BharatPremi
07-05 05:00 PM
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=738&page=9
zerozerozeven
04-10 03:29 PM
163,000 applns for general and more than 31,200 applns for advanced degree.
Kodi
11-13 12:53 PM
How do we know that I-140 is "approvable"?
peer123
04-10 01:40 PM
My wife's company also applied for my 485 application, in that case can she apply for EAD for both of us also?..
I already have EAD for both us from my company,...
I already have EAD for both us from my company,...
more...
sury
11-15 02:59 PM
-------------------
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
------------------
We recently filed AR-11 for which we also recieved receipts from USCIS to my new Address. What would this mean. Is it that they are trying to send a new copy of I-485 receipts again...
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
we mailed the document to the address we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
------------------
We recently filed AR-11 for which we also recieved receipts from USCIS to my new Address. What would this mean. Is it that they are trying to send a new copy of I-485 receipts again...
Jaime
09-04 11:57 AM
Rally slogan?
more...
Kevin Sadler
May 23rd, 2005, 05:17 AM
Gary, they're all good. The sky and clouds in the first one are spectacular. You could lose that tree and all the scrub in the front and have a strong image with just the sky and those hills.
freeskier89
03-02 10:17 AM
Just out of curiousity, does traditional painting qualify?
more...
rajsenthil
09-16 05:21 PM
Done.
It's time to tell CNN not to give a platform for racists.
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
- JK
It's time to tell CNN not to give a platform for racists.
Drop Dobbs: Halt the Hate (http://www.dropdobbs.com/)
Please sign the petition
Take Action (http://www.dropdobbs.com/take-action/)
"Drop Dobbs": CNN Pressured To Give Up Controversial Host (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/16/drop-dobbs-cnn-pressured_n_288506.html)
- JK
shree772000
10-15 05:17 PM
Considering the lowered cost of stock I am planning to gets my hands dirty in stock. But I don't have much knwoeldge about it. Also, by the time I find resouces to learn more about stock, the prices might ahve gone up.
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
There are way better places than this forum to discuss about stocks. You will get much more response from those sites as the people there share similiar intrests as you. I do not understand the point in discussing stocks here.
Would you go to liquor store and buy groceries?
What you are trying to do is similiar.
So can anyone provide good online tools to know more about investing on stocks and buying stocks online...
Thanks
There are way better places than this forum to discuss about stocks. You will get much more response from those sites as the people there share similiar intrests as you. I do not understand the point in discussing stocks here.
Would you go to liquor store and buy groceries?
What you are trying to do is similiar.
more...
raj2227
10-17 03:12 PM
1
rsirpal
09-23 01:42 PM
Hi boreal,
I had a problem with my wifes AP- they had not acted on it for 4 months I asked them to expedite it since we wanted to visit my father in law who was hospitalized for a medical condition- they did not respond to that request so I contacted my Senators office and asked if they could assist in this matter. They asked me for some medical documentation and faxed it to USCIS.. I noticed yesterday that her online status had changed to document mailed..we are still to get it but are optimistic that we should receive it soon.
In the absence of any compelling circumstances though I am not sure how it would work. but I would definitely recommend contacting your Senators office.
seeking_GC,
Which service center did you apply your wife's AP from ? I have applied for my wife in NSC and she is scheduled to travel overseas in 4 months. I am worried it will not come in time
I had a problem with my wifes AP- they had not acted on it for 4 months I asked them to expedite it since we wanted to visit my father in law who was hospitalized for a medical condition- they did not respond to that request so I contacted my Senators office and asked if they could assist in this matter. They asked me for some medical documentation and faxed it to USCIS.. I noticed yesterday that her online status had changed to document mailed..we are still to get it but are optimistic that we should receive it soon.
In the absence of any compelling circumstances though I am not sure how it would work. but I would definitely recommend contacting your Senators office.
seeking_GC,
Which service center did you apply your wife's AP from ? I have applied for my wife in NSC and she is scheduled to travel overseas in 4 months. I am worried it will not come in time
more...
watzgc
09-18 04:45 PM
Hi, can I use EAD for my current employer.. my h1b exten under process and taking more than 1 yr .... thanks
NO. Once you start using your EAD, whether part-time of full-time, it take precedence and your H1 becomes invalid.
NO. Once you start using your EAD, whether part-time of full-time, it take precedence and your H1 becomes invalid.
larryking
10-23 07:30 PM
Deall All,
Thanks for your replies...i hope you gurus can shed some light into my situation:
labor(EB3) priority date 18 jan07.
I -140 has been approved june 25 2007.
I - 485 ucsis filing date july 19th 2007
EAD recvd Oct 16th 2007 valid till 3rd oct 2008
fingerprinting scheduled nov 7th 2007
H1 and H4 for me & my wife expires may 20th 2008
Here are my questions:
1. My present employer is under a divestiture process. Can i change employers as long as its a similar job? If so, do I apply for a H1 extension or should i work on EAD? (Note: I havent crossed the magical 180 days on the I-485 yet)
2. I have not received my advance parole docs yet but im planning on visiting india in april-may 2008. Assuming i get my AP can i visit India and return to the states and be working for a different employer (company B) other than the original employer (company A) who was my employer when i applied for my I-140, I485 etc?
3. Upon my return if the inspecting officer asks who the petitioner is/was do i tell them that, while i filed for the I-485 i was with company A but i am currently working for Company B? How do i handle this scenario?
4. If I do find another job, but not a "similar" job, then I'd have to file labor again right? If thats the case, will the current I-140 still hold good? Can I file for a second labor while working on EAD / AP? I guess my question really is: Can i file for another labor under EB2 to expedite my priority date? Then can i use my old I-140 which has been approved? What about the I-485? do i need to apply another one?
Thanks for your replies.
Thanks for your replies...i hope you gurus can shed some light into my situation:
labor(EB3) priority date 18 jan07.
I -140 has been approved june 25 2007.
I - 485 ucsis filing date july 19th 2007
EAD recvd Oct 16th 2007 valid till 3rd oct 2008
fingerprinting scheduled nov 7th 2007
H1 and H4 for me & my wife expires may 20th 2008
Here are my questions:
1. My present employer is under a divestiture process. Can i change employers as long as its a similar job? If so, do I apply for a H1 extension or should i work on EAD? (Note: I havent crossed the magical 180 days on the I-485 yet)
2. I have not received my advance parole docs yet but im planning on visiting india in april-may 2008. Assuming i get my AP can i visit India and return to the states and be working for a different employer (company B) other than the original employer (company A) who was my employer when i applied for my I-140, I485 etc?
3. Upon my return if the inspecting officer asks who the petitioner is/was do i tell them that, while i filed for the I-485 i was with company A but i am currently working for Company B? How do i handle this scenario?
4. If I do find another job, but not a "similar" job, then I'd have to file labor again right? If thats the case, will the current I-140 still hold good? Can I file for a second labor while working on EAD / AP? I guess my question really is: Can i file for another labor under EB2 to expedite my priority date? Then can i use my old I-140 which has been approved? What about the I-485? do i need to apply another one?
Thanks for your replies.
more...
saro28
11-07 05:52 AM
agc2005: I am sending in the card and new photos along with the application today to TSC. According to USCIS Service rep, I don't need to attach the fees. Now I need to find the address where to send.
Blog Feeds
02-01 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
kicca
01-25 03:48 PM
^^
invincibleasian
01-31 03:18 PM
As per the law, your H1B will still be valid even in if I-140 is revoked. However, the only flip side is one will lose the old priority date.
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
You cannot lose priority date after i140 is approved unless revoked for fraud!
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
You cannot lose priority date after i140 is approved unless revoked for fraud!
maximus777
09-16 03:20 PM
done
vallabhu
01-02 11:56 AM
Is it BA with Mathematics (honors) or BSC. in Mathematics (honors). or does it say General?
If you are asking about Labor petition It said Mathematics or related feild
if you are my qualification it is BSc with Mathematics. but my trascripts say maths1,maths2, maths3, maths4 as supposed to Mathematics1,Mathematics2,Mathematics3,Mathematics 4.
which made the difference.
but provisional said Mathematics, so adjudicator got confused.
If you are asking about Labor petition It said Mathematics or related feild
if you are my qualification it is BSc with Mathematics. but my trascripts say maths1,maths2, maths3, maths4 as supposed to Mathematics1,Mathematics2,Mathematics3,Mathematics 4.
which made the difference.
but provisional said Mathematics, so adjudicator got confused.
ram112
09-03 03:52 AM
gc approved on sept 1.
No comments:
Post a Comment