arthsidhu
09-10 01:54 AM
The way these companies are run is pathetic. I know a Desi employer who invested his revenues into Tollywood (Telugu) movies. :D Isn�t it amusing?
Most of these movies flopped and he didn't have any money to pay his employees. Some one complained to DOL and they blacklisted the company preventing them from processing anymore H1's or GC's. The Desi employer eventually started another company and went into the whole crappy business again.
American desi, the employer you are referring to is known as Netsoft previously which has a long history of employee abuse and also the abuse of the H1B visas. It changed name to HIDEF TECHNOLOGIES 17177 N Laurel Park Dr # 402, Livonia, MI 48152-3951 after some of its employees complained about it to DOL . It still exists and has come back with vengeance in abusing this H1b visas. It is located in Livonia, Michigan. So beware of this company.
HIDEF TECHNOLOGIES
17177 N Laurel Park Dr # 348
Livonia, MI , 48152-3951
Phone: 734-632-0308
Most of these movies flopped and he didn't have any money to pay his employees. Some one complained to DOL and they blacklisted the company preventing them from processing anymore H1's or GC's. The Desi employer eventually started another company and went into the whole crappy business again.
American desi, the employer you are referring to is known as Netsoft previously which has a long history of employee abuse and also the abuse of the H1B visas. It changed name to HIDEF TECHNOLOGIES 17177 N Laurel Park Dr # 402, Livonia, MI 48152-3951 after some of its employees complained about it to DOL . It still exists and has come back with vengeance in abusing this H1b visas. It is located in Livonia, Michigan. So beware of this company.
HIDEF TECHNOLOGIES
17177 N Laurel Park Dr # 348
Livonia, MI , 48152-3951
Phone: 734-632-0308
wallpaper Celebrity Hairstyles of the
sidshar
10-15 12:49 PM
If we file our 485 after July 2007 form says we dont pay filing fees, is that true?
Thanks.
Thanks.
reddymjm
05-27 12:56 PM
You probably won't get a FP notice if you have done biometrics done before for I-485.
So may just have to wait for approval.
This is not consistent. I filed on Apr 18th. Last LUD on apr 27th.They received the documentation that day. My fried filed 3 weeks ago. He got a FP notice. Both were efiles. He has also done his FP along for 485.
So may just have to wait for approval.
This is not consistent. I filed on Apr 18th. Last LUD on apr 27th.They received the documentation that day. My fried filed 3 weeks ago. He got a FP notice. Both were efiles. He has also done his FP along for 485.
2011 tattoo is a chocolate brown.
ticktoe
09-06 02:06 PM
Doesn't matter. MS+0 works just fine. (My EB-2 was MS+0).
The biggest issue is that just with MS, IS NOT HARD TO REFUTE OTHER RESUMES. EVEN IF SOME ONE WITH A MS+6 MONTHS apply to the ad. Then it will be hard for me to justify. That's what makes me little uncomfortable here.
But how did you manage to justify that you have enough knowledge/experience for that job. Did you use any particular course material or project work or anything of that kind against some one who applied for your ad ?
Please do let me know your experience. It will greatly help me.
Thanks
The biggest issue is that just with MS, IS NOT HARD TO REFUTE OTHER RESUMES. EVEN IF SOME ONE WITH A MS+6 MONTHS apply to the ad. Then it will be hard for me to justify. That's what makes me little uncomfortable here.
But how did you manage to justify that you have enough knowledge/experience for that job. Did you use any particular course material or project work or anything of that kind against some one who applied for your ad ?
Please do let me know your experience. It will greatly help me.
Thanks
more...
rani77
08-30 10:53 AM
Isnt recording conversations without the consent illegal? :confused:
This may be correct but , if you sent the tape of employer abusing /cursing its own employees to DOL along with other allegations , they might well pay special attention and scrutinize him or his company thoroghly.
This may be correct but , if you sent the tape of employer abusing /cursing its own employees to DOL along with other allegations , they might well pay special attention and scrutinize him or his company thoroghly.
ash0210
07-18 11:21 AM
My GC is approved but still I want to continue my contribution (in steps of $20) for this good cause....However, I dont see any $20 contributions for last couple of weeks..Is it possible to start contribution of $20 for guy like me who have GC & wants to help for this cause?
more...
shivaz90
07-16 10:40 PM
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
Well .. lets think for a second before trumpeting our victory here. And Victory, I mean is not achieved by one group over the other. Various groups and parties have put in thier efforts to find a resolution and to cast blame on one another is playing some childish games.
Lets leave out our passion for a second and think "logically" for a second - which one of this scares the s*** out of the USCIS people here - flower campaign or a Class action lawsuit by bunch of immigration lawyers? I am not doubting anyone's efforts here - but to say that we have achieved victory here is too early, too short sighted and blaming other groups for not doing much is silly. As much as the flower campaign help spread the word among the media of the plight of legal immigrants - the proposed lawsuit has made USCIS tremble in thier pants.
Sheikh - couldn't agree more here with you.
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
Well .. lets think for a second before trumpeting our victory here. And Victory, I mean is not achieved by one group over the other. Various groups and parties have put in thier efforts to find a resolution and to cast blame on one another is playing some childish games.
Lets leave out our passion for a second and think "logically" for a second - which one of this scares the s*** out of the USCIS people here - flower campaign or a Class action lawsuit by bunch of immigration lawyers? I am not doubting anyone's efforts here - but to say that we have achieved victory here is too early, too short sighted and blaming other groups for not doing much is silly. As much as the flower campaign help spread the word among the media of the plight of legal immigrants - the proposed lawsuit has made USCIS tremble in thier pants.
Sheikh - couldn't agree more here with you.
2010 chocolate brown hairstyles.
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
nashdel
08-07 11:09 PM
Mine approved August 2nd, Wife`s pending. May be this is one of the administrative fixes from USCIS! As primary on EAD I would have to Work in same job classification, can not stay here for long without work or open a new business. But spouse on EAD can do either one of those per my knowledge. They can allot visa number to another primary. I do not think this is the reasoning from USCIS and there has to be some other reason though such as security check. I wonder if it is smart for them to allot visa numbers to primary and secondary in 2:1 ratio. Will ease problems for lot of people.
hair more.
perm2gc
08-26 01:19 AM
Dude it is pretty clear you dont belong here. If you joined a body-shop that replaced americans with cheap bodies then your employer violated the law and you were a willing accomplice. You are no better than an illegal alien. No wonder you are so scared of being replaced by yet another cheap body ! IV does not represent people like you.
Now get the hell out of here.well said dude
Now get the hell out of here.well said dude
more...
aristotle
01-31 01:51 AM
If one transfers H1 after I140 approval, employers should have no reason to withdraw the I140. Unless ofcourse for revenge :)
Right now, a lot of big companies withdraw I140 and reuse the labor for another applicant. With the new law in place, employers have no motivation to withdraw the I140.
Right now, a lot of big companies withdraw I140 and reuse the labor for another applicant. With the new law in place, employers have no motivation to withdraw the I140.
hot light rown dark blonde hair
gapala
07-09 12:33 PM
is'nt an Advanced parol document a re-entry permit ???
USCIS has different meening for Re-entry permit and Advance parole. Infact the eligibility criteria is different for both. Look at I-131 Instructions. Its very clearly specified there.
Hope this helps.
1. Re-entry Permit - A reentry permit allows a permanent resident or conditional resident to apply for admission to the United States upon returning from abroad during the permit's validity, without having to obtain a returning resident visa from a U.S. Embassy or consulate
2. Refugee Travel Document - A refugee travel document is issued to a person classified as a refugee or asylee, or to a permanent resident who obtained such status as a result of being a refugee or asylee in the United States. Persons who hold aslyee or refugee status, and are not permanent residents, must have a refugee travel document to return to the United States after temporary travel abroad.
3. Advance Parole Document - An advance parole document is issued solely to authorize the temporary parole of a person into the United States.
The document may be accepted by a transportation company in lieu of a visa as an authorization for the holder to travel to the United States. An advance parole document is not issued to serve in place of any required passport.
Advance parole is an extraordinary measure used sparingly to bring an otherwise inadmissible alien to the United States for a temporary period of time due to a compelling emergency. Advance parole cannot be used to circumvent the normal visa issuing procedures and is not a means to bypass delays in visa issuance.
NOTE: If you are in the United States and wish to travel abroad, you do not need to apply for advance parole if both conditions described below in A and B are met:
B. A Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, was filed on your behalf and is pending with USCIS.
However, upon returning to the United States, you must present your valid H, L, K, or V nonimmigrant visa and continue to remain eligible for that status.
USCIS has different meening for Re-entry permit and Advance parole. Infact the eligibility criteria is different for both. Look at I-131 Instructions. Its very clearly specified there.
Hope this helps.
1. Re-entry Permit - A reentry permit allows a permanent resident or conditional resident to apply for admission to the United States upon returning from abroad during the permit's validity, without having to obtain a returning resident visa from a U.S. Embassy or consulate
2. Refugee Travel Document - A refugee travel document is issued to a person classified as a refugee or asylee, or to a permanent resident who obtained such status as a result of being a refugee or asylee in the United States. Persons who hold aslyee or refugee status, and are not permanent residents, must have a refugee travel document to return to the United States after temporary travel abroad.
3. Advance Parole Document - An advance parole document is issued solely to authorize the temporary parole of a person into the United States.
The document may be accepted by a transportation company in lieu of a visa as an authorization for the holder to travel to the United States. An advance parole document is not issued to serve in place of any required passport.
Advance parole is an extraordinary measure used sparingly to bring an otherwise inadmissible alien to the United States for a temporary period of time due to a compelling emergency. Advance parole cannot be used to circumvent the normal visa issuing procedures and is not a means to bypass delays in visa issuance.
NOTE: If you are in the United States and wish to travel abroad, you do not need to apply for advance parole if both conditions described below in A and B are met:
B. A Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, was filed on your behalf and is pending with USCIS.
However, upon returning to the United States, you must present your valid H, L, K, or V nonimmigrant visa and continue to remain eligible for that status.
more...
house rown hair with blonde streaks
wandmaker
11-16 11:38 AM
FYI - While I was talking to CSR regarding my AP. There was discussion about processing times, she told me that the new processing times will be posted this Friday.
tattoo chris rown and rihanna images
sabr
09-19 03:17 PM
Quick Q:
Lets say my H1b renewal is pending..while its pending I used EAD for a diff company than my sponsoring company( I will be with my Sponsoring company but in bench). Then my H1b gets approved. Can I still work with a diff company till I choose to go out to stamp for H1b and once am in US i can start working for my sponsoring company again?
Lets say my H1b renewal is pending..while its pending I used EAD for a diff company than my sponsoring company( I will be with my Sponsoring company but in bench). Then my H1b gets approved. Can I still work with a diff company till I choose to go out to stamp for H1b and once am in US i can start working for my sponsoring company again?
more...
pictures best black hairstyles_13. Black Hairstyles; Black Hairstyles. reedandbamboo
Munna Bhai
04-27 11:41 AM
Hi,
I am in a unique situation as far as capture of earlier PD is concerned.
My company had filed an LC for me in EB3 with PD of Oct '03.
I get fed up waiting for that and got another LC filed with PD Nov 05 in EB2.
I have got my I140 approved for the same and also 3yr ext. based on that as well.
My EB3 LC is approved as well now.
My question to somehow capture the PD of my EB3 LC.
Is it possible ? Is anyone in the same boat ?
Regards.
Get I-140 approved for EB3 case and then swtich to another company and start fresh GC and once you are ready to file I-140 at new company, take this approved I-140 for EB3 and port it.
Hope this helps.
I am in a unique situation as far as capture of earlier PD is concerned.
My company had filed an LC for me in EB3 with PD of Oct '03.
I get fed up waiting for that and got another LC filed with PD Nov 05 in EB2.
I have got my I140 approved for the same and also 3yr ext. based on that as well.
My EB3 LC is approved as well now.
My question to somehow capture the PD of my EB3 LC.
Is it possible ? Is anyone in the same boat ?
Regards.
Get I-140 approved for EB3 case and then swtich to another company and start fresh GC and once you are ready to file I-140 at new company, take this approved I-140 for EB3 and port it.
Hope this helps.
dresses blonde hair with rown
dazed378
03-28 04:18 PM
As per my tax preparer's advice, I sent both the tax return and W-7 form to IRS ITIN Operation office in Austin, Texas. Is this the correct address?
more...
makeup blonde hair with rown
insbaby
11-12 08:12 PM
If it is a "FOR-PROFIT" organization, they may use you as a "free-service" in place of a "paid-service".
If you want to use this experience to get a job, then they will surely question what was your status while working for this company in US, and eventually they will find what kind of organization it is.
If you don't want to use this experience for a future job, it is surely not recommended but it is your choice to take risk, you may be safe until some one complaints.
At the end if it is a "NON-PROFIT" organization, you have a chance to defend.
If you want to go by the LAW, you have to satisfy all subclauses, it is annoying, painful, but thats how they made the LAW :)
If you want to use this experience to get a job, then they will surely question what was your status while working for this company in US, and eventually they will find what kind of organization it is.
If you don't want to use this experience for a future job, it is surely not recommended but it is your choice to take risk, you may be safe until some one complaints.
At the end if it is a "NON-PROFIT" organization, you have a chance to defend.
If you want to go by the LAW, you have to satisfy all subclauses, it is annoying, painful, but thats how they made the LAW :)
girlfriend of a Brown Cartoon House
srkamath
07-12 08:52 PM
Our Current EAD is expiring on 10/01/2008. So we had applied for extension in june. On july 7th our application was approved and today we recieved our EAD cards. I was expecting a one year extension , which is until 10/01/2009. But USCIS send us ead cards that will expire on 01/01/2009.
What should be the course of action here. Do i need to reapply or just contact USCIS and will they be able to fix it? Any body on similiar situation.?
Service center is nebraska
Just wondering - it may mean that the USCIS expects to finish processing your case by then !!!!!!
What should be the course of action here. Do i need to reapply or just contact USCIS and will they be able to fix it? Any body on similiar situation.?
Service center is nebraska
Just wondering - it may mean that the USCIS expects to finish processing your case by then !!!!!!
hairstyles highlights on rown hair.
cgs
11-21 09:19 AM
just sent a mail to cbs.
TomTancredo
03-16 04:33 PM
I was in a similar frame of mind like you a few days ago...thinking whether to switch to EAD with different company or not.
On technical side, job title and description does not need to be word-to-word same. Just use common-sense (if a programmer is going to be working as an Electrician or Systems Administrator, that might cause a problem. Otherwise you should be able to prove the similarity.)
On the other side, EAD is a gift USCIS has given while your 485 is pending. Even being on H1B, there is nothing much you can do if you run out of luck. So, why not enjoy the freedom? Come out in the sky. You will "feel" it, especially if your current employer is "desi" or if you have to call them 10 times in a month to get your paycheck.
I am myself invoking AC21 in April. Whatever happens, I know I will survive. Wherever I live later (India or US), I know I will be with my family and I will still have tens of reasons to thank God for.
If you want to be a little more conservative, spend few dollars and get a back-up of an attorney.
Let go of the negativity. Do it.
Good luck.
There is no point in worrying about a future RFE ... My lawyer told me not to file AC21..
I dont think its worth it to fight the rejection of 485 and start all over again.. If they reject my 485 I will go home and be happy ... Most of the people on this forum are blessed compared to so many other Indians ..
This is my view with 2004 PD :)
On technical side, job title and description does not need to be word-to-word same. Just use common-sense (if a programmer is going to be working as an Electrician or Systems Administrator, that might cause a problem. Otherwise you should be able to prove the similarity.)
On the other side, EAD is a gift USCIS has given while your 485 is pending. Even being on H1B, there is nothing much you can do if you run out of luck. So, why not enjoy the freedom? Come out in the sky. You will "feel" it, especially if your current employer is "desi" or if you have to call them 10 times in a month to get your paycheck.
I am myself invoking AC21 in April. Whatever happens, I know I will survive. Wherever I live later (India or US), I know I will be with my family and I will still have tens of reasons to thank God for.
If you want to be a little more conservative, spend few dollars and get a back-up of an attorney.
Let go of the negativity. Do it.
Good luck.
There is no point in worrying about a future RFE ... My lawyer told me not to file AC21..
I dont think its worth it to fight the rejection of 485 and start all over again.. If they reject my 485 I will go home and be happy ... Most of the people on this forum are blessed compared to so many other Indians ..
This is my view with 2004 PD :)
myeb2gc
02-24 08:43 PM
Hi myeb2gc ,
You added lot of hope in this H1 extn process but for how long did you got ur H1 extn ?
Hi, i got it for 2 years 10 months, but not 3 years even after having approved 140.But it seems ok...
You added lot of hope in this H1 extn process but for how long did you got ur H1 extn ?
Hi, i got it for 2 years 10 months, but not 3 years even after having approved 140.But it seems ok...
No comments:
Post a Comment