transferring I- 485 case from one center to other.
any response is appreciated
even my PD is current. but my case is transferred from texas to vermont. though my PD is current my processing date is not current. what is the reason for transferring I- 485 case from one center to other.
any response is appreciated
more...
fide_champ
06-25 08:41 AM
As we all know that priority dates became current in the latest visa bulletin. My lawyer made all my paper work ready and is about to file my paperwork with USCIS today. I am not sure if we can file the application a week before it actually becomes current.
I heard some people say that it's actually allowed to file 3 or 4 days before it becomes current. I also read reports that some people's application was rejected because it was sent too early. I am not sure what to believe here. Does anybody has any information on this?
I heard some people say that it's actually allowed to file 3 or 4 days before it becomes current. I also read reports that some people's application was rejected because it was sent too early. I am not sure what to believe here. Does anybody has any information on this?
ARUNRAMANATHAN
06-11 01:54 PM
I am in my 8 yr. Have a H1-B approved Untill 2008 Dec
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
Have a EB3 Approved Labor and 140 from Company A.
Now as of today if I move to Company B ...
Question :
Can I get a 3 yr Extension based on Company A (140 Approved )
that is from june 2007 to june 2010
OR
Do I get my H1-B untill 2008 Dec ?
----
When I move to Company B is there anything that I have be aware off as
I am planning to pally Eb2 and move the PD from company A
My PD : EB3 Jun 2004
Thanks Thanks Thanks Thanks
more...
snathan
08-18 06:39 PM
Some people did mistakes in the past and tried to correct it. If they are successful in correcting the mistake legally, then you should feel happy about it and wish them success.
At least don't wish them bad luck....
This is stupid. I am not wishing good luck or bad luck to anyone. We are trying to explain the rule and its consequences. Its up to them to take it or not. Moreover I am not a fan of people who applied H1 through some desi consulting (most of them with fake experience), sitting on bench without any project and put everyone in the bad light, giving ammo to the antis. Do you know how many house wives put eight-ten years fake experience when they dont even know the difference between USB port or ether net port. Its not a mistake...its called greed. Well I am not here to fight with you...but thats the fact.
At least don't wish them bad luck....
This is stupid. I am not wishing good luck or bad luck to anyone. We are trying to explain the rule and its consequences. Its up to them to take it or not. Moreover I am not a fan of people who applied H1 through some desi consulting (most of them with fake experience), sitting on bench without any project and put everyone in the bad light, giving ammo to the antis. Do you know how many house wives put eight-ten years fake experience when they dont even know the difference between USB port or ether net port. Its not a mistake...its called greed. Well I am not here to fight with you...but thats the fact.
inetuser
07-16 01:52 PM
Here is the update we have been waiting for
USCIS has announced that on Wed, Jul 18, 2007, from 9:00pm ET until Thur at 1:00am ET, the INFOPASS appointment system will be unavailable for a scheduled upgrade. USCIS customers will see some minor changes to the appointment screens on Thur, Jul 19, 2007. ;)
USCIS has announced that on Wed, Jul 18, 2007, from 9:00pm ET until Thur at 1:00am ET, the INFOPASS appointment system will be unavailable for a scheduled upgrade. USCIS customers will see some minor changes to the appointment screens on Thur, Jul 19, 2007. ;)
Green_Always
06-12 06:04 PM
Paaji msingh, Try contacting Manmohan Singh.
Right Solution :-)
msingh.. life is tough for GC Holders also here, without Job / work life is hell over here.
Right Solution :-)
msingh.. life is tough for GC Holders also here, without Job / work life is hell over here.
greyhair
04-21 12:10 PM
greyhair - that was something i tried on my own and i have never represented IV.
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
this requires a big movement for which IV is a very nice platform. that is the reason i keep shouting on this forum that nothing will happen untill you somehow make uscis held accountable or in this case even congress accountable.
Filing a Lawsuit against USCIS and CONGRESS together may lead us somewhere.
I don't think constitution allows suing Congress because it has immunity. Based on the their approval ratings you would see thousands of lawsuits everyday if it was allows to sue congress.
RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Congressional Job Approval (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html)
In that case we would have to take a number in line to sue congress because it will be big line. In other words there will be backlog to sue Congress and that backlog would be bigger than the green card backlog. :)
you are right we may sue congress but to win that is much much tough as even the judge is been appointed by the president which i guess is a member of congress :) but one can certainly try.
this requires a big movement for which IV is a very nice platform. that is the reason i keep shouting on this forum that nothing will happen untill you somehow make uscis held accountable or in this case even congress accountable.
Filing a Lawsuit against USCIS and CONGRESS together may lead us somewhere.
I don't think constitution allows suing Congress because it has immunity. Based on the their approval ratings you would see thousands of lawsuits everyday if it was allows to sue congress.
RealClearPolitics - Election Other - Congressional Job Approval (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html)
In that case we would have to take a number in line to sue congress because it will be big line. In other words there will be backlog to sue Congress and that backlog would be bigger than the green card backlog. :)
dealsnet
11-08 02:06 PM
Family based, majority (90%) is done by consular processing. AOS mostly for EB based. Petition for relatives is from the mother country, who is not present in USA for AOS. Yes - I agree with andy garcia
I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker
Both require a I-485 to adjust status
I-130, Petition for Alien Relative
I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker
Both require a I-485 to adjust status
No comments:
Post a Comment