VisaHelp
07-26 09:27 AM
Sure. It was an H1B transfer application. So, the RFE asked for pay stubs with company A. Also asked, if applicable, for company B's pay stubs. W2s for the whole time I was in H1 status. And my last six tax returns.
Could you please detailed RFE? It is difficult to suggest without the RFE details.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
Could you please detailed RFE? It is difficult to suggest without the RFE details.
____________________
Not a legal advice.
garybanz
10-29 09:41 AM
It took about 4 days. Mine was filed at CSC and transferred to Nebraska Service Center
Thanks PermFiling.
Thanks PermFiling.
Pineapple
05-02 03:34 PM
Letter to USA Today (Published today)
-------------------------------------
Unlike illegal immigrants, our family, including two teenage girls, followed the legal way to come into the USA. My husband, an IT specialist, was asked to come by a U.S. employer. We are from Holland, where some have had a weak spot for the USA since World War II; we took the step of moving to America in 2001.
After a visa, heaps of paperwork and an extension of the visa after three years � the employer still needs my husband's skills. He also offers his skills to U.S. workers via training. No other experts are available. So, we decided we wanted to stay. Despite legal hurdles, we like it here.
But, for the past year and a half or so, the Department of Labor has stacked applicants in backlog centers to see whether it is true that no U.S. citizen is available for the job. Officials promise a lot, but we are all waiting and waiting.
If the immigration legislation adds some millions of guest workers to that stack, what will happen to us legals?
That's why I was glad to see the commentary �Stingy immigration policy stifles U.S. innovation.� I hope it raises awareness. But couldn't we legal immigrants get the front page for once?
Betty Innemee
Livingston, N.J.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web Link:
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060502/letad02.art.htm
Looks like another potential IV member, if she could be contacted.
-------------------------------------
Unlike illegal immigrants, our family, including two teenage girls, followed the legal way to come into the USA. My husband, an IT specialist, was asked to come by a U.S. employer. We are from Holland, where some have had a weak spot for the USA since World War II; we took the step of moving to America in 2001.
After a visa, heaps of paperwork and an extension of the visa after three years � the employer still needs my husband's skills. He also offers his skills to U.S. workers via training. No other experts are available. So, we decided we wanted to stay. Despite legal hurdles, we like it here.
But, for the past year and a half or so, the Department of Labor has stacked applicants in backlog centers to see whether it is true that no U.S. citizen is available for the job. Officials promise a lot, but we are all waiting and waiting.
If the immigration legislation adds some millions of guest workers to that stack, what will happen to us legals?
That's why I was glad to see the commentary �Stingy immigration policy stifles U.S. innovation.� I hope it raises awareness. But couldn't we legal immigrants get the front page for once?
Betty Innemee
Livingston, N.J.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web Link:
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20060502/letad02.art.htm
Looks like another potential IV member, if she could be contacted.
dilusa1
08-31 10:00 AM
Hello
I will appreciate if somebody guide me good indian comonay for SAP FI/CO training in Chicago area.
i will be CPA very soon, i will really appreciate your help in thi sreagrd.
Thanks
I will appreciate if somebody guide me good indian comonay for SAP FI/CO training in Chicago area.
i will be CPA very soon, i will really appreciate your help in thi sreagrd.
Thanks
more...
vin13
03-09 01:20 PM
Just in-case one gets layed-off and has an EAD, can that person buy a 7-Eleven or a Gas Station?
Can the EAD holder actually run the gas station/7-eleven by working/being present there? (Maybe he/she can work there and take all the profit but no salary).
What happens if there is an RFE asking for proof of employment during this period?
You will have to persue your gas station business parallel to your GC job (or similar job if you are using AC-21 portability).
Can the EAD holder actually run the gas station/7-eleven by working/being present there? (Maybe he/she can work there and take all the profit but no salary).
What happens if there is an RFE asking for proof of employment during this period?
You will have to persue your gas station business parallel to your GC job (or similar job if you are using AC-21 portability).
eb2_mumbai
10-15 07:55 PM
This is what I can speculate from logical point of view. There can be an 2nd RFE which is basically seeking more clarification on an earlier RFE. These kind of RFE will be pretty much immediate to the preceeding RFE (within 1 -2 months)
After that hopefully there should not be any unrelated RFE with the assumption that IO has taken a complete look at the file before issuing a RFE. We do not want a RFE for BC and when that is replied IO sending another one for Medical or Marriage Certificate. We should reasonably assume that IO has taken a good look at the application before sending RFE.
But we can expect RFE for cases that are current. The reason being most of these cases might be lying with CIS for over 2-3 years before getting current and considering the current state of economy they might issue a RFE for updated EVL to check if the person is still working. That is again just a pure guess no one knows how CIS works in reality
After that hopefully there should not be any unrelated RFE with the assumption that IO has taken a complete look at the file before issuing a RFE. We do not want a RFE for BC and when that is replied IO sending another one for Medical or Marriage Certificate. We should reasonably assume that IO has taken a good look at the application before sending RFE.
But we can expect RFE for cases that are current. The reason being most of these cases might be lying with CIS for over 2-3 years before getting current and considering the current state of economy they might issue a RFE for updated EVL to check if the person is still working. That is again just a pure guess no one knows how CIS works in reality
more...
prabhu07
05-21 12:02 PM
@surabhi - Adios Amigos.
pappu
05-24 10:18 AM
all new members, pls bring in more people like us to this forum.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=36
has an email format that you can forward to your friends. Lets increase the presence on this forum.
we only have about 4k members. However people on H1B visas every year are 65+K and retrogression affected people are more than 300K. Thus we have lot of scope for bringing more members. Remember, more numbers would also mean more weight for IV when talking to lawmakers.
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=36
has an email format that you can forward to your friends. Lets increase the presence on this forum.
we only have about 4k members. However people on H1B visas every year are 65+K and retrogression affected people are more than 300K. Thus we have lot of scope for bringing more members. Remember, more numbers would also mean more weight for IV when talking to lawmakers.
more...
jiraprapaasa
04-09 03:48 PM
I am planning to apply my niece to come to USA to study 8th grader in private school. She is 13 years old in May 2011. I believe she doesn't need to go for an interview at US embassy in Bangkok Thailand. What do I suppose to do then? How do I submit her DS-160 (already finish filling online) and other document? What else do I need to know in order for her to come to the US.
indian111
10-13 11:06 AM
30 minutes per day aerobics ?
lol that was a good one :P
lol that was a good one :P
more...
HumHongeKamiyab
03-16 11:32 AM
I am a primary applicant of GC. My question is can I take an unpaid vacation (for upto 6 months). FYI, My PD is EB3 - Aug 2003.
Does that affect my GC status in any way?
If this topic has been discussed earler, pl. point me to a correct thread.
Thanks,
Does that affect my GC status in any way?
If this topic has been discussed earler, pl. point me to a correct thread.
Thanks,
brij523
11-10 12:31 PM
I guess poll closes after 15 days (?)
Thanks to all those who are helping out in different ways.
I would like to know what is the booth number?
Thanks to all those who are helping out in different ways.
I would like to know what is the booth number?
more...
485Mbe4001
05-25 12:56 PM
I renewed at SFO via mail, got it in 3.5 weeks, no problems at all, my requirement was not urgent. They have number you can call and ask for status, people are nice to talk to and you can ask them to expediate it you are in a hurry. Chicago might be the same.
Does anyone have recent experience with the Chicago office of Consulate of India for passport renewal. How long does it take? 2 weeks, 3 weeks, more than 3 weeks.
Does anyone have recent experience with the Chicago office of Consulate of India for passport renewal. How long does it take? 2 weeks, 3 weeks, more than 3 weeks.
hoolahoous
03-11 07:07 PM
please do report the outcome.
more...
manderson
12-29 07:56 PM
have you tried filing a FOIA (freedom of information act) request to obtain the 140? i don't know how well u have researched this, but u should talk to a good lawyer.
Getting I-140 approval copy is not possible.
I only have case number prinout.
anyways, it is not a big deal. Worst case, I will get 1 year extension.
It is not going to deter me from exercising AC-21.
Getting I-140 approval copy is not possible.
I only have case number prinout.
anyways, it is not a big deal. Worst case, I will get 1 year extension.
It is not going to deter me from exercising AC-21.
axp817
03-28 01:46 PM
If you worked in CA you need to file the same state. You dont have to file the tax for the state where your employer resides.
Not always true, if the employer withholds tax (OP's case) for a certain state, you HAVE to file returns for that state. Even if the withholding was done in error. The only way around this is to get an amended W-2 from the employer without the withholding. I speak from experience.
An easy way to figure this out is as follows
1. You have to file state tax returns in the state of your residence.
2. You have to file state tax returns in state of employment (where your employer is) IF
the employer withheld taxes (for that state) from your paycheck. Technically, they
shouldn't but if they do, for whatever reason, the only way you wouldn't have to file
returns is if they amend the W-2 and give you a new one without the tax withheld.
3. You have to file state tax returns in the state where you perform work on your
employer's behalf (this applies mostly to consulting scenarios where an employee is
deployed on assignments across the country and the only time you don't have to file
taxes in the third situation is when the work performed was for a short period of time
(less than a certain number of months, I am not sure exactly how many, but I think it is
9 or 10 months).
In many cases the state of residence, employment, etc. are all the same, in some cases they are not.
One of the exceptions is states which don't have state income tax, e.g. Texas.
Of course, having to file returns in so many states doesn't mean you pay tax to each state, usually, the total state tax you end up paying is equal to the state with the highest tax rate.
e.g. if you lived in NJ, employer was in NY, and you drove to a client site in PA for all of 2008, you would file returns in NJ and PA, and if the tax rate in NJ was 6% and PA was 6.1%, you would pay 6.1%, the higher of the two. Of course, if your employer accidentally withheld taxes for NY, then you would have to file for NY, and if NY doesn't agree to give you your withheld money back, then the only way to get it back would be to have your employer give you an amended W-2.
That being said, the OP should be okay since he has now filed CA taxes for 2005 and 2006. There will be a small amount of money owed to CA-Dept. of Revenue as penalty, but that should have been calculated during filing, by whoever did the OP's taxes. If the penalty wasn't paid, the OP can expect a 'bill' from CA-DOR asking for that money.
OP, If I were you, I would look into one more thing. If you were on H-1B when you were in CA, did your employer amend the H-1B LCA to state that CA was the work location? Seeing that taxes were withheld for NJ, they might have not amended the LCA. Speak to your employer and see if that could cause any problems or if there is a way to fix that.
Good luck,
Not always true, if the employer withholds tax (OP's case) for a certain state, you HAVE to file returns for that state. Even if the withholding was done in error. The only way around this is to get an amended W-2 from the employer without the withholding. I speak from experience.
An easy way to figure this out is as follows
1. You have to file state tax returns in the state of your residence.
2. You have to file state tax returns in state of employment (where your employer is) IF
the employer withheld taxes (for that state) from your paycheck. Technically, they
shouldn't but if they do, for whatever reason, the only way you wouldn't have to file
returns is if they amend the W-2 and give you a new one without the tax withheld.
3. You have to file state tax returns in the state where you perform work on your
employer's behalf (this applies mostly to consulting scenarios where an employee is
deployed on assignments across the country and the only time you don't have to file
taxes in the third situation is when the work performed was for a short period of time
(less than a certain number of months, I am not sure exactly how many, but I think it is
9 or 10 months).
In many cases the state of residence, employment, etc. are all the same, in some cases they are not.
One of the exceptions is states which don't have state income tax, e.g. Texas.
Of course, having to file returns in so many states doesn't mean you pay tax to each state, usually, the total state tax you end up paying is equal to the state with the highest tax rate.
e.g. if you lived in NJ, employer was in NY, and you drove to a client site in PA for all of 2008, you would file returns in NJ and PA, and if the tax rate in NJ was 6% and PA was 6.1%, you would pay 6.1%, the higher of the two. Of course, if your employer accidentally withheld taxes for NY, then you would have to file for NY, and if NY doesn't agree to give you your withheld money back, then the only way to get it back would be to have your employer give you an amended W-2.
That being said, the OP should be okay since he has now filed CA taxes for 2005 and 2006. There will be a small amount of money owed to CA-Dept. of Revenue as penalty, but that should have been calculated during filing, by whoever did the OP's taxes. If the penalty wasn't paid, the OP can expect a 'bill' from CA-DOR asking for that money.
OP, If I were you, I would look into one more thing. If you were on H-1B when you were in CA, did your employer amend the H-1B LCA to state that CA was the work location? Seeing that taxes were withheld for NJ, they might have not amended the LCA. Speak to your employer and see if that could cause any problems or if there is a way to fix that.
Good luck,
more...
mrsahaayam
09-02 03:36 PM
If YOU want to reply just reply else DONT bulls***. Don't care abt other threads or posts. I know you guys are ready for pointing you nasty fingers at some one, maniacs
Thanks for wasting your valuable time for posting nothing :mad:
Thanks for wasting your valuable time for posting nothing :mad:
shana04
05-18 05:41 PM
did you receive one rfe for both cases or one each for each case?
two seperate RFE one for each
two seperate RFE one for each
eb3_nepa
03-07 02:18 PM
Hi,
A while ago on one of the conference calls, if i remember correctly, it was mentioned that there wud be a team of ppl who would be aggressively calling up people and ask them to join.
First off am i correct? If i am correct, I was wondering if the same team could look at the contributions from the various members and call the "dormant" members up and ask them why they are apprehensive to contribute.
A while ago on one of the conference calls, if i remember correctly, it was mentioned that there wud be a team of ppl who would be aggressively calling up people and ask them to join.
First off am i correct? If i am correct, I was wondering if the same team could look at the contributions from the various members and call the "dormant" members up and ask them why they are apprehensive to contribute.
ryan
04-27 01:11 PM
The antis regularly say that unathorized immigrants get a range of public benefits but don't pay any taxes. Not so. They're paying $8.4 billion a year in sales taxes and $1.2 billion in income taxes. And they don't get most public benefits. They get public schools for their kids and emergency rooms can't turn them away. That's pretty much it. In the mean time, a company that earned $14 billion in profits last year paid zero taxes.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/04/unauthorized-immigrants-paid-11-billion-in-taxes-last-year-ge-paid-non.html)
That article isn't comparing apples to apples . Corporate tax is one form of tax. However, GE and its units pay billions in several other form of taxes, which can be used in part, to offset corporate tax.
Also, IMO this statement negates the article itself -- "$8.4 billion in sales taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes, and $1.2 billion in personal income taxes last year"
The illegal folk paid more in sale tax than income tax -- MEANING what exactly? The LARGE majority did not file / pay Income taxes. Period. Who are they kidding here with the sort of agenda filled write ups?
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/04/unauthorized-immigrants-paid-11-billion-in-taxes-last-year-ge-paid-non.html)
That article isn't comparing apples to apples . Corporate tax is one form of tax. However, GE and its units pay billions in several other form of taxes, which can be used in part, to offset corporate tax.
Also, IMO this statement negates the article itself -- "$8.4 billion in sales taxes, $1.6 billion in property taxes, and $1.2 billion in personal income taxes last year"
The illegal folk paid more in sale tax than income tax -- MEANING what exactly? The LARGE majority did not file / pay Income taxes. Period. Who are they kidding here with the sort of agenda filled write ups?
Toxic'
May 19th, 2005, 12:11 AM
Hello,
I want to make it clear that I have read the manual that came with my D70... But I seem to be having an issue that I'm not exactly sure of the cause whereas I haven't altered any of the settings since I purchased/recieved it... unless I did something without realizing it.
One of the very first pic's I took with my D70 was of the moon. As you can see from my attached (cropped) image, "in my honest opinion anyway", I think they came out awesome rather decent for being taken "handheld" via a Sigma 300 mm kit lens...
Anyway... I took maybe a half dozen Moon'shots over the following couple of nights and everyone of them was "in focus" and relatively clear as the attached image... I proceeded to take other shots of various subjects over the following couple of weeks until one night the sky was crystal clear and there was a 3/4 Moon. I attempted to take the picture the exact way I took them the first couple of nights, with everything at its "default" settings (unless as I said I changed something without knowing)... What I found has left me bewildered. I can aim at & focus the Moon in crystal clear within the center brackets and then proceed to press the shutter release... only now "every single shot" will in the end, be nothing more than a gaint fuzzy snowball. I've even attempted taking a shot via the "Timer Release" feature whilest the D70 is mounted to a Tripod on solid ground, and its always the same thing. The image in the viewfinder is as "crystal clear" as I could ever hope for, yet when the picture is actually taken its a giant fuzzy snowball.
As I stated above, I've gone through the manual while looking at the camera in hand but I in no way remember ever changing anything where as this is my very first "fully adjustable" camera of anykind, digital or otherwise...
Any help would be truely appreciated...
Toxic'
I want to make it clear that I have read the manual that came with my D70... But I seem to be having an issue that I'm not exactly sure of the cause whereas I haven't altered any of the settings since I purchased/recieved it... unless I did something without realizing it.
One of the very first pic's I took with my D70 was of the moon. As you can see from my attached (cropped) image, "in my honest opinion anyway", I think they came out awesome rather decent for being taken "handheld" via a Sigma 300 mm kit lens...
Anyway... I took maybe a half dozen Moon'shots over the following couple of nights and everyone of them was "in focus" and relatively clear as the attached image... I proceeded to take other shots of various subjects over the following couple of weeks until one night the sky was crystal clear and there was a 3/4 Moon. I attempted to take the picture the exact way I took them the first couple of nights, with everything at its "default" settings (unless as I said I changed something without knowing)... What I found has left me bewildered. I can aim at & focus the Moon in crystal clear within the center brackets and then proceed to press the shutter release... only now "every single shot" will in the end, be nothing more than a gaint fuzzy snowball. I've even attempted taking a shot via the "Timer Release" feature whilest the D70 is mounted to a Tripod on solid ground, and its always the same thing. The image in the viewfinder is as "crystal clear" as I could ever hope for, yet when the picture is actually taken its a giant fuzzy snowball.
As I stated above, I've gone through the manual while looking at the camera in hand but I in no way remember ever changing anything where as this is my very first "fully adjustable" camera of anykind, digital or otherwise...
Any help would be truely appreciated...
Toxic'