Hassan11
09-07 11:44 AM
I posted this question almost a month agao with no response. can anybody help?? I am stuck........
Hi
I have a question regarding an appeal I did a year ago for a rejected LC.
I have an approved LC and I-140 on an entry level position (EB3) with my company. after I got a promotion to a senior position that requires a masters degree but with a smilar job description but more senior and supervisory responsabilities with the same company. after promotion, I filed for a new LC (EB2) but it got rejected because DOL thinks it is the same position as the already approved LC. my company and I wrote a letter as an appeal on Sep 2006 within 30 days from rejection of LC to BALCA explaining that new position requires a masters degree and it is a senior position with more supervisory duties. as of today, almost a year later, we haven't heard anything regarding DOL (BALCA) decision on my appeal. is anybody in the same situation?? what should I do next?? also I read somewhere that DOl might revoke the already approved LC EB3 after I filed a second LC for EB2 with the same employer. can DOL revoke the first LC EB3 after I have an approved I-140?? please help. Thanks
Hi
I have a question regarding an appeal I did a year ago for a rejected LC.
I have an approved LC and I-140 on an entry level position (EB3) with my company. after I got a promotion to a senior position that requires a masters degree but with a smilar job description but more senior and supervisory responsabilities with the same company. after promotion, I filed for a new LC (EB2) but it got rejected because DOL thinks it is the same position as the already approved LC. my company and I wrote a letter as an appeal on Sep 2006 within 30 days from rejection of LC to BALCA explaining that new position requires a masters degree and it is a senior position with more supervisory duties. as of today, almost a year later, we haven't heard anything regarding DOL (BALCA) decision on my appeal. is anybody in the same situation?? what should I do next?? also I read somewhere that DOl might revoke the already approved LC EB3 after I filed a second LC for EB2 with the same employer. can DOL revoke the first LC EB3 after I have an approved I-140?? please help. Thanks
wallpaper choppy layers and curls
mariusp
02-22 09:28 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=NSC
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/jsps/Processtimes.jsp?SeviceCenter=TSC
TSC
485: went from May 24 to April 10, 2007 :(
140: June 23, 2007
NSC
485: July 30, 3007
140: Jan 22, 2007
nixstor
04-13 06:30 PM
Gurus,
Please help me guiding in my situation:
I have been on H1B for about 2 years, I came through desi consulting company. As usual there were no bench salary and very irregular payment during project duration also, I was not paid for about 50% of time.
I had switched to another employer couple of months back, My H1B approval with new employer is still pending. recently I had got letter from Department of Labor (DOL). They are trying to investigate my previous employer if he is complying with american competitiveness and workforce improvement act(ACWIA) of 1998.
They had sent me a questioner about previous employer about salary being paid etc.
I am not sure what should I be doing in this situation:
If I reply with all facts this might effect my pending H1B status for new employer.
If I write in a way that thing were as per LC then I am lieing, which I am not comfortable with.
Third Option could be that I do not respond at all
[They had mentioned that I am NOT required to respond.]
I am seeking help from experts and forum members, what should be I doing in this situation so that my H1B transfer do not get jeopradasided.
Thanks
Saurav
If you decide to reply, tell the truth.
Telling the truth about not getting paid will not get your new H1 extension into jeopardy. If you already filed for extension and do not have pay stubs for a period of time, you will possibly receive a RFE for lack of pay stubs. your response will help as an explanation of the employer's violations in case of a RFE and possibly can get you paid for the time you were not paid.
Please help me guiding in my situation:
I have been on H1B for about 2 years, I came through desi consulting company. As usual there were no bench salary and very irregular payment during project duration also, I was not paid for about 50% of time.
I had switched to another employer couple of months back, My H1B approval with new employer is still pending. recently I had got letter from Department of Labor (DOL). They are trying to investigate my previous employer if he is complying with american competitiveness and workforce improvement act(ACWIA) of 1998.
They had sent me a questioner about previous employer about salary being paid etc.
I am not sure what should I be doing in this situation:
If I reply with all facts this might effect my pending H1B status for new employer.
If I write in a way that thing were as per LC then I am lieing, which I am not comfortable with.
Third Option could be that I do not respond at all
[They had mentioned that I am NOT required to respond.]
I am seeking help from experts and forum members, what should be I doing in this situation so that my H1B transfer do not get jeopradasided.
Thanks
Saurav
If you decide to reply, tell the truth.
Telling the truth about not getting paid will not get your new H1 extension into jeopardy. If you already filed for extension and do not have pay stubs for a period of time, you will possibly receive a RFE for lack of pay stubs. your response will help as an explanation of the employer's violations in case of a RFE and possibly can get you paid for the time you were not paid.
2011 long hair layers and side
styrum
10-26 10:05 PM
I got this as a real paper letter. The signature is a picture, of course, not real.
No surprise here. We are not even a part of immigration reform for him.:mad:
So in this standard reply "about immigration reform" we are not even mentioned.
EDWARD M. KENNEDY
MASSACHUSETTS
Uinited States
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-2101
October 9, 2007
Dear Mr. :
Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. This is a complex issue, with many important aspects, and it requires a comprehensive solution. 12 million undocumented workers are now living in the United States. They're working, paying taxes, and raising children who are U.S. citizens if they are born here. They contribute to our economy, and it is time to bring them out of the shadows and end their unfair exploitation by unscrupulous employers in communities across the country.
Funds for border enforcement have increased dramatically over the years. The budget for the Border Patrol has increased from $263 million in 1990 to $1.6 billion today - a six-fold increase. Yet each year during this period, hundreds of thousands of immigrants have continued to enter the U.S. illegally. Our immigration laws are clearly broken, and stronger border enforcement alone will not fix them.
Long and thorough negotiations with the White House and fellow Senators, Republican and Democrat, led to the drafting of a comprehensive bipartisan immigration reform bill this year. It contained important provisions to strengthen border security, but it also contained needed provisions imposing higher penalties on businesses that employ undocumented immigrants, a temporary worker program to help American businesses meet their employment needs, and provisions to address the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States by allowing them to obtain legal status after undergoing background checks, paying a fine, and going to the back of the line for green cards. The bill was a realistic and comprehensive solution that would not only protect our borders, but also enable needed temporary workers to enter the country legally, and allow workers already here to become legal.
Unfortunately, this needed legislation has now stalled in the Senate, which is enormously disappointing for Congress and the country. But the battle is far from over. I'm in it for the long haul, and Fm certain that, in the end, we will prevail. Ignoring the problem will not solve it. We cannot afford to do nothing, especially in this post-9/11 era. By heritage and history, America is a nation of immigrants, and we must preserve this tradition. I will continue to fight to reform our immigration laws, so that our borders are secure and immigrant families can continue to live the American dream.
Again, thank you for writing to me about this important issue.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy
No surprise here. We are not even a part of immigration reform for him.:mad:
So in this standard reply "about immigration reform" we are not even mentioned.
EDWARD M. KENNEDY
MASSACHUSETTS
Uinited States
WASHINGTON, DC 20510-2101
October 9, 2007
Dear Mr. :
Thank you for contacting me about immigration reform. This is a complex issue, with many important aspects, and it requires a comprehensive solution. 12 million undocumented workers are now living in the United States. They're working, paying taxes, and raising children who are U.S. citizens if they are born here. They contribute to our economy, and it is time to bring them out of the shadows and end their unfair exploitation by unscrupulous employers in communities across the country.
Funds for border enforcement have increased dramatically over the years. The budget for the Border Patrol has increased from $263 million in 1990 to $1.6 billion today - a six-fold increase. Yet each year during this period, hundreds of thousands of immigrants have continued to enter the U.S. illegally. Our immigration laws are clearly broken, and stronger border enforcement alone will not fix them.
Long and thorough negotiations with the White House and fellow Senators, Republican and Democrat, led to the drafting of a comprehensive bipartisan immigration reform bill this year. It contained important provisions to strengthen border security, but it also contained needed provisions imposing higher penalties on businesses that employ undocumented immigrants, a temporary worker program to help American businesses meet their employment needs, and provisions to address the millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United States by allowing them to obtain legal status after undergoing background checks, paying a fine, and going to the back of the line for green cards. The bill was a realistic and comprehensive solution that would not only protect our borders, but also enable needed temporary workers to enter the country legally, and allow workers already here to become legal.
Unfortunately, this needed legislation has now stalled in the Senate, which is enormously disappointing for Congress and the country. But the battle is far from over. I'm in it for the long haul, and Fm certain that, in the end, we will prevail. Ignoring the problem will not solve it. We cannot afford to do nothing, especially in this post-9/11 era. By heritage and history, America is a nation of immigrants, and we must preserve this tradition. I will continue to fight to reform our immigration laws, so that our borders are secure and immigrant families can continue to live the American dream.
Again, thank you for writing to me about this important issue.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy
more...
dazed378
03-28 02:47 PM
Thanks, snathan.
Is not it strange that IRS processed the tax refund before completing the ITIN processing? They could not confirm the current status of my wife's ITIN processing, as they could not pull out any details about the W-7 based on the information provided by me. They only guessed that it might be still undergoing processing. I wonder if they misplaced the W-7 form or something like that :-(.
Is not it strange that IRS processed the tax refund before completing the ITIN processing? They could not confirm the current status of my wife's ITIN processing, as they could not pull out any details about the W-7 based on the information provided by me. They only guessed that it might be still undergoing processing. I wonder if they misplaced the W-7 form or something like that :-(.
jungalee43
02-16 03:11 PM
I did some research on murthy.com and found that AC21 did abolish 'per country of birth quota' on recycled numbers. I am posting a link to this murthy.com article of Oct 6, 2000 which clarifies the issue.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDh1det.html
If the link fails I am reporducing the paragraph here: -
Major highlights of ACTA are listed below :
Per Country Quotas for Immigrant Visas
"Under Section 104, with respect to immigrant visas, the per country quota, which has been adversely affecting those from China and India and which the U.S. State Department had stated could possibly affect those from the Philippines in the near future, may have been resolved with this Bill. It has always been the case that not all of the available immigrant visas were issued, since most countries did not have enough applicants to use the total available. ACTA provides that if the INS or the U.S. State Department does not issue all of the immigrant visas that should be issued in that FY, the unused immigrant visa numbers should be made available to all countries without the per country quota limit applying."
Retrogression started as the recycled numbers are no longer available and with that country quota showed its horrible effect. It is clear guys we have to concentrate our energy and our thoughts on this quota. Quota on the basis of "country of birth" on talent or skill needed is really hard to explain and we can have good logical arguments to support its abolition.
more...
ajju
03-01 11:55 AM
USCIS can pre-adjudicate a case, even when visa numbers are not available. This means that USCIS processes all the application, but just waits for a visa number to finalize it.
does it reflect on online status? How else can we find out that one's case has been pre-adjudicated... LUD?? or any specific status?? or only IO can tell??
does it reflect on online status? How else can we find out that one's case has been pre-adjudicated... LUD?? or any specific status?? or only IO can tell??
2010 long layers, long side
Nil
11-13 12:06 AM
^^^^
more...
va2000
10-10 09:30 AM
My lawyer told me that using EAD will not effected H4 status . It is good to get extensions on H4 along with H1 even you use your EAD to be safer side if some thing wrong with 485
hair Long Hair Short Layers And
harrydr
06-13 04:00 PM
BimmerFan, my wife is planning to apply for the med school and mostly the hospitals tend to apply for J visa instead of H1-B. Of course my preference is to get H1-B for her to avoid the J1 waiver process and who knows how tough their policy might turn out to be once you apply.
From your expreince it seems like you have lived this process inside out. Can you please PM me with your phone number so that i can have a more private correspondence with you. I would be greatly thankful to you for assisting me with this.
From your expreince it seems like you have lived this process inside out. Can you please PM me with your phone number so that i can have a more private correspondence with you. I would be greatly thankful to you for assisting me with this.
more...
samsu
03-22 08:31 AM
Hi,
My Situation is very similar to above mentioned and I would appreciate if someone can give comments.
My I-485 was filed during July'07 and I-140 was approved during the same time but I was on H1 until Feb'10 working for employer directly and lost my job. I have found new job now starting March 15 but I am not going to transfer H1 and started working on EAD. I am not sure about filling AC21 as it might create unnecessary confusion and I don't want to miss out in case my date become current (Nov'06) due to spill over.
Now, I have to travel internationally for work and will be using first time my AP but not sure how to answer question on my employer without filling AC21.
I can bring AC21 memo and show them paycheck from last employer and new employer (with little more than one month gap in between) but not sure if that is enough. Let me know your suggestion.
Also, my old employer will most likely not revoke 140.
Thanks,
Sam
My Situation is very similar to above mentioned and I would appreciate if someone can give comments.
My I-485 was filed during July'07 and I-140 was approved during the same time but I was on H1 until Feb'10 working for employer directly and lost my job. I have found new job now starting March 15 but I am not going to transfer H1 and started working on EAD. I am not sure about filling AC21 as it might create unnecessary confusion and I don't want to miss out in case my date become current (Nov'06) due to spill over.
Now, I have to travel internationally for work and will be using first time my AP but not sure how to answer question on my employer without filling AC21.
I can bring AC21 memo and show them paycheck from last employer and new employer (with little more than one month gap in between) but not sure if that is enough. Let me know your suggestion.
Also, my old employer will most likely not revoke 140.
Thanks,
Sam
hot Cut and color: Long,
alterego
10-27 12:15 PM
It is precisely this type of ignorance and reluctance to address the real issues by both sides of the issue that makes our predicament so difficult to fix(as with many other policy issues that need fixing in this country). It is an almost insurmountable feat to get the policy makers and even the debaters on this issue to distinguish between the issues of illegal immigration and legal immigration in this country. This obfuscation is not by accident but by clear intent to serve each their specific interests.
Were that not the case, why don't these "we need to stand by the rule of law" enforcement types, call for an improvement in the situation for those "who have followed the law", simply put, it is only convenient for them to say that when they are speaking about the illegals, but alas they are against us legals as well................. so how can they ask anyone to believe that they are anything but anti immigrant period.
The pro immigrant guys blur the distinction specifically because they consider us a sweetener in the deal no less and no more they really don't consider the way we came any better or worse than the way others arrived, it is simply either all or none for them.
A rational policy that the American people can be asked to accept IMHO would involve, strict enforcement both at the border and interior at multiple sites including workplace, policies to alleviate the plight of the legals to demonstrate that way is rewarded and finally a strict case by case evaluation of illegals where some are given amnesty(if they have US children, spouse, lived here over X number of years and can prove it etc) Some will have to be made to have to leave to demonstrate that illegal behavior is not condoned or rewarded, be they Mexicans, Indians or Irish.
Alas, this cannot and will not be done due to the cowardice OF BOTH SIDES of this debate. Cowardice is sadly now changing to outright disdain for immigrants and that is sad in this great country of immigrants. Now the obfuscation will see a backlash emerging against us legals as well.
Were that not the case, why don't these "we need to stand by the rule of law" enforcement types, call for an improvement in the situation for those "who have followed the law", simply put, it is only convenient for them to say that when they are speaking about the illegals, but alas they are against us legals as well................. so how can they ask anyone to believe that they are anything but anti immigrant period.
The pro immigrant guys blur the distinction specifically because they consider us a sweetener in the deal no less and no more they really don't consider the way we came any better or worse than the way others arrived, it is simply either all or none for them.
A rational policy that the American people can be asked to accept IMHO would involve, strict enforcement both at the border and interior at multiple sites including workplace, policies to alleviate the plight of the legals to demonstrate that way is rewarded and finally a strict case by case evaluation of illegals where some are given amnesty(if they have US children, spouse, lived here over X number of years and can prove it etc) Some will have to be made to have to leave to demonstrate that illegal behavior is not condoned or rewarded, be they Mexicans, Indians or Irish.
Alas, this cannot and will not be done due to the cowardice OF BOTH SIDES of this debate. Cowardice is sadly now changing to outright disdain for immigrants and that is sad in this great country of immigrants. Now the obfuscation will see a backlash emerging against us legals as well.
more...
house hairstyles for long hair with
arjunpa
08-18 11:35 AM
Thanks for the replies guys....
TXH1B,
The RFE as per my employer is about Vendor/Client Details and a latest paystub from the current job. Since I started working already and was getting paid, my employer generated a paystub and supplied the same.
TXH1B,
The RFE as per my employer is about Vendor/Client Details and a latest paystub from the current job. Since I started working already and was getting paid, my employer generated a paystub and supplied the same.
tattoo long hair layered side bangs.
makemygc
07-18 12:08 PM
There's no need for you to be negative.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
That's exactly what I'm saying. Flowers campaign has run its course and it's not going to benefit anymore. We need to come up with fresh ideas.
Obviously you have benefitted already from what's happened. Think about people who are stuck (just as you were up until recently) and want to 'try' to make things work for them too....
wish people were more understanding of others also. Why is it people forget what it was like for them when they were in same boat?
That's exactly what I'm saying. Flowers campaign has run its course and it's not going to benefit anymore. We need to come up with fresh ideas.
more...
pictures choppy layers haircuts
pitha
02-27 04:47 PM
It is worse than your estimates below because when green card is issued spouse and children are also counted in the quota unlike the h1 where spouse and children are not counted in the quota. Even if we assume each green card applicat has only one child, there would be 3 visa numbers used for each GC applicant. Going by that India has a demand for 150K GC as per the perm statistics but it gets only about 10000 per year. At this rate people from India who applied for GC in 06 and 07 would have to wait about 15 years and 30 years respectively to get the GC!!!!!!!!
About 25,000 PERM labors were approved in 2007 for Indian nationals. Assuming a 2.5:1 ratio of 'GC filed:Labor approved', implies that each year 62,500 GC are demanded by Indians under EB. Since only 10,000 are available (across all EB classes), this implies each year a backlog of 50,000 cases is created for Indians.
Since PD are essentially retrogressed from Nov. 2005, we can assume that since then another 100,000 Indians have joined the GC backlog. It can also be assumed that between 2001 and Nov. 2005 there must be another (atleast) 50,000 waiting for GC.
Assuming these numbers are correct, a person filing for labor today is looking to wait for atleast 15 years before getting a GC (150,000/10,000).
As for those wth PD prior to Nov. 2005 - well..... probably anywhere between 1 to 5 years .....
Comments on the analysis.........?
About 25,000 PERM labors were approved in 2007 for Indian nationals. Assuming a 2.5:1 ratio of 'GC filed:Labor approved', implies that each year 62,500 GC are demanded by Indians under EB. Since only 10,000 are available (across all EB classes), this implies each year a backlog of 50,000 cases is created for Indians.
Since PD are essentially retrogressed from Nov. 2005, we can assume that since then another 100,000 Indians have joined the GC backlog. It can also be assumed that between 2001 and Nov. 2005 there must be another (atleast) 50,000 waiting for GC.
Assuming these numbers are correct, a person filing for labor today is looking to wait for atleast 15 years before getting a GC (150,000/10,000).
As for those wth PD prior to Nov. 2005 - well..... probably anywhere between 1 to 5 years .....
Comments on the analysis.........?
dresses side fringe and layers.
jsb
01-27 12:53 PM
Hi,
If anybody has used a lawyer for AC21, please post the lawyer details and their cost.
Thank you.
Question is why do you need a lawyer for AC21. It does not require any action, unless USCIS asks for confirmation of same/similar job offer. In any case, if you choose to take some action, just send copy of new job offer to UCSIC (by your your new employer that they have a job for you when you get your GC). The letter should have job details same/similar to what you were sponsored for.
When lawyers want to do this, they do so only to make some money.
If anybody has used a lawyer for AC21, please post the lawyer details and their cost.
Thank you.
Question is why do you need a lawyer for AC21. It does not require any action, unless USCIS asks for confirmation of same/similar job offer. In any case, if you choose to take some action, just send copy of new job offer to UCSIC (by your your new employer that they have a job for you when you get your GC). The letter should have job details same/similar to what you were sponsored for.
When lawyers want to do this, they do so only to make some money.
more...
makeup And you can get a hair style
cahaba
04-14 12:07 PM
Your friend is capable of a lot; but incapable of asking his own questions !!! Not being cynical or rubbing salt on a wound....but whats the harm in claiming that its your own problem instead of a 3rd persons.?
Given 'your friends' patents & papers in the technical field, self employment as consultant could be possible.
Also ask opinion of attorney on actually incorporating LLC....timing of incorporating such LLC after receiving RFE can be suspect.
Good luck - to your friend.
Hello,
Thanks for your reply. But I do not appreciate the sarcastic cynicism . The only reason I am fronting for my friend is 1. he does not have time now and 2. because of the apprehension that participating in forums like this may put him in more hot soup. I hope you understand.
Also, I am at loss to understand how can people jump to imaginary conclusions without any supporting basis.
Please let us not create any distractions for a really serious problem we have on hand. I am not going to engage in war of words, even if you have a retort for me.
--
Given 'your friends' patents & papers in the technical field, self employment as consultant could be possible.
Also ask opinion of attorney on actually incorporating LLC....timing of incorporating such LLC after receiving RFE can be suspect.
Good luck - to your friend.
Hello,
Thanks for your reply. But I do not appreciate the sarcastic cynicism . The only reason I am fronting for my friend is 1. he does not have time now and 2. because of the apprehension that participating in forums like this may put him in more hot soup. I hope you understand.
Also, I am at loss to understand how can people jump to imaginary conclusions without any supporting basis.
Please let us not create any distractions for a really serious problem we have on hand. I am not going to engage in war of words, even if you have a retort for me.
--
girlfriend Long choppy layers, long
Berkeleybee
05-18 05:17 PM
Will we be able to find by the end of 2006 wether CIR bill is passed or not ?
Here is what Specter said: (Apr 24, 2006)
quoting Specter "And after this meeting, I'm confident we'll get it done, out of the Senate by Memorial Day and to the president's desk, as he's asked for, before the end of the year."
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...&postcount=336
Here is what Specter said: (Apr 24, 2006)
quoting Specter "And after this meeting, I'm confident we'll get it done, out of the Senate by Memorial Day and to the president's desk, as he's asked for, before the end of the year."
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...&postcount=336
hairstyles long hair layers side bangs.
DDash
04-05 12:07 PM
Someone pls respond if you think you can help answer my questions. Pretty please.
seeking_GC
07-18 08:19 PM
bump>>
pou-pou
06-11 08:44 PM
wow :D I have done good here :D :lol:
well, the guy with the green swan stamp should win though :love:
well, the guy with the green swan stamp should win though :love:
No comments:
Post a Comment