johnmcdonald98
07-05 12:19 PM
I go against this idea, because this doesn't work out logistically.
First as others pointed out traffic will be way less as soon as IV charges,
second, what would be the cut-off? $5 or $100? So if person who paid $5 might get the same privileges as guys who paid $1000? Is it fair, then you need to come up with normal, premium membership etc..
Third, as soon as you make people pay, they become more demanding as they need to know where their each cents have been spent. I guess then IV core member needs to answer questions related to this more than actual issues
by the way who and where do they keep the accounting in IV?
First as others pointed out traffic will be way less as soon as IV charges,
second, what would be the cut-off? $5 or $100? So if person who paid $5 might get the same privileges as guys who paid $1000? Is it fair, then you need to come up with normal, premium membership etc..
Third, as soon as you make people pay, they become more demanding as they need to know where their each cents have been spent. I guess then IV core member needs to answer questions related to this more than actual issues
by the way who and where do they keep the accounting in IV?
wallpaper house love quotes for her. funny funny love quotes and sayings for her. emo
anshuman
01-09 10:15 AM
most of the desi consultants seem to be concentrated in NJ or Chicago. Are there any reliable desi consultants for H-1 in CA? What are the websites which give info in this direction?
What are the steps to be followed and things to watch out for in selecting a desi consultant?
Join Satyam computers, the one stop shop for all your body shopping needs. :D: They will do whatever it takes to get you a green card, by hook or crook.
What are the steps to be followed and things to watch out for in selecting a desi consultant?
Join Satyam computers, the one stop shop for all your body shopping needs. :D: They will do whatever it takes to get you a green card, by hook or crook.
bfadlia
03-09 12:54 PM
As much as I hated it, being EB3 ROW with Jul05 pd, I feel it is good that they didn't randomly move the pd forward like last year then give gc to some random 2006, 2007 cases while there are plenty of 2004 and 2005 ROW people still waiting
2011 sayings true love quotes
akred
01-28 11:23 AM
If the country cap was supposed to increase diversity, lets have a country cap based on the person's race. Or lets have a single country cap for the EU. The fact that political integration in Europe has lagged behind China and India is being used by the restrictionists to limit immigration from the 3rd world.
Anyway, point is the immigration system overall is broken. IV should seriously consider making common cause with the lobby for undocumented immigrants. The way I see it, my H4 wife is an illegal immigrant now since she volunteered at some place in exchange for reduced fees.
Anyway, point is the immigration system overall is broken. IV should seriously consider making common cause with the lobby for undocumented immigrants. The way I see it, my H4 wife is an illegal immigrant now since she volunteered at some place in exchange for reduced fees.
more...
vandanaverdia
09-12 02:32 PM
You and me together can make a difference...
Lets all stand up together & be heard!!!!
Come to DC!!! GO IV!!!
Help IV help you....
Its now or never...Or else it may be too late....
Lets all stand up together & be heard!!!!
Come to DC!!! GO IV!!!
Help IV help you....
Its now or never...Or else it may be too late....
alisa
01-23 08:49 PM
And hoping that some more data, some more pointers, and some more information comes out of this thread, before it dies.
Data and estimates and links to websites needed for estimating when a PD would become current.
Data and estimates and links to websites needed for estimating when a PD would become current.
more...
whitecollarslave
01-18 01:36 PM
Talking about ID cards, wouldn't a driver's license be a proof of legal stay? With the new rules they check for immigration status before issuing a drivers license. People who are tourists or visitors will not have a US state issued drivers license.
In my case, my driver's license is valid till my H1 validity.
In my case, my driver's license is valid till my H1 validity.
2010 true love quotes and sayings
gcdreamer05
03-19 07:29 AM
This is the power of Immigration Voice. Not everyone has the knowledge of all these situations, so we need to gain knowledge from the past experience of others.
I am sure thread's like this will help a lot of people who have plans to join few Full Time Employees who promise but cannot keep it up.
Please continue to share...
I am sure thread's like this will help a lot of people who have plans to join few Full Time Employees who promise but cannot keep it up.
Please continue to share...
more...
nixstor
07-03 12:26 PM
I admit, it seems discriminatory to say you can't get your GC now because you're from this country or that country but these "high volume" countries have created the current back log through their sheer numbers and sometimes multiple applications, not the system. The system is fair to ALL and for some group to say that it isn't fair because all of that group isn't getting what they want is unjust to the rest of us. I knew I would be pounced upon when I submitted my original post and it only proves my point of personal agendas; sometimes I wonder what the "I" in "IV" really stands for? Don't be so arrogant as to believe that your higher education should give you more rights than others - that doesn't fly with me! I am frustrated with this forum because of this arrogance and I may not visit too much longer!
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Sheer number of applications from the high volume countries has created the backlog?? Are you saying/wishing that these people should not have come in the first place to avoid the backlog?? My friend, backlogs did not happen completely because of the sheer number of applications and gaming. Backlogs happened primarily because of wasted visa numbers and issues surrounding it. If there was no visa number wastage the priority dates would have been around 2-3 years behind as opposed to 7 or 8 years. There are gamers in every system. If a system does not work for people as it is supposed to, gamers do so to get out of the system. Not that IV condones such things but it happens in any system, when the system is broken.
The I in IV definitely does not stand for me only or for any one only. I along with V only makes sense. I by itself does not get IV any where.
So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed?
On one hand you are saying that there is a bias towards lower population countries now and you are ok with it, just because you happen to benefit from it. Is that what you mean?
If retrogressed countries are asking for 75% of the numbers reserved to them rather than having one line for all, You have a good point in saying that the bias is shifting towards retrogressed countries. There is no such provision like that. The provision creates one line depending on when you entered the line. You enter the line ahead, you get it first.
So keeping the limits intact is NOT a bias to you? You can't have it both ways. What do you think is a solution? The point system you referred to came with the same 10% limit on the retrogressed countries. What difference does it make to a retrogressed person with 96 out of 100 points, but still needs to wait for 4 years, while some one from Krakozhia walks away in 6 months with 60 points. B T W , you also said that higher education deserves more does not fly with you. I am not sure how you want points to be assigned, other than education and experience. Don't let the fear and protectionist thought take over the logical and rational thought.
The "other side" of immigration is an entirely different topic. Their issues and our issues, their path to the end line and ours are entirely different. We can't simply compare apples and oranges and call people hypocrites. That said, I personally support it and feel that it will happen at some point depending on the majority in both houses and one party will suffer for the decisions it made. As a by stander, I sympathize with the situation the "other side" has been in. I have a full plate to work on.
I do have one question for all of you who are in favor of eliminating the per country limit; do you support an eventual road to citizenship for the large group of people who dominate the "other side" of immigration? If you don't, some may think you hipocritical to want the rules changed for yourselves!
Sheer number of applications from the high volume countries has created the backlog?? Are you saying/wishing that these people should not have come in the first place to avoid the backlog?? My friend, backlogs did not happen completely because of the sheer number of applications and gaming. Backlogs happened primarily because of wasted visa numbers and issues surrounding it. If there was no visa number wastage the priority dates would have been around 2-3 years behind as opposed to 7 or 8 years. There are gamers in every system. If a system does not work for people as it is supposed to, gamers do so to get out of the system. Not that IV condones such things but it happens in any system, when the system is broken.
The I in IV definitely does not stand for me only or for any one only. I along with V only makes sense. I by itself does not get IV any where.
So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed?
On one hand you are saying that there is a bias towards lower population countries now and you are ok with it, just because you happen to benefit from it. Is that what you mean?
If retrogressed countries are asking for 75% of the numbers reserved to them rather than having one line for all, You have a good point in saying that the bias is shifting towards retrogressed countries. There is no such provision like that. The provision creates one line depending on when you entered the line. You enter the line ahead, you get it first.
So keeping the limits intact is NOT a bias to you? You can't have it both ways. What do you think is a solution? The point system you referred to came with the same 10% limit on the retrogressed countries. What difference does it make to a retrogressed person with 96 out of 100 points, but still needs to wait for 4 years, while some one from Krakozhia walks away in 6 months with 60 points. B T W , you also said that higher education deserves more does not fly with you. I am not sure how you want points to be assigned, other than education and experience. Don't let the fear and protectionist thought take over the logical and rational thought.
The "other side" of immigration is an entirely different topic. Their issues and our issues, their path to the end line and ours are entirely different. We can't simply compare apples and oranges and call people hypocrites. That said, I personally support it and feel that it will happen at some point depending on the majority in both houses and one party will suffer for the decisions it made. As a by stander, I sympathize with the situation the "other side" has been in. I have a full plate to work on.
hair true love quotes and sayings
sbabunle
12-28 10:07 PM
Anybody tried timesof India?
more...
Ramba
07-14 10:02 PM
--
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
I do not think what you are saying is correct. Ac21 does not allow you to leave before 180 days of your 485 filing.
Have you read the USCIS question? If not, read few times to understand how your interpretation is wrong.
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
The bottom line is if his approved 140 is not revoked with in 180 days of filing the 485, his 485 is still valid even if ported the job with in a month after filing 485.
The RFE is trying to determine whether your former employer holds a bonafide future job open for you or not. If he/she does not then your application is not valid in your circumstances from what I know.
If you get a letter from him/her then that should be adequate, however you will also need to start work with that employer for a reasonable time afterward to be within the law.
If as you say the intent has to be there at the time of filing, then it would be easy for everyone to intend whatever the needed at the time of filing and then change their minds. It does not work that way.
The revocation of the 140 would not have been a problem if it happened after the 180 days, but would be an issue now.
I can see you are in a difficult spot. I would definitely suggest you stay honest, since they have all of your filing records etc. and if you fudge it, your petition can be denied for fraud, which could harm future applications.
Rather than relying on the advise here, you should seek out a good attorney experienced in AC21.
hot true love quotes and sayings for her. true love quotes and
GCVivek
03-21 02:33 PM
There is no requirement for any company to sponsor green cards for any employee. A job is granted to you based on requirement of the company. Once that requirement no longer exists, the company can (and should) lay off the employee. This applies to H1 extensions and filing of GC.
GC filing is completely based on the company needing your service. Unless you totally excel and become indispensible to the company, they do not need to keep you. This is unlike a secure Govt. job in most 3rd world countries.
The conclusion is that this list would include ALL COMPANIES IN THE WORLD (and some Govts jobs). However, the list is not of rogue companies but simply companies that are run well.
There is nothing wrong in what I have posted to invite defamation suit.We should be filing defamation suit against them for not filing green cards as promised.Whatever my friend said I posted here.
GC filing is completely based on the company needing your service. Unless you totally excel and become indispensible to the company, they do not need to keep you. This is unlike a secure Govt. job in most 3rd world countries.
The conclusion is that this list would include ALL COMPANIES IN THE WORLD (and some Govts jobs). However, the list is not of rogue companies but simply companies that are run well.
There is nothing wrong in what I have posted to invite defamation suit.We should be filing defamation suit against them for not filing green cards as promised.Whatever my friend said I posted here.
more...
house images true love quotes and
Legal
07-13 10:35 AM
#67 Today, 09:28 AM
alterego
Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 460
Keep in mind two things. Many, quite possibly most of the July VB fiasco filed 485s have not been processed yet, Eb2 or EB3 India. There have been more recently (in the past couple of months) but still not most.
When a few IV members predicted the rapid movment of EB2 -I, they were dismissed as naive, and fantasizing. Yet, here we are with the EB-2-I PD current for June 2006. Lately, I'm having more faith in the philosophical statement -"The truth is unknowable". :) and having less and less faith on the speculations/ predictions of most IV members.
Are you sure about your above statement? My interpretation is since the processing date for 485s at the Nebraska service center is July 27th 2007, all the 485S received before that date have been processed, and are waiting only for visa number assignment.
I would like to fantasize next fee weeks my assumption is correct:). My PD is EB2-I feb 2006, RD July 2nd 2007.
alterego
Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 460
Keep in mind two things. Many, quite possibly most of the July VB fiasco filed 485s have not been processed yet, Eb2 or EB3 India. There have been more recently (in the past couple of months) but still not most.
When a few IV members predicted the rapid movment of EB2 -I, they were dismissed as naive, and fantasizing. Yet, here we are with the EB-2-I PD current for June 2006. Lately, I'm having more faith in the philosophical statement -"The truth is unknowable". :) and having less and less faith on the speculations/ predictions of most IV members.
Are you sure about your above statement? My interpretation is since the processing date for 485s at the Nebraska service center is July 27th 2007, all the 485S received before that date have been processed, and are waiting only for visa number assignment.
I would like to fantasize next fee weeks my assumption is correct:). My PD is EB2-I feb 2006, RD July 2nd 2007.
tattoo true love quotes and sayings
transpass
04-09 10:20 PM
This is an "Ouch..." visa bulletin.
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
Dont want to be passimistic or discourage anyone; I have always been optimistic and will remain so...
However, this suggests that there will not be any fall down (previously called spillover) from EB4 and may not even be much from EB5 (Last year this was the major factor that gave 10k additional numbers to EB2 India). Lookes like people are finding alternate ways (who can) by these routes.
EB1 used up all its numbers last year and we dont know what will happen this year.
EB2 ROW usage looks low, but then again no movement in EB2 India...
Patience and persistence....
Good Luck to all of us.
Does anyone have numbers for spillover last year category wise? I mean, last year how many EB4, EB5 and EB1 left out visas got spilled over to EB2? Thanks...
more...
pictures tattoo true love quotes
Polk1848
06-13 11:45 AM
We are not out of the CIR woods yet.
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
......WE ARE OPPOSED AROUND THE WORLD BY A MONOLITHIC AND RUTHLESS CONSPIRACY THAT RELIES PRIMARILY ON COVERT MEANS FOR EXPANDING ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE...ON INFILTRATION INSTEAD OF INVASION...ON SUBVERSION INSTEAD OF ELECTIONS...ON INTIMIDATION INSTEAD OF FREE CHOICE...IT IS A SYSTEM WHICH HAS CONSCRIPTED VAST HUMAN AND MATERIAL RESOURCES INTO THEE BUILDING OF A TIGHTLY KNIT HIGHLY EFFICIENT MACHINE THAT COMBINES MILITARY DIPLOMATIC INTELLIGENT ECONOMIC, SCIENTIFIC, AND POLITICAL OPERATIONS. ITS PREPARATIONS ARE CONCEALED NOT PUBLISHED. ITS MISTAKES ARE BURIED, NOT HEADLINED. ITS DISSENTERS ARE SILENCED. NOT PRAISED. NO EXPENDITURE IS QUESTIONED. NO SECRET IS REVEALED. THAT IS WHY THE ATHENIAN LAWMAKER SOLO DECREED IT A CRIME FOR ANY CITIZEN TO SHRINK FROM CONTROVERSY. I AM ASKING YOUR HELP IN THE TREMENDOUS TASK OF INFORMING AND ALERTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. CONFIDENT THAT WITH YOUR HELP MAN WILL BE WHAT HE WAS BORN TO BE...FREE AND INDEPENDENT" John F Kennedy
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8450558837192717138&hl=en
Link:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070612/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_immigration
......WE ARE OPPOSED AROUND THE WORLD BY A MONOLITHIC AND RUTHLESS CONSPIRACY THAT RELIES PRIMARILY ON COVERT MEANS FOR EXPANDING ITS SPHERE OF INFLUENCE...ON INFILTRATION INSTEAD OF INVASION...ON SUBVERSION INSTEAD OF ELECTIONS...ON INTIMIDATION INSTEAD OF FREE CHOICE...IT IS A SYSTEM WHICH HAS CONSCRIPTED VAST HUMAN AND MATERIAL RESOURCES INTO THEE BUILDING OF A TIGHTLY KNIT HIGHLY EFFICIENT MACHINE THAT COMBINES MILITARY DIPLOMATIC INTELLIGENT ECONOMIC, SCIENTIFIC, AND POLITICAL OPERATIONS. ITS PREPARATIONS ARE CONCEALED NOT PUBLISHED. ITS MISTAKES ARE BURIED, NOT HEADLINED. ITS DISSENTERS ARE SILENCED. NOT PRAISED. NO EXPENDITURE IS QUESTIONED. NO SECRET IS REVEALED. THAT IS WHY THE ATHENIAN LAWMAKER SOLO DECREED IT A CRIME FOR ANY CITIZEN TO SHRINK FROM CONTROVERSY. I AM ASKING YOUR HELP IN THE TREMENDOUS TASK OF INFORMING AND ALERTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. CONFIDENT THAT WITH YOUR HELP MAN WILL BE WHAT HE WAS BORN TO BE...FREE AND INDEPENDENT" John F Kennedy
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8450558837192717138&hl=en
dresses true love quotes and sayings
cn0568
07-23 12:09 PM
Thanks for your replies.
Following are the clarifications.
1. Currently I have only the L1-A Visa stamped on my passport. Also I have the I-94 which is of L1-A Visa (I entered USA on L1-A Visa).
2. I have received the receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B and it is valid from Oct-07.
Hope this helps.
Please let me know if you require any additional information.
Following are the clarifications.
1. Currently I have only the L1-A Visa stamped on my passport. Also I have the I-94 which is of L1-A Visa (I entered USA on L1-A Visa).
2. I have received the receipt issued by the USCIS for the H1B and it is valid from Oct-07.
Hope this helps.
Please let me know if you require any additional information.
more...
makeup love quotes and sayings for
memyselfandus
04-09 09:32 AM
Details below
girlfriend 2010 love quotes and sayings
.jpg "love quotes and sayings")
wizard20740
07-09 07:25 PM
A FBI name check does not seem to be a mandatory requirement for a GC. I think it maybe part of a "National Security Background Check" but does not seem to be a mandatory one.
Also Please see link below, which seems to indicate that precedents exist for issuing Citizenship to people without completion of background checks. These checks have to be completed within 120 days of citizenship interview, and it seems that in nearly 20% cases, people have been granted citizenship without completion of background checks because the 120 day timeline expired.
http://immigration.about.com/b/a/256020.htm
Would you mind quoting the actual law then?
Does every I-485 need FBI approval or just background check? How do you know that it needs FBI Name Check for all cases. Quote the law please.
Also Please see link below, which seems to indicate that precedents exist for issuing Citizenship to people without completion of background checks. These checks have to be completed within 120 days of citizenship interview, and it seems that in nearly 20% cases, people have been granted citizenship without completion of background checks because the 120 day timeline expired.
http://immigration.about.com/b/a/256020.htm
Would you mind quoting the actual law then?
Does every I-485 need FBI approval or just background check? How do you know that it needs FBI Name Check for all cases. Quote the law please.
hairstyles house true love quotes and
Jaime
09-10 02:15 PM
If only moves were so easy wouldn't all H1's be in Florida?
We have different laws for different states, we have states where driver license is only given for the period on your H1, we have states where SSN is required for a drivers license but your spouse cannot get a license. Please be aware of everyone's plight. We are trying to bring awareness by keeping the larger picture in mind.
Great point! We need to be able to convey to Washington our plight with accuracy! In order to do that we have to unite and deliver our message together!
We have different laws for different states, we have states where driver license is only given for the period on your H1, we have states where SSN is required for a drivers license but your spouse cannot get a license. Please be aware of everyone's plight. We are trying to bring awareness by keeping the larger picture in mind.
Great point! We need to be able to convey to Washington our plight with accuracy! In order to do that we have to unite and deliver our message together!
gsc999
08-04 01:00 AM
PCS:
Lou Hates ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION NOT LEGAL IMMIGRATION. if we can explain him about our problem then beleive me he is the only one who can talk everday about SKIL BILL.
Try it.
----
Talking to Lou Doubs in "favor" of immigration is like committing Harakiri.
Lou represents the extreme "right" wing anti-immigration lobby.
Kakaji, what part of Lou Doubs programs have you missed, the Anti-H1B programs or the anti-immigration ones?
Kaka ji plz don't instigate others to send e-mails to Lou Doubbs. It is enough that you have made that mistake.
Lou Hates ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION NOT LEGAL IMMIGRATION. if we can explain him about our problem then beleive me he is the only one who can talk everday about SKIL BILL.
Try it.
----
Talking to Lou Doubs in "favor" of immigration is like committing Harakiri.
Lou represents the extreme "right" wing anti-immigration lobby.
Kakaji, what part of Lou Doubs programs have you missed, the Anti-H1B programs or the anti-immigration ones?
Kaka ji plz don't instigate others to send e-mails to Lou Doubbs. It is enough that you have made that mistake.
hsm2007
09-20 07:37 PM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.