s_r_e_e
11-29 02:18 PM
their email notif system doesnt work.. they may not send email on even hard lud.. I got email for my EAD approval a month after getting the card in hand! ..
wallpaper aby footprint tattoo
rsayed
04-20 05:54 PM
04/20/2007: Immigration Reform Growingly Picks Up Heat
Along with more and more number of bills which are being introduced in the Congress, the constitutents of pro and con in the communities start mobilizing their muscles. Currently, the Senate debate schedule remains the last two weeks of May and these groups started acting up to pave a way for building a lofty wall against or smoothens the road for passage of this legislation. The Catholic community is very charged in support of the bill and actively lobbying both openly and behind the scenes to work with the legislators. People sometimes question why the Catholic community acts as one of the front lobbying forces for the CIR. You guessed it. Hispanics are Catholics and the CIR will tremendously expand the horizen of their constituents and its power base in the national political arena. Twelve or thirteen millions are not a small number. The same question is also raised relating to the AFL-CIO, labor unions. Again, you guessed it. The low-end industries and illegal aliens that will benefit from legalization are charaterized as workforces that belong to the organized unions. This is contrasted to the high-end industries and professional workers that are not by nature tightly organized into the unions. For the reasons, the unions tend to support the CIR, unlike the high-tech worker bills, to take advantage of expanding its membership and power base through the to-be-newly-recruited members of the unions. Aha...... Immigration proponents hope to see that legal immigration supporters and illegal immigration supporters quickly find a bed to share and become bed-partners such that the immigration reform legislation will move along more smoothly avoiding internal feuds and conflicts in the community.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
It is a positive update - hopefully, these "behind the scenes" or "back-door" lobbying efforts/activities will help alleviate the Retrogression situation.
If there is any chance, it is 2007. In the past 2-3 years, there have not been so many Bills in the House and Senate, aiming at solving the Immigration situation.
I just read the following update on www.immigration-law.com -
04/20/2007: House Version of SKIL Bill, H.R. 1930, Introduced in the House on 04/18/2007
Congressman John Shregg from Arizona introduced the SKIL Act of 2007 in the House on Wednesday, 04/18/2007. This is a bill which is identical to the Sen. Cornyn's bill in the Senate. These two legislators also introduced the identical bills in the House and the Senate last year. The full text has yet to be published, but the text is considered identical to the Cornyn bill. Rep. Shregg strongly opposes the comprehensive immigration reform legislation that includes legalization of illegal aliens.
The EIA, Electronics Industries Alliance, supports this bill, particularly H-1B reform, but asks that the SKIL and H-1B reform be enaced as part of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation.
Along with more and more number of bills which are being introduced in the Congress, the constitutents of pro and con in the communities start mobilizing their muscles. Currently, the Senate debate schedule remains the last two weeks of May and these groups started acting up to pave a way for building a lofty wall against or smoothens the road for passage of this legislation. The Catholic community is very charged in support of the bill and actively lobbying both openly and behind the scenes to work with the legislators. People sometimes question why the Catholic community acts as one of the front lobbying forces for the CIR. You guessed it. Hispanics are Catholics and the CIR will tremendously expand the horizen of their constituents and its power base in the national political arena. Twelve or thirteen millions are not a small number. The same question is also raised relating to the AFL-CIO, labor unions. Again, you guessed it. The low-end industries and illegal aliens that will benefit from legalization are charaterized as workforces that belong to the organized unions. This is contrasted to the high-end industries and professional workers that are not by nature tightly organized into the unions. For the reasons, the unions tend to support the CIR, unlike the high-tech worker bills, to take advantage of expanding its membership and power base through the to-be-newly-recruited members of the unions. Aha...... Immigration proponents hope to see that legal immigration supporters and illegal immigration supporters quickly find a bed to share and become bed-partners such that the immigration reform legislation will move along more smoothly avoiding internal feuds and conflicts in the community.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
It is a positive update - hopefully, these "behind the scenes" or "back-door" lobbying efforts/activities will help alleviate the Retrogression situation.
If there is any chance, it is 2007. In the past 2-3 years, there have not been so many Bills in the House and Senate, aiming at solving the Immigration situation.
I just read the following update on www.immigration-law.com -
04/20/2007: House Version of SKIL Bill, H.R. 1930, Introduced in the House on 04/18/2007
Congressman John Shregg from Arizona introduced the SKIL Act of 2007 in the House on Wednesday, 04/18/2007. This is a bill which is identical to the Sen. Cornyn's bill in the Senate. These two legislators also introduced the identical bills in the House and the Senate last year. The full text has yet to be published, but the text is considered identical to the Cornyn bill. Rep. Shregg strongly opposes the comprehensive immigration reform legislation that includes legalization of illegal aliens.
The EIA, Electronics Industries Alliance, supports this bill, particularly H-1B reform, but asks that the SKIL and H-1B reform be enaced as part of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation.
F1_doubt
05-10 05:20 AM
Hello all, my scenario -
Been in the US for 5 yrs (MS + work). My employer had filed for my I-140 which was also approved. However, I decided to leave US, quit my job and have been in India for the last 1 year. Now, I want to go back to school in US and in the process of applying for a F1 visa.
Now, I need to know how my previous I-140 (immigration petition) affects my prospects for obtaining the F1 visa (non-immigrant visa) now? I presume my I-140 will be void anyway since I quit my employer and been out of US for the last 12 months?
note: Though my priority date became current in 2007, I chose NOT to go ahead with my GC application (I-485/AOS) as I did not have any intention to settle in US.
Would really appreciate some insight into my F1 prospects and how to bolster my candidature to the Visa officer.
Thank you
P.S. The entire thought process started when I saw the question "has anyone ever filed for immigration petition on your behalf" on the F1 visa application form!
Been in the US for 5 yrs (MS + work). My employer had filed for my I-140 which was also approved. However, I decided to leave US, quit my job and have been in India for the last 1 year. Now, I want to go back to school in US and in the process of applying for a F1 visa.
Now, I need to know how my previous I-140 (immigration petition) affects my prospects for obtaining the F1 visa (non-immigrant visa) now? I presume my I-140 will be void anyway since I quit my employer and been out of US for the last 12 months?
note: Though my priority date became current in 2007, I chose NOT to go ahead with my GC application (I-485/AOS) as I did not have any intention to settle in US.
Would really appreciate some insight into my F1 prospects and how to bolster my candidature to the Visa officer.
Thank you
P.S. The entire thought process started when I saw the question "has anyone ever filed for immigration petition on your behalf" on the F1 visa application form!
2011 aby footprint tattoos
transpass
03-23 05:07 PM
Hello gurus,
need little help from you guys. Right now i am on H1b.
I am about to file my Family based I-485, I-130, I-765, I-131. on all these forms they are asking for A# ( Alien Registration Number).
I was on F1 visa before. so i have one expired EAD card which i got during my OPT in 2005. this card has a A#.
so should i put this A# on all forms( I-485,I-130,I-765,I-131) or leave it blank.???
H1bdude1
As far as I know, the OPT A# is different from what you will get from filing 140. Once you receive 140 approval notice, it should have the A# which you can use on 485...If you don't have one or don't know, leave it blank...
need little help from you guys. Right now i am on H1b.
I am about to file my Family based I-485, I-130, I-765, I-131. on all these forms they are asking for A# ( Alien Registration Number).
I was on F1 visa before. so i have one expired EAD card which i got during my OPT in 2005. this card has a A#.
so should i put this A# on all forms( I-485,I-130,I-765,I-131) or leave it blank.???
H1bdude1
As far as I know, the OPT A# is different from what you will get from filing 140. Once you receive 140 approval notice, it should have the A# which you can use on 485...If you don't have one or don't know, leave it blank...
more...
p_kumar
02-07 11:24 AM
All three options put a dent in your life. But I guess the golden period of life is over, remaining period of life will go raising your kids, looking after your parents. Sometimes I like the American culture a lot; you get to enjoy all life long!
American culture as we know it maybe ending. Social security will not be enough to support the baby boomers and many will end up being a burden on their children. In a way, we always have an option of going back to india but for americans?.
American culture as we know it maybe ending. Social security will not be enough to support the baby boomers and many will end up being a burden on their children. In a way, we always have an option of going back to india but for americans?.
rb_248
09-21 04:35 PM
Dude,
There is a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong queue unless the rules change.
Hello,
I'm Harish. I've finished my masters in usa and working on H1-B. I applied for GC this year. Right now at 1-140 filing stage. I think I-140 should be approved in a few months. After that how long should I wait to apply for I-485?
I want to change my employer. I believe you can do that 180 days after u file for I-485. So can any1 give me an approx time when I should be able to file I-485.
With all this retrogression its really confusing and frustating to understand...
I appreciate your help.
Thanks,
Harish.
There is a loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong queue unless the rules change.
Hello,
I'm Harish. I've finished my masters in usa and working on H1-B. I applied for GC this year. Right now at 1-140 filing stage. I think I-140 should be approved in a few months. After that how long should I wait to apply for I-485?
I want to change my employer. I believe you can do that 180 days after u file for I-485. So can any1 give me an approx time when I should be able to file I-485.
With all this retrogression its really confusing and frustating to understand...
I appreciate your help.
Thanks,
Harish.
more...
saketkapur
08-18 06:40 PM
filing ar-11 is mandatory so please do it.........
also if your new job meets all the legal requirements then getting a RFE should not be an issue just a nag........
I my experience RFE is generated in one of the following 2 cases:
1. Filing AC21( I am against filing it as long its not requested by USCIS as its not mandatory and sometimes just triggers unwanted attention to your case......
2. If your 140 is revoked by the previous employer....in this case you can bet that an RFE is going to be generated for sure if not worse like NOID etc...........In this case actually filing AC 21 might be a better option......
Above is just my experience and every case is different....this is not legal advice in any way........
if you want more clarifications feel free to PM me........
but again file your AR-11 RFE or not............its mandatory.......
also if your new job meets all the legal requirements then getting a RFE should not be an issue just a nag........
I my experience RFE is generated in one of the following 2 cases:
1. Filing AC21( I am against filing it as long its not requested by USCIS as its not mandatory and sometimes just triggers unwanted attention to your case......
2. If your 140 is revoked by the previous employer....in this case you can bet that an RFE is going to be generated for sure if not worse like NOID etc...........In this case actually filing AC 21 might be a better option......
Above is just my experience and every case is different....this is not legal advice in any way........
if you want more clarifications feel free to PM me........
but again file your AR-11 RFE or not............its mandatory.......
2010 aby footprint tattoos. aby footprint tattoos for; aby footprint tattoos for
Jimi_Hendrix
12-13 10:40 AM
a level playing field for CIR. This is just an attempt to increase publicity on Enforcement work.
Pile of BS. Go to Home Depot here in California or any other hardware store and you see illegals getting on and off the bus. Waiting around the corner in full public view.
Pile of BS. Go to Home Depot here in California or any other hardware store and you see illegals getting on and off the bus. Waiting around the corner in full public view.
more...
prout02
07-30 12:26 PM
I have read in this forum frequent questions about this - legality/enforceability of noncompete clause. Here's a recent court decision from Kansas. It talks about physician practices. No idea if it is applicable to other professions. But the four factors cited in the decision seem relevant.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
hair aby foot print tattoos.
alterego
02-20 08:12 PM
EB1 is too restrictive! Even a so called NIW (national interest waiver) does not mean EB1 automatically.
Just food for thought. At this time there are 28600 EB1 visas. The EB1 category is current and has been pretty close to it for nearly everyone throughout the last couple of years.
Physicians with their many years of education and relatively very high standing in American society are still not automatically eligible for EB1 visas.
Likewise someone with a PhD who is gainfully employed. Similarly someone who has the kind of skills that are in such desperate shortage that he/she commands incomes sometimes exceeding 250K(as some do have in the SAP field) as per the free market that some in this country believe religiously. When you make this category so restrictive, then who do you expect to fill it up?
This is a sign of the broken system in my view.
Then EB2 and worse yet EB3 become stuffed!
Just food for thought. At this time there are 28600 EB1 visas. The EB1 category is current and has been pretty close to it for nearly everyone throughout the last couple of years.
Physicians with their many years of education and relatively very high standing in American society are still not automatically eligible for EB1 visas.
Likewise someone with a PhD who is gainfully employed. Similarly someone who has the kind of skills that are in such desperate shortage that he/she commands incomes sometimes exceeding 250K(as some do have in the SAP field) as per the free market that some in this country believe religiously. When you make this category so restrictive, then who do you expect to fill it up?
This is a sign of the broken system in my view.
Then EB2 and worse yet EB3 become stuffed!
more...
ghost
10-20 06:44 AM
pledging and donating regularly is a novel concept for immigrant population, there has been some market research as well done on this when I was back in business school - feels a long time back!
Good to see folks coming out and signing up for recurring donations - every small amount counts as long as it is recurring.
For folks who want to celebrate the procurement of Greencard, it is fine as well but let's try focusing on the present than on future or past (courtesy: dialog from Rang De Basanti)...not trying to demean but trying to emphasize on the importance of present day!
Good to see folks coming out and signing up for recurring donations - every small amount counts as long as it is recurring.
For folks who want to celebrate the procurement of Greencard, it is fine as well but let's try focusing on the present than on future or past (courtesy: dialog from Rang De Basanti)...not trying to demean but trying to emphasize on the importance of present day!
hot my aby#39;s footprints from
veni001
09-14 01:28 PM
Thanks in advance gurus!!
the job description says "Bachelors degree (B.A) in related area and 4-6 years of experience
in the field or in a related area."
Will this be a problem??
as one of EB2 requirement is BS or equivalent US degree with 5 years of experience.
But this job desc says its 4-6 years..
Shout it say 5 or more years ??? please help me by commenting on this!!
(This is my 10th year in USA, I would have become UK citizen if i have gone to UK in 2000)
Thank you,
Based on the Job Description Bachelors +4 years can qualify/eligible for this position so this job does not qualify for EB2 period.:(
the job description says "Bachelors degree (B.A) in related area and 4-6 years of experience
in the field or in a related area."
Will this be a problem??
as one of EB2 requirement is BS or equivalent US degree with 5 years of experience.
But this job desc says its 4-6 years..
Shout it say 5 or more years ??? please help me by commenting on this!!
(This is my 10th year in USA, I would have become UK citizen if i have gone to UK in 2000)
Thank you,
Based on the Job Description Bachelors +4 years can qualify/eligible for this position so this job does not qualify for EB2 period.:(
more...
house aby footprint tattoos.
waitin_toolong
08-14 06:17 AM
Hello All,
One of my friends mentioned that there is a possibility that I-94 card could be stamped with the date on my current visa stamp at the port of entry. This would invalidate my wife's transfer since the new transferred visa is valid until 2009 whereas my stamping with my old employer is valid only until Dec 2007. In order to avoid this, should my wife submit her passport as well as the I-797 and I-539 from my current employer and ask the officer to stamp the new dates on the I-94? Please advise.
Regards,
Azeez
It would not invalidate the transfer, as legally there is no such thing as transfer it is always a new H1/4 what she loses is her extension period on I-94 and you will be forced to file an extension for her an unnecessary hassel. Usually if H1/4 travel together this problem rarely happens as the H4 spouse is automatically given same I-94 time as H1 per their new I-797. But some VO's surprise are still too new at their job to figure out the same for H4 travelling alone.
One of my friends mentioned that there is a possibility that I-94 card could be stamped with the date on my current visa stamp at the port of entry. This would invalidate my wife's transfer since the new transferred visa is valid until 2009 whereas my stamping with my old employer is valid only until Dec 2007. In order to avoid this, should my wife submit her passport as well as the I-797 and I-539 from my current employer and ask the officer to stamp the new dates on the I-94? Please advise.
Regards,
Azeez
It would not invalidate the transfer, as legally there is no such thing as transfer it is always a new H1/4 what she loses is her extension period on I-94 and you will be forced to file an extension for her an unnecessary hassel. Usually if H1/4 travel together this problem rarely happens as the H4 spouse is automatically given same I-94 time as H1 per their new I-797. But some VO's surprise are still too new at their job to figure out the same for H4 travelling alone.
tattoo Baby Footprints Tattoo
Robert Kumar
02-26 11:31 AM
What happens if premium processing is done at this stage.
Will premium be allowed in the 1st place, through:
1. Same company.
2. Different company.
Will premium be allowed in the 1st place, through:
1. Same company.
2. Different company.
more...
pictures aby feet tattoo.
floridasun
01-12 08:57 AM
Mi won't call u superstitious but superstupid, for lack of any better words
Maddipati and furiouspride - if you want to use your foul mouth, be my guest. gc has shattered my career right in front of eyes. I have seen worthless piece of $hits grow and show their attitude just like you guys.
Maddipati and furiouspride - if you want to use your foul mouth, be my guest. gc has shattered my career right in front of eyes. I have seen worthless piece of $hits grow and show their attitude just like you guys.
dresses tattoos for aby D
whitecollarslave
03-31 02:41 PM
I have transfered or renewed H-1 multiple times. Never had a situation where an employer will not provide the salary slip. Who is your employer?
more...
makeup Tiny red aby footprint
yestogc
06-09 12:33 PM
I second your thought khodalmd, ............... when there is no country cap on H1B , why on GC then, this creates more backlog
girlfriend aby footprints tattoo
thesparky007
05-24 08:24 PM
has this been uploaded yet?
hairstyles Zodiac Tattoos-Feel
eagerr2i
08-29 04:11 PM
I had asked this question to the immigration lawyer at IV. She said that if you are working for the same company at their offices aboard & go for Consular Processing ( it is the only option as you can not go 485 route) it should be just fine. However, if the company that you are working for when you are abroad and the company that did your GC are not the same thenit is almost impossible to prove that the job exists when you arrive in USA after CP.
ASingh10
07-25 10:08 AM
Hi,
I'm looking for some answers for my wife's visa issues. I'm on H1B (valid until 2010) and she is on OPT (Valid until Dec 20 2008. F-1 visa expired May 2008). My PERM labor is in process and we hope to file for I 140 and I 485 and EAD concurrently by September/ October 2008. My lawyer says that we can file concurrently because my wife's country of birth is in Europe.
Now the questions:
1. Is it okay for my wife to apply for EAD based in I 485 while on OPT with expired F-1 visa? Is there a requirement that wife has to be on H-4 to apply for EAD based on husband's GC application?
2. Also read on some forums that Wife's F-1 OPT will be invalidated as soon as her I 485 application is recieved. Is this true?
3. EAD approval takes 3-4 months on average. So if she doesn't recieve her EAD approval by December 2008 (Dec 20 2008 her OPT expires) she will be out of status. Should we apply for H-4 so that she doesn't become out-of-status?
4. We expect that her EAD approval will come by Jan/ Feb 2009. There is a 2 month gap provision that foreign nationals sometimes use to change their status. Is it a safe bet to avoid getting her on H-4 and use the 2 month gap period?
4. How much does applying for H-4 cost? I'm simply expecting a range of sorts.
Thanks,
A. Singh
I'm looking for some answers for my wife's visa issues. I'm on H1B (valid until 2010) and she is on OPT (Valid until Dec 20 2008. F-1 visa expired May 2008). My PERM labor is in process and we hope to file for I 140 and I 485 and EAD concurrently by September/ October 2008. My lawyer says that we can file concurrently because my wife's country of birth is in Europe.
Now the questions:
1. Is it okay for my wife to apply for EAD based in I 485 while on OPT with expired F-1 visa? Is there a requirement that wife has to be on H-4 to apply for EAD based on husband's GC application?
2. Also read on some forums that Wife's F-1 OPT will be invalidated as soon as her I 485 application is recieved. Is this true?
3. EAD approval takes 3-4 months on average. So if she doesn't recieve her EAD approval by December 2008 (Dec 20 2008 her OPT expires) she will be out of status. Should we apply for H-4 so that she doesn't become out-of-status?
4. We expect that her EAD approval will come by Jan/ Feb 2009. There is a 2 month gap provision that foreign nationals sometimes use to change their status. Is it a safe bet to avoid getting her on H-4 and use the 2 month gap period?
4. How much does applying for H-4 cost? I'm simply expecting a range of sorts.
Thanks,
A. Singh
suriajay12
05-11 06:05 PM
Guys,
Read till the end....
I know with this thread I'll get 100000 red dots, but anyways never mind...
I see the immigration portal when the process on my other machine is running and I have nothing else to do. But thats irrelevant on why and what I do.
The point is , I see everyone coming up with 100000 different ideas, and then there is a never ending thread of debates on should we do it or do not. pros and cons, blah blah blah. Debates are good , as it results the best of both parties views. But I see a trend here which is , the discussion happens and then the idea goes down the flush. I never see,
kinda list or something like that, which says these were the action items selected by the IV team and this is the status of the same. Seems to me everyone comes up with something and discuss and they forget about it.
I think a bit of Project management is required to be in place. also a workflow with the option to introduce the idea then debate and a voting and once thats done , if idea is selected it should move on to action item category else if the idea is in the process of debate the list should show as the status 'Pending in Process'.
At the end of the day , at a glance everyone will have the visibility of, where do we stand with all the ideas and how far are we with selected ideas as action item and results of it.
Well I think this is also an idea and will now subject to debate and then lets see if it goes off the flush or some workflow and new menu items appear on the IV.
Nothing negative , but the IV members and views are to scattered, specially with the lack of ownership and leadership its like headless chicken running is all directions, and I totally understand the admin of this group and website are also guys like us , who got jobs and family and tons of different things to do, but now I think there is a need to revisit and see how the division of the labor can be done and responsibilities are assigned so that not just a few guys gets the pressure of getting the things done, but a joint responsibility like an organization( not just a word but in real sense) gets the mission accomplished.
Well the processing is complete I'll get back to my other screen now..
PS: No intentions to hurt or demoralize anyone or any effort. Just thought a little enforcement and leadership is required so thought of mentioning it. ( My english is not so great so please pardon me)
<B>The same thread was posted with a different heading on the forum with the heading " Status Update on Action Items"</B> . I was trying to do the analysis on what kind of readers does this portal has. The readers who really wanna do something or just timepass.
And if you are reading this and skipped reading the other one, you are one those thousand who do not wanna do anything but just sit and timepass and when get frustated, open a thread and vent out frustation with some idea.
The reason behind this conclusion is because, if you want to see a difference and to see where are you heading to in terms of what is done and what is to be done, you would have open the other thread. Makes sense?
__________________
Thanks
Live well do good
Good one, I support your views and I am ready to participate in any campaign that helps us all.
Read till the end....
I know with this thread I'll get 100000 red dots, but anyways never mind...
I see the immigration portal when the process on my other machine is running and I have nothing else to do. But thats irrelevant on why and what I do.
The point is , I see everyone coming up with 100000 different ideas, and then there is a never ending thread of debates on should we do it or do not. pros and cons, blah blah blah. Debates are good , as it results the best of both parties views. But I see a trend here which is , the discussion happens and then the idea goes down the flush. I never see,
kinda list or something like that, which says these were the action items selected by the IV team and this is the status of the same. Seems to me everyone comes up with something and discuss and they forget about it.
I think a bit of Project management is required to be in place. also a workflow with the option to introduce the idea then debate and a voting and once thats done , if idea is selected it should move on to action item category else if the idea is in the process of debate the list should show as the status 'Pending in Process'.
At the end of the day , at a glance everyone will have the visibility of, where do we stand with all the ideas and how far are we with selected ideas as action item and results of it.
Well I think this is also an idea and will now subject to debate and then lets see if it goes off the flush or some workflow and new menu items appear on the IV.
Nothing negative , but the IV members and views are to scattered, specially with the lack of ownership and leadership its like headless chicken running is all directions, and I totally understand the admin of this group and website are also guys like us , who got jobs and family and tons of different things to do, but now I think there is a need to revisit and see how the division of the labor can be done and responsibilities are assigned so that not just a few guys gets the pressure of getting the things done, but a joint responsibility like an organization( not just a word but in real sense) gets the mission accomplished.
Well the processing is complete I'll get back to my other screen now..
PS: No intentions to hurt or demoralize anyone or any effort. Just thought a little enforcement and leadership is required so thought of mentioning it. ( My english is not so great so please pardon me)
<B>The same thread was posted with a different heading on the forum with the heading " Status Update on Action Items"</B> . I was trying to do the analysis on what kind of readers does this portal has. The readers who really wanna do something or just timepass.
And if you are reading this and skipped reading the other one, you are one those thousand who do not wanna do anything but just sit and timepass and when get frustated, open a thread and vent out frustation with some idea.
The reason behind this conclusion is because, if you want to see a difference and to see where are you heading to in terms of what is done and what is to be done, you would have open the other thread. Makes sense?
__________________
Thanks
Live well do good
Good one, I support your views and I am ready to participate in any campaign that helps us all.
0 comments:
Post a Comment