immiadvise
01-02 12:06 AM
Thanks gveerab,hpandey,johnamit,wandmaker for your valuable suggestions.
wallpaper chrysler 300 srt8 rims
Paisano
04-16 01:28 PM
It is WITCH HUNTING brother.
Below is the link about a case where an approved I-140 is going to be revoked because of this.
140 Revoked on April 2nd.Out of country currently.Re-Entry on AP? (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/i-140-petitions/10686-140-revoked-on-april-2nd-out-of-country-currently-re-entry-on-ap.html)
Below is the link about a case where an approved I-140 is going to be revoked because of this.
140 Revoked on April 2nd.Out of country currently.Re-Entry on AP? (http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/i-140-petitions/10686-140-revoked-on-april-2nd-out-of-country-currently-re-entry-on-ap.html)
sin94
06-04 02:04 PM
Isn't this disputable by the Lawyers?
I mean fine ask questions for the company who has filed for the Visa but now going to doubt if their clients are legit 2, much.
Following the link is even more disturbing about the guest comment preparing to answer the RFE where CIS is asking for floor plan OF THE CLIENT.
disturbing trend if true.
I mean fine ask questions for the company who has filed for the Visa but now going to doubt if their clients are legit 2, much.
Following the link is even more disturbing about the guest comment preparing to answer the RFE where CIS is asking for floor plan OF THE CLIENT.
disturbing trend if true.
2011 Chrysler 300C Forum: 300C
Shenner
06-04 06:19 PM
We have been seeing a lot of these as of late. For example, I represent many companies who are actually agents; ie, a staffing agency who places speech therapists or nurses. The USCIS is now seeking to show that the beneficiary is actually on payroll and that the staffing company is in existence and that the location where the beneficiary will work is actually in existence. They have also been asking for copies of the contracts between the staffing agency and the place where the alien will work. Although it seems like they are asking for a lot, it does make sense in light of the immigration laws for H-1bs. A lot of abuse went on in the past in this visa categories espcially with staffing agencies etc. They would bring in nurses, etc. and then not place them anywhere! These people would pay and get a visa, enter the US, and when they reported for work were told there was no job for them and then they had no place to go. I believe it is in response to these abuses why we are seeing this now.
more...
oaktree
01-12 12:57 PM
Dear Attornies,experts
My perm was denied recently because "The wage listed in the SWA job order is less than the wage offered to the foreign worker", It took DOL almost one and half years to determine this after a business necessity audit. I am going to start a new application now. What are my chances for an appeal by providing corrected supporting documents, can I apply a new application while an appeal is in progress..
Can I have multiple PERM applications from multiple employers at the same time, with different position titles?
Is there anyway of taking advantage of the old priority date application that was denied with a new application.
I almost lost 2 years in priority date because of this denial...
Please suggest...
My perm was denied recently because "The wage listed in the SWA job order is less than the wage offered to the foreign worker", It took DOL almost one and half years to determine this after a business necessity audit. I am going to start a new application now. What are my chances for an appeal by providing corrected supporting documents, can I apply a new application while an appeal is in progress..
Can I have multiple PERM applications from multiple employers at the same time, with different position titles?
Is there anyway of taking advantage of the old priority date application that was denied with a new application.
I almost lost 2 years in priority date because of this denial...
Please suggest...
skynet2500
11-24 04:15 PM
I have quickly checkced with few other folks and they said it is not possible. They could be sent back if they have a retunr ticket more than 180 days.
more...
gc_chahiye
09-17 02:35 AM
I am working with Company B on H-1b. My GC labor, I-140, I-485 and EAD is filed by Company A. Now, I am close to getting EAD in few weeks. Few say that once EAD is approved, then I have start working for Company A immediately. Others say that GC and EAD is for future employment with Company A and hence, I should start working for Company A only after GC is approved.
So, I have two questions and need advice.
1. When should I start working for Company A, upon approval of EAD or approval of GC.
Ideally, I would like to start working for Company A upon approval of GC.
2. Even, if I want to transfer EAD to Company B, the job title differs as the job title on GC is more junior than the current role.
Please let me know if anyone has similar situation and need what the reality is when EAD is approved.
Thanks.
Kum25
you dont need to start working for the company that sponsored your GC until you get the GC. If USCIS ever sends an RFE that company needs to confirm to USCIS that the job offer is open to you and provide a copy of the offer letter (it should match the LC). Your intent to work for that company on getting a GC should also be obvious (ie. if you currently make 5X what that company is offering for the GC job, you might have to convince the IO that you really intend to take up that offer).
In the meantime you can do whatever you want at company B, either on H1 or on EAD.
So, I have two questions and need advice.
1. When should I start working for Company A, upon approval of EAD or approval of GC.
Ideally, I would like to start working for Company A upon approval of GC.
2. Even, if I want to transfer EAD to Company B, the job title differs as the job title on GC is more junior than the current role.
Please let me know if anyone has similar situation and need what the reality is when EAD is approved.
Thanks.
Kum25
you dont need to start working for the company that sponsored your GC until you get the GC. If USCIS ever sends an RFE that company needs to confirm to USCIS that the job offer is open to you and provide a copy of the offer letter (it should match the LC). Your intent to work for that company on getting a GC should also be obvious (ie. if you currently make 5X what that company is offering for the GC job, you might have to convince the IO that you really intend to take up that offer).
In the meantime you can do whatever you want at company B, either on H1 or on EAD.
2010 2010 Chrysler 300C
Saralayar
09-02 10:50 AM
I'm just curious as there has been approvals contrary to the bulletins in the years before. Please don't flame me as i'm just looking for any signs of hope around the corner for the EB3 folks.
Yes lot of EB3 approvals for many in their SWEET DREAMS.. yesterday night...:)
Yes lot of EB3 approvals for many in their SWEET DREAMS.. yesterday night...:)
more...
Ennada
01-29 11:05 PM
Legalizing unauthorized immigrants would help economy, study says - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/07/immigration.economy/index.html#cnnSTCText)
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
hair O.CT Tuning Chrysler 300C oct
canleo98
11-11 09:56 PM
I renewed my passport from Indian SF consulate by mail. I had send my passport in Aug 2010 with Notarized supporting documents like photocopies of driving license and H1B. I did not notarize passport photos. I got my passport back after 5 weeks without any problem. Hope this helps.
more...
milind70
06-04 11:59 AM
My PD 15 July 2002 EB3 India and
I485 Receipt Date May 12, 2004
Found that someone with Aug 2002 PD got approved on June 1 whose I485 Receipt date was May 2003.
I guess USCIS does not go by PD to select who should be adjucated first but by what date the I485 was received. They are really ingenious and creative in finding ways to be inefficient and unjust.
Oh well....
IV is the only place that is doing a lot to change.
Keep the good work IV.
Have donated $200 under my name and $150 under my wife's name to IV
Well this is always going to be there,FIFO is not guaranteed during adjustement of status.It is quite possible someone who has filed later and has a PD which is later is likely to be approved because this depends on various factors i.e case to case basis,FBI name check ,security clearance,immigration officer who is adjucating your case etc.
But the good news for you is that your case has now has a available Visa Number and if your application is in order (as per the Immigration Officer)
then u will get an approval.
In other words your chances of your case /PD being retrogressed are highly unlikely.
I485 Receipt Date May 12, 2004
Found that someone with Aug 2002 PD got approved on June 1 whose I485 Receipt date was May 2003.
I guess USCIS does not go by PD to select who should be adjucated first but by what date the I485 was received. They are really ingenious and creative in finding ways to be inefficient and unjust.
Oh well....
IV is the only place that is doing a lot to change.
Keep the good work IV.
Have donated $200 under my name and $150 under my wife's name to IV
Well this is always going to be there,FIFO is not guaranteed during adjustement of status.It is quite possible someone who has filed later and has a PD which is later is likely to be approved because this depends on various factors i.e case to case basis,FBI name check ,security clearance,immigration officer who is adjucating your case etc.
But the good news for you is that your case has now has a available Visa Number and if your application is in order (as per the Immigration Officer)
then u will get an approval.
In other words your chances of your case /PD being retrogressed are highly unlikely.
hot Chrysler 300C 22quot; Wheel
dixie
10-17 01:42 PM
They can introduce all the premium processing they want, but the crux of the matter is that it is of no much use to us without the visa numbers to apply for a GC in the first place. USCIS will still end up making a lot of money - guess why - because we will have lost all our sanity by the time our PD becomes current so we wont mind shelling out money for I-485 premium processing even after having waited for ~10 years !! So more severe the retrogression, more the premium processing revenue. Not to speak of the fees for renewing the EAD,AP and so on. So much for the "USCIS certified premium processed" GC
more...
house New SEVAS R66 on CHRYSLER 300C
vkannan
08-14 07:26 PM
i was given a red dot as well.. jus coz i started a thread on Oct Bulletin - discussion! with a gracious addressing .. as A.hole!!! what one earth i did to deserve that..
so anyways...I dont care a **** but this is imperialist
After seeing the Sep bulletin rightly so ppl. who are struck with unfortunate EB3 category are frustrated, your post came at the wrong timing.....just to chill you off I gave you green enjoy....
so anyways...I dont care a **** but this is imperialist
After seeing the Sep bulletin rightly so ppl. who are struck with unfortunate EB3 category are frustrated, your post came at the wrong timing.....just to chill you off I gave you green enjoy....
tattoo Chrysler 300C Forum: 300C
alien2006
07-21 02:56 PM
Isn't Murthy in the DC Area?
more...
pictures Chrysler 300c Wedding Cars
Lost
04-13 09:12 PM
Yea you are so right Yeld. I just picked up one from a clan on Rainbow Six 3. (their in first place, lol) So i can build a portfolio based on that.
dresses wheels - Chrysler 300C
blacktongue
01-20 02:56 PM
How many Information Technology people?
How many from China?
How many from China?
more...
makeup I#39;m selling my rims.
sankap
07-20 02:36 PM
Yes, we've been using our marriage affidavit all along--including for getting PR and citizenship of country X.
hey, so you got h4 by just producing marriage affidavit and not marriage certificate?
hey, so you got h4 by just producing marriage affidavit and not marriage certificate?
girlfriend chrysler 300C rims
rkgc
11-18 05:43 PM
I recently booked interview appointment for Dec in chennai, I used IE all along, there are some bugs when you use firefox.
RK
RK
hairstyles NEW Sevas AP51 on Chrysler
naveenk
07-22 08:34 PM
hi all,
I am EB3 with PD April 06/ I-140 Approved / Applied I-485 and My Employer is shifting the offcice from One state to other state. Does it have any affect on my 485 petition..?? Please respond back with some information
Regards,
Naveen
I am EB3 with PD April 06/ I-140 Approved / Applied I-485 and My Employer is shifting the offcice from One state to other state. Does it have any affect on my 485 petition..?? Please respond back with some information
Regards,
Naveen
snathan
02-21 09:59 AM
Thanks. Can anyone please help me in understanding how long does it take to get EAD aprroval from the starting point for EB1,EB2 and EB3 category. I am interested only in EAD approval at this point.
EB1 - current
EB2 - 3-2 years
EB3 - 10 - 20 years....
You cannot use the experience gained with your current employer...so you are coming under EB3 and its a long & treacherous journey for you. Take part in advocacy day on Apr 4 & 5 th in DC.
EB1 - current
EB2 - 3-2 years
EB3 - 10 - 20 years....
You cannot use the experience gained with your current employer...so you are coming under EB3 and its a long & treacherous journey for you. Take part in advocacy day on Apr 4 & 5 th in DC.
priderock
06-07 06:27 PM
This is a very complex bill with some provisions that could be detrimental to us. But there are some amendments that could help us (and some that could hurt us).
But I some times feel like you do. We as a groups seem to be confused. All along we want to have control over our GC process and not succumb to employers. But when this bill would have given what we wanted all along, we don't want it.
It would have been better to get some of provisions in that would help us rather than an out right opposition. As I said this is a VERY VERY VERY complex bill and there are VERY FEW that understood this completely.
But I some times feel like you do. We as a groups seem to be confused. All along we want to have control over our GC process and not succumb to employers. But when this bill would have given what we wanted all along, we don't want it.
It would have been better to get some of provisions in that would help us rather than an out right opposition. As I said this is a VERY VERY VERY complex bill and there are VERY FEW that understood this completely.