hopeful08
06-14 12:11 PM
I was told by my attorney NOT to do this...Apply either through yourself or through your spouse. I was told that if there are two different applications for the same person, then it raises a red flag and you might end up in a big soup...But having said that, your attorney(s) might have different opinion(s)...
With the good news of all numbers current, both I and my wife's dates are current and eligible for filing I485.
1. In my application, can I include my wife as spouse for adjustment of status? And In my wife's application, can I include myself as spouse?
I am trying to do this to make sure if anything goes wrong in any one of our application, I can depend on the other one.
2. If I get an EAD based on my wife's application, can we both switch jobs after 180 days and take advantage of AC21? I read in some forums that I can, but the primary application (my wife) has to work for the same company until we get I485 approved.
Thanks for your answers in advance
With the good news of all numbers current, both I and my wife's dates are current and eligible for filing I485.
1. In my application, can I include my wife as spouse for adjustment of status? And In my wife's application, can I include myself as spouse?
I am trying to do this to make sure if anything goes wrong in any one of our application, I can depend on the other one.
2. If I get an EAD based on my wife's application, can we both switch jobs after 180 days and take advantage of AC21? I read in some forums that I can, but the primary application (my wife) has to work for the same company until we get I485 approved.
Thanks for your answers in advance
wallpaper iphone 4 wallpaper resolution.
Totoro
05-06 05:57 PM
Here is a web page that lists IRS media contacts (http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=97242,00.html) and they respond pretty quickly.
The media contacts are for press inquiries. I do recommend that everyone contacts his or her local news organizations though. Not many people are aware of this.
The media contacts are for press inquiries. I do recommend that everyone contacts his or her local news organizations though. Not many people are aware of this.
newuser
03-05 11:13 AM
I am ready to pitch in my contribution
2011 Even though iPhone 4 have the
krishnam70
03-23 08:02 PM
As long as you have had a valid h1b peition approved for employer 1 and employer 2 while you worked for them you are FINE.
According to my lawyer there is nuthing like a h1b transfer. When someone decides to move to a new sponsor that new sponsor files for a h1b via the petition but nuthing gets transfered, they need to refer to old h1b just to prove thatyou are legal and have been maintaining legal status.
in your case Employer X did so but you never joined that employer so you are fine. USCIS can get back to that emplyer if they have not cancelled your h1b as they are liable to pay you by law.
For real as you had an approved petition (latest but not the greatest) from Employer X but did not join them you are fine as long as you were still holding a valid petition with Emp # 2. You should respond back to RFE stating that you were maintaining stauts via emp#2 and were offered a job by EmpX which you never accepted. As a proof you should sen copies of pay stub for enitre period and w-2 + peition and visa copies.
Hope this helps!:)
BTW there is nothing like H1 Transfer as I learned, when you file your H1 with another employer its equivalent to a new H1 only thing is it will not count in the current year's quota.
You are good if you maintained valid status and have the documents to prove, not working for employer X with an approved petition is ok if you maintained your valid status with your current employer.
Get a good letter drafted by your attorney and it should be straightforward. Your attorney should have told you that.
- cheers
kris
According to my lawyer there is nuthing like a h1b transfer. When someone decides to move to a new sponsor that new sponsor files for a h1b via the petition but nuthing gets transfered, they need to refer to old h1b just to prove thatyou are legal and have been maintaining legal status.
in your case Employer X did so but you never joined that employer so you are fine. USCIS can get back to that emplyer if they have not cancelled your h1b as they are liable to pay you by law.
For real as you had an approved petition (latest but not the greatest) from Employer X but did not join them you are fine as long as you were still holding a valid petition with Emp # 2. You should respond back to RFE stating that you were maintaining stauts via emp#2 and were offered a job by EmpX which you never accepted. As a proof you should sen copies of pay stub for enitre period and w-2 + peition and visa copies.
Hope this helps!:)
BTW there is nothing like H1 Transfer as I learned, when you file your H1 with another employer its equivalent to a new H1 only thing is it will not count in the current year's quota.
You are good if you maintained valid status and have the documents to prove, not working for employer X with an approved petition is ok if you maintained your valid status with your current employer.
Get a good letter drafted by your attorney and it should be straightforward. Your attorney should have told you that.
- cheers
kris
more...
needhelp!
11-15 01:57 PM
Thank you for that info. I was not visiting the forums regularly then, and the only time I saw it was when IV core was already supporting it and encouraging everyone to do it. I have seen many great ideas on the forums.
Flower campaign wasnt started by iv (atleast not by the seniors), it slowly gathered momentum on its own and produced results. After seeing this bulletin I ve lost hope in all this lobbying and stuff. We need publicity and more of it. Fasting for a day if organized by iv could bring more results.
Flower campaign wasnt started by iv (atleast not by the seniors), it slowly gathered momentum on its own and produced results. After seeing this bulletin I ve lost hope in all this lobbying and stuff. We need publicity and more of it. Fasting for a day if organized by iv could bring more results.
n_2006
06-10 11:08 AM
We should not waste our time and money on this. I also would like to understand the lobbying impact of IV. After hearing tech lobby brought CA governor into picture and even that does not make any difference in favor of tech companies, are we making any impact with 200-300 thousand lobbying and some web faxes?
There is no question about IV effort. But the question I have is impact of that effort.
I am not sure why we are still behind this bill and wasting our money and resources,
everyone here needs to realize we don't need to sweeping legislative reform to address our concern, all we need few guidelines to impliment current law in more sensible way,
we simply don't have resources/strenght to address this issue letz not fool ourself anymore and letz put our moeny where mouth is
There is no question about IV effort. But the question I have is impact of that effort.
I am not sure why we are still behind this bill and wasting our money and resources,
everyone here needs to realize we don't need to sweeping legislative reform to address our concern, all we need few guidelines to impliment current law in more sensible way,
we simply don't have resources/strenght to address this issue letz not fool ourself anymore and letz put our moeny where mouth is
more...
ghost
07-07 05:25 PM
[QUOTE=dixie]So what they say sounds valid in theory, but impossible in practise.
If USCIS takes 5 years to process an EB visa,how is anyone going to wait that long to hire a foreign worker ? And what is going to happen to a foreign student when he graduates ? go back home and return after 5 years ? Even allowing for significant reform, and assuming their "instant GC" proposal is really instant, I dont see a GC ever being processed in under 2 years anytime in the near future. QUOTE]
I agree with you, my first reaction too was that this is practically impossible. Bill Gates was suggesting the proposal of "Instant GC" for anyone who completes their Master's degree in US. So may be some day this will become a reality.
I dont know how they are going to deal with immediate family members in that scenario. This does not sound like a bad idea but not everyone is lucky enough to afford doing their Master's in US. A number of them come on H-1B visas. Bill Gates was not against H-1B program.
I think there is a general consensus that H-1B program is being abused by employers. IEEE is suggesting to wrap it up while others are suggesting to keep the program but fix it, by providing the flexibility based on the current market needs and enforcing tough monitoring on the employers.
I must agree that the document is a perfect representation of how the H-1B program is being abused, which is unfortunate!
If USCIS takes 5 years to process an EB visa,how is anyone going to wait that long to hire a foreign worker ? And what is going to happen to a foreign student when he graduates ? go back home and return after 5 years ? Even allowing for significant reform, and assuming their "instant GC" proposal is really instant, I dont see a GC ever being processed in under 2 years anytime in the near future. QUOTE]
I agree with you, my first reaction too was that this is practically impossible. Bill Gates was suggesting the proposal of "Instant GC" for anyone who completes their Master's degree in US. So may be some day this will become a reality.
I dont know how they are going to deal with immediate family members in that scenario. This does not sound like a bad idea but not everyone is lucky enough to afford doing their Master's in US. A number of them come on H-1B visas. Bill Gates was not against H-1B program.
I think there is a general consensus that H-1B program is being abused by employers. IEEE is suggesting to wrap it up while others are suggesting to keep the program but fix it, by providing the flexibility based on the current market needs and enforcing tough monitoring on the employers.
I must agree that the document is a perfect representation of how the H-1B program is being abused, which is unfortunate!
2010 Home gt; iPhone 4 Wallpapers
walking_dude
09-20 11:43 AM
Do you really think the numbers will be that bad? Look at the improvement in turnout in DC from San Jose? ...
San Jose was a local CA event planned almost spontaneously. DC was an event planned months in advance. People were offered Free ride, Free plane fare, Free food (in Gurdwaras). Yet how many participated?
Do you think Indian’s in CA have a different mindset compared to those in TX or NY/NJ?
I have been refraining from posting on this point, as I wouldn't like to belittle the contributions of the strong team from California and the numbers they brought to the rally.
But let's face it. CA has more EB immigrants than the next three. Look at the recent 2006 Performance report from DoL (available at Mathew Oh website). CA had 21,000+ labor petitions compared to NY - 7,000, NJ - 7,000(?) , TX - 5000. As you can see CA scores more than the next three states put together.
If 40 people participate from NY, it's as good as 120 from Cal. Percentagewise it would be the same. If 40 peope walk in Michigan ( 2000 Labor petitions) statistically it would surpass CA, percentagewise.
It's a known thing that only 5%-10% of the population participates actively in the most successful movements be it American Revolution or struggle for Indian Independence. We haven't reached that critical mass yet ( at the regional level)
If rallies are local and on a weekend then more people will turn out. Not only will there be better turnout, many of these same people will being more passionate about their support to IV and might start showing up in out of state rallies and protests.
There is an enthusiasm right now. But how long before the fatigue sets in? Rallies need to be minimal, held with certain strategic target and should serve some specific purpose.
Weekend rallies attracting bigger crowds is a myth. Be prepared to listen to reasons like - Shucks I have to mow the lawn, take kids to Bharatanatyam dance classes, I have relatives over for lunch etc.
With that logic if we hold rallies over the LONG weekends, we should attract bigger crowd, since people have 2-3 days to relax afterwards. And since people already plan to visit Orlando, LA etc to visit Disneyland, Universal etc., if we can hold rallies there we should attract the highest possible crowd. Do you think my idea will work?
Many of my colleagues did not even know until yesterday when I showed then the news articles that there was a rally like this in DC. Unless we have local chapters with an organized structure which meet regularly/ even if it’s a conference call, you cannot expect mass mobilization…this is Politics works!!
I think the DC rally has caught every ones attention, this is the right time to push the drive for local mobilization, it will be tragic if we lose the momentum now.
I agree with you 100%. Question is - who'll bell the cat? Who will take the lead and sacrifice their time, family life etc. to plan, organize and conduct these?
We need a fearless leader like Aman Kapoor, who can motivate and inspire people to participate, in every state. Where can we find them?
San Jose was a local CA event planned almost spontaneously. DC was an event planned months in advance. People were offered Free ride, Free plane fare, Free food (in Gurdwaras). Yet how many participated?
Do you think Indian’s in CA have a different mindset compared to those in TX or NY/NJ?
I have been refraining from posting on this point, as I wouldn't like to belittle the contributions of the strong team from California and the numbers they brought to the rally.
But let's face it. CA has more EB immigrants than the next three. Look at the recent 2006 Performance report from DoL (available at Mathew Oh website). CA had 21,000+ labor petitions compared to NY - 7,000, NJ - 7,000(?) , TX - 5000. As you can see CA scores more than the next three states put together.
If 40 people participate from NY, it's as good as 120 from Cal. Percentagewise it would be the same. If 40 peope walk in Michigan ( 2000 Labor petitions) statistically it would surpass CA, percentagewise.
It's a known thing that only 5%-10% of the population participates actively in the most successful movements be it American Revolution or struggle for Indian Independence. We haven't reached that critical mass yet ( at the regional level)
If rallies are local and on a weekend then more people will turn out. Not only will there be better turnout, many of these same people will being more passionate about their support to IV and might start showing up in out of state rallies and protests.
There is an enthusiasm right now. But how long before the fatigue sets in? Rallies need to be minimal, held with certain strategic target and should serve some specific purpose.
Weekend rallies attracting bigger crowds is a myth. Be prepared to listen to reasons like - Shucks I have to mow the lawn, take kids to Bharatanatyam dance classes, I have relatives over for lunch etc.
With that logic if we hold rallies over the LONG weekends, we should attract bigger crowd, since people have 2-3 days to relax afterwards. And since people already plan to visit Orlando, LA etc to visit Disneyland, Universal etc., if we can hold rallies there we should attract the highest possible crowd. Do you think my idea will work?
Many of my colleagues did not even know until yesterday when I showed then the news articles that there was a rally like this in DC. Unless we have local chapters with an organized structure which meet regularly/ even if it’s a conference call, you cannot expect mass mobilization…this is Politics works!!
I think the DC rally has caught every ones attention, this is the right time to push the drive for local mobilization, it will be tragic if we lose the momentum now.
I agree with you 100%. Question is - who'll bell the cat? Who will take the lead and sacrifice their time, family life etc. to plan, organize and conduct these?
We need a fearless leader like Aman Kapoor, who can motivate and inspire people to participate, in every state. Where can we find them?
more...
indianabacklog
07-27 01:12 PM
indianabacklog, did you make your video and upload on you tube? you know about 2 action items posted by core right? you people are the right one who should stand first in the line to show our problems. I really appreciate if make a video along with your family.
I would like to shout this issue from the rooftops since it would appear that nobody appreciates how awful this situation is. IV do not have aging out on their agenda, nobody does, only those affected by it. If the delays get long enough waiting for priority dates the horizon might change for many many more employment based people. Did not make video for youtube, to be honest do not know how to and am not sure I could make the message short and sweet since my emotions run away with me when I start talking about his issue.
I would like to shout this issue from the rooftops since it would appear that nobody appreciates how awful this situation is. IV do not have aging out on their agenda, nobody does, only those affected by it. If the delays get long enough waiting for priority dates the horizon might change for many many more employment based people. Did not make video for youtube, to be honest do not know how to and am not sure I could make the message short and sweet since my emotions run away with me when I start talking about his issue.
hair iphone 4 wallpaper resolution.
raysaikat
11-18 11:52 AM
Credit cards are issued mostly to GC holders only unless they have a checking account as well with the institution-unless one lies in the application. -snip-.
Unless there has been a change in the policy after 2000, one only needs SSN and a checking account (not necessarily at the same bank) to get a credit card. It is true that having no prior credit record is a hindrance, but that mostly affects the credit line (you will get a small credit line). All F1 students with some kind of assistantship/scholarship/stipend would satisfy that. AmEx used to be a very good choice for students that time.
Unless there has been a change in the policy after 2000, one only needs SSN and a checking account (not necessarily at the same bank) to get a credit card. It is true that having no prior credit record is a hindrance, but that mostly affects the credit line (you will get a small credit line). All F1 students with some kind of assistantship/scholarship/stipend would satisfy that. AmEx used to be a very good choice for students that time.
more...
logiclife
09-25 12:04 PM
Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED.
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED.
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
hot But iPhone 4 Retina display
new2H1&GC
08-04 09:29 AM
Thank you so much for the reply. As you suggested, I will try to find an attorney and get more details. In the mean time I just have a few more questions.
1.Do you know if pay stubs would be a problem to get the "transfer/new" H1B before Oct 1st? Since I wouldn't actually work with Company A, so I wouldn't have any pay stubs.
2. Actually what's difference between getting the "transfer" before Oct 1st and getting a "new" H1B before Oct 1st? Is there some procedure difference?
Company A (the company through which I got the H1B) is withholding the H1B approval notice Original until I am put on project. I went ahead with them for sponsorship because they guaranteed getting projects in my area and no "bench" time, but now after the approval came through, they don't seem as enthusiastic about placing me in local projects. In case there's a problem, I don't want to risk going through the whole "bench" period thing, that's why I am considering changing companies early itself, instead of waiting to find out for sure.
So my third question is
3. Is a COPY of H1B approval notice enough for getting a "new" H1B with company B?
Again THANK YOU for your replies, it's a BIG HELP!
I had the same question so I asked my attorney and he told me that you can "transfer" your H1B after Oct 1 and benefit from AC21, meaning that as soon as company B files an H1B petition for you and you have proof of this filing, you can start working for them.
However, I understand that you want to "transfer" before Oct 1, in which case company B has to file a new H1B petition either regular or with premium processing. This new H1B is not counted against the cap because you have already been counted against the gap in the 6 previous years.
In short, you should be able to work for company B starting Oct 1 if they file for a new H1B now and it is approved by Oct 1.
I recommend you ask an attorney for your specific case.
1.Do you know if pay stubs would be a problem to get the "transfer/new" H1B before Oct 1st? Since I wouldn't actually work with Company A, so I wouldn't have any pay stubs.
2. Actually what's difference between getting the "transfer" before Oct 1st and getting a "new" H1B before Oct 1st? Is there some procedure difference?
Company A (the company through which I got the H1B) is withholding the H1B approval notice Original until I am put on project. I went ahead with them for sponsorship because they guaranteed getting projects in my area and no "bench" time, but now after the approval came through, they don't seem as enthusiastic about placing me in local projects. In case there's a problem, I don't want to risk going through the whole "bench" period thing, that's why I am considering changing companies early itself, instead of waiting to find out for sure.
So my third question is
3. Is a COPY of H1B approval notice enough for getting a "new" H1B with company B?
Again THANK YOU for your replies, it's a BIG HELP!
I had the same question so I asked my attorney and he told me that you can "transfer" your H1B after Oct 1 and benefit from AC21, meaning that as soon as company B files an H1B petition for you and you have proof of this filing, you can start working for them.
However, I understand that you want to "transfer" before Oct 1, in which case company B has to file a new H1B petition either regular or with premium processing. This new H1B is not counted against the cap because you have already been counted against the gap in the 6 previous years.
In short, you should be able to work for company B starting Oct 1 if they file for a new H1B now and it is approved by Oct 1.
I recommend you ask an attorney for your specific case.
more...
house iphone 4 wallpaper resolution.
vinabath
02-28 11:35 AM
I am very happy with Ken Stern. They do a very good job. Little expensive though.
their website
www.secalaw.com
their website
www.secalaw.com
tattoo iphone 4 wallpaper resolution.
gaz
03-05 09:44 AM
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOmbudsman_RR_2_Streamlining_Employment_Based_Im migrant_Processing_USCIS_Response_04-27-06.pdf
"On April 27, 2004, the Ombudsman sent an information request to USCIS for a breakdown of data for pending employment-based applications for adjustment of status to be broken down by preference classification, priority date and country of chargeability. This request attempted to reflect similar data contained within the Immigration Annual Statistical Handbook, Chart 5, for completed cases. The Ombudsman’s interest in pending employment-based workload is in part a reflection of the broader issue relating to USCIS’ ability to support the Department of State in accurately forecasting immigrant visa requirements and the visa issuance process."
"This update will enable USCIS to identify 100% of the pending employment-based visa cases. It is anticipated that this exercise will be completed by April 28, 2006. Once this exercise is complete, USCIS will be able to extract data relating to the priority date, country of chargeability and preference classification. USCIS has already entered into discussions with the Department of State to provide this detailed information not only for pending workload but for visa regressed cases as well to allow DOS to accurately manage future visa allocations in regressed workloads."
[updated]
http://www.aila.org/content/fileviewer.aspx?docid=22650&linkid=162315
so are we getting anything different from what the ombudsman has already requested (and received?)
"On April 27, 2004, the Ombudsman sent an information request to USCIS for a breakdown of data for pending employment-based applications for adjustment of status to be broken down by preference classification, priority date and country of chargeability. This request attempted to reflect similar data contained within the Immigration Annual Statistical Handbook, Chart 5, for completed cases. The Ombudsman’s interest in pending employment-based workload is in part a reflection of the broader issue relating to USCIS’ ability to support the Department of State in accurately forecasting immigrant visa requirements and the visa issuance process."
"This update will enable USCIS to identify 100% of the pending employment-based visa cases. It is anticipated that this exercise will be completed by April 28, 2006. Once this exercise is complete, USCIS will be able to extract data relating to the priority date, country of chargeability and preference classification. USCIS has already entered into discussions with the Department of State to provide this detailed information not only for pending workload but for visa regressed cases as well to allow DOS to accurately manage future visa allocations in regressed workloads."
[updated]
http://www.aila.org/content/fileviewer.aspx?docid=22650&linkid=162315
so are we getting anything different from what the ombudsman has already requested (and received?)
more...
pictures iphone 4 wallpaper for mac. iphone 4 wallpaper resolution.
krishnam70
03-23 08:02 PM
As long as you have had a valid h1b peition approved for employer 1 and employer 2 while you worked for them you are FINE.
According to my lawyer there is nuthing like a h1b transfer. When someone decides to move to a new sponsor that new sponsor files for a h1b via the petition but nuthing gets transfered, they need to refer to old h1b just to prove thatyou are legal and have been maintaining legal status.
in your case Employer X did so but you never joined that employer so you are fine. USCIS can get back to that emplyer if they have not cancelled your h1b as they are liable to pay you by law.
For real as you had an approved petition (latest but not the greatest) from Employer X but did not join them you are fine as long as you were still holding a valid petition with Emp # 2. You should respond back to RFE stating that you were maintaining stauts via emp#2 and were offered a job by EmpX which you never accepted. As a proof you should sen copies of pay stub for enitre period and w-2 + peition and visa copies.
Hope this helps!:)
BTW there is nothing like H1 Transfer as I learned, when you file your H1 with another employer its equivalent to a new H1 only thing is it will not count in the current year's quota.
You are good if you maintained valid status and have the documents to prove, not working for employer X with an approved petition is ok if you maintained your valid status with your current employer.
Get a good letter drafted by your attorney and it should be straightforward. Your attorney should have told you that.
- cheers
kris
According to my lawyer there is nuthing like a h1b transfer. When someone decides to move to a new sponsor that new sponsor files for a h1b via the petition but nuthing gets transfered, they need to refer to old h1b just to prove thatyou are legal and have been maintaining legal status.
in your case Employer X did so but you never joined that employer so you are fine. USCIS can get back to that emplyer if they have not cancelled your h1b as they are liable to pay you by law.
For real as you had an approved petition (latest but not the greatest) from Employer X but did not join them you are fine as long as you were still holding a valid petition with Emp # 2. You should respond back to RFE stating that you were maintaining stauts via emp#2 and were offered a job by EmpX which you never accepted. As a proof you should sen copies of pay stub for enitre period and w-2 + peition and visa copies.
Hope this helps!:)
BTW there is nothing like H1 Transfer as I learned, when you file your H1 with another employer its equivalent to a new H1 only thing is it will not count in the current year's quota.
You are good if you maintained valid status and have the documents to prove, not working for employer X with an approved petition is ok if you maintained your valid status with your current employer.
Get a good letter drafted by your attorney and it should be straightforward. Your attorney should have told you that.
- cheers
kris
dresses iphone background resolution. iphone 4 wallpaper resolution.
jonty_11
11-08 02:06 PM
Yes, I would agree this is good news. BUsh has already protected himself from War Crimes by passing the Torture Bill....now he wants to make sure Dems do not start setting up committees on Iraq war, tax cuts etc...he will basically protect himself now for the 2 yrs left in office.
There is talk that Bush wants to do something GREAT before his term ends; and that he would not like to be called a War PResident, I think Bush does not have teh Vision, Leadership or Intellegence to think that far out. He will think short term about protecting his turf, and it is upto the Democrats to put forth the Immigration Legislation on the table - which IV needs to push for in the new congress.
There is talk that Bush wants to do something GREAT before his term ends; and that he would not like to be called a War PResident, I think Bush does not have teh Vision, Leadership or Intellegence to think that far out. He will think short term about protecting his turf, and it is upto the Democrats to put forth the Immigration Legislation on the table - which IV needs to push for in the new congress.
more...
makeup Apple Game iPhone 4 Wallpaper
nfinity
09-21 07:26 PM
This question is not to undermine the effort, which was tremendous but just from a realistic point of view...
I'm just curious to know how long it will take (or rather how long we are prepared to wait) for the impact of this rally to be felt and what are the changes that can be expected from USCIS as a result ?
Say, after waiting for a few months, status quo continues, what further actions are planned to persist with IV's cause (i.e. more rallies or by other means) ?
If the same question has been already raised, please ignore.
Thanks.
Vin,
I dont think the question is about price of action. Its the price you are going to pay for inaction. Each of us is impacted one way another. So, do you really want to sit at home and do nothing about it?
how many times do you take the approach of inaction to solve a problem?
I'm just curious to know how long it will take (or rather how long we are prepared to wait) for the impact of this rally to be felt and what are the changes that can be expected from USCIS as a result ?
Say, after waiting for a few months, status quo continues, what further actions are planned to persist with IV's cause (i.e. more rallies or by other means) ?
If the same question has been already raised, please ignore.
Thanks.
Vin,
I dont think the question is about price of action. Its the price you are going to pay for inaction. Each of us is impacted one way another. So, do you really want to sit at home and do nothing about it?
how many times do you take the approach of inaction to solve a problem?
girlfriend Iphone 4 Wallpaper HS 3 by
waitnwatch
05-31 10:44 AM
This is a slippery slope,
"would create a quota exemption for certain highly skilled immigrants who have at least three years of U.S. work experience"
the keyword is "certain", in skil that "certain" meany MS or PHD, what does this certain mean, it all depends on the definition of certain, it would be nice if the use the same definition of skil (masters and phd)
Please have a look on thomas. The "certain" is clearly defined in proposed SA 1249 to S. 1348.
"would create a quota exemption for certain highly skilled immigrants who have at least three years of U.S. work experience"
the keyword is "certain", in skil that "certain" meany MS or PHD, what does this certain mean, it all depends on the definition of certain, it would be nice if the use the same definition of skil (masters and phd)
Please have a look on thomas. The "certain" is clearly defined in proposed SA 1249 to S. 1348.
hairstyles The iPhone 4 wallpapers are
GCScrewed
08-22 11:36 AM
Certainly Canada is much much better option. Wish people had talked about it 10 years ago. So for those who just came to America or those who are deciding where to go to work or to school, Canada should be the first choice. You will actually have more flexibility being a Canadian than American.
tdasara
07-20 03:10 PM
And look what our desi reporters write
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1779190.cms
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1779190.cms
Totoro
05-16 11:29 AM
Great work toro , the article was very good...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24567987/page/2/
So do we have any update on this, will it be possible to get SSN for H4 dependents?
So far things are looking good, but I have been instructed to not discuss any specifics until the lawyers have reviewed all the information. I should know more next week. I also received a call yesterday from a congressional office, but I was unavailable to take the call. We'll see what happens.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24567987/page/2/
So do we have any update on this, will it be possible to get SSN for H4 dependents?
So far things are looking good, but I have been instructed to not discuss any specifics until the lawyers have reviewed all the information. I should know more next week. I also received a call yesterday from a congressional office, but I was unavailable to take the call. We'll see what happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment