danu2007
10-30 11:03 PM
Done..Posted the letter
wallpaper love, marilyn monroe,
unitednations
12-21 10:48 PM
This is from Murthy chat.
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
I had written about this in the past. When I went for local office interview; he had requested all w2's and tax returns from my initial entry shown on g-325( LAST ADDRESS OUTSIDE USA FOR MORE THEN ONE YEAR) which was 1999.
It said prove that you maintained status on each entry.
Now: i didn't have any issues but I was pretty upset that officer was going way outside the law and testing periods that he wasn't supposed to. My date of last entry before filing 485 was December 2002 and he was requesting 1999-2006.
I did inform him that he wasn't supposed to ask for this as it was outside the law. However; what I gathered is that although 245k does have some significant protection for everyone; uscis tries to go other ways in catching/snagging you. Another link was provided in this link where a person listed an employer on his g-325a but he was on bench and never got paid. USCIS was trying to deny his 485 due to fraud. Fraud overrules 24k any time.
Therefore; uscis uses many different avenues to get at other aspects; especially to get you to lie, cover up, mislead in things you don't need to but inadvertently do because you think it is problematic when it really wasn't.
The feeling i got from my interview is that is what he was exactly trying to do.
Question: If in the past I have been out of H1B status for 6 months (I-94 not expired), is this going to hurt my GC (or any new petitions to change / extend / adjust status)?
Answer: A person who fails to maintain status for over 180 days may have a problem obtaining the approval of the I-485, which allows a maximum of 180 days for one to be out of status under Section 245(k) of the INA, unless the person is covered under 245(i) of the INA. Sometimes, though, the fault of the employer in not paying the salary while the person is considered an employee may not pose a problem but at other times it may pose a problem. Not having pay stubs will certainly adversely impact the ability to obtain an extension or change of status from the USCIS. Jun-20-2005.
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
I had written about this in the past. When I went for local office interview; he had requested all w2's and tax returns from my initial entry shown on g-325( LAST ADDRESS OUTSIDE USA FOR MORE THEN ONE YEAR) which was 1999.
It said prove that you maintained status on each entry.
Now: i didn't have any issues but I was pretty upset that officer was going way outside the law and testing periods that he wasn't supposed to. My date of last entry before filing 485 was December 2002 and he was requesting 1999-2006.
I did inform him that he wasn't supposed to ask for this as it was outside the law. However; what I gathered is that although 245k does have some significant protection for everyone; uscis tries to go other ways in catching/snagging you. Another link was provided in this link where a person listed an employer on his g-325a but he was on bench and never got paid. USCIS was trying to deny his 485 due to fraud. Fraud overrules 24k any time.
Therefore; uscis uses many different avenues to get at other aspects; especially to get you to lie, cover up, mislead in things you don't need to but inadvertently do because you think it is problematic when it really wasn't.
The feeling i got from my interview is that is what he was exactly trying to do.
pappu
01-11 01:21 PM
Hi:
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
welcome.
pls contact varsha and others to start chapter activities.
varsha, pls plan some action items for the chapter.
I just joined the chapter.
Would love to be able to volnteer my services to this cause. How can I help? Also it may be a good idea to start a local support group for those of us in line waiting for this immigration hell to be over...may be a get together of some sort....
Wishin' for a better future ahead for all us immigration victims
PD for self: August 03
Labor Cert: pending
PD for husband: Dec 03
Labor Cert & I-140: appoved.
welcome.
pls contact varsha and others to start chapter activities.
varsha, pls plan some action items for the chapter.
2011 Marilyn Monroe quotes
h1-b forever
01-24 09:16 AM
I feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that EB3 needs IV's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for EB3, as INS merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
GK,
I think you do have a point. Let me do some research and contact some attorneys as well on this. Will also check with the IV leadership on their thoughts on this point.
Cheers,
Rayoflight
Did anything come of this plan? Is this doable?
But, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The INA language says that until EB2 is not current, there will be no spillover to EB3. Agreed. But I would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. That is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all EB2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 EB3.
Is this something IV can point out and fight for? Can EB3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
GK,
I think you do have a point. Let me do some research and contact some attorneys as well on this. Will also check with the IV leadership on their thoughts on this point.
Cheers,
Rayoflight
Did anything come of this plan? Is this doable?
more...
gimmeacard
07-12 09:00 PM
So looking at the demand data used for determining Aug bulletin,
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
how far do you think it'll progress next month?
AUG BULLETIN is already out, it moved to March06 for EB2,
http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/EmploymentDemandUsedForCutOffDates.pdf
how far do you think it'll progress next month?
AUG BULLETIN is already out, it moved to March06 for EB2,
jonty_11
01-02 03:54 PM
Posted about IV on www.denverindians.com
http://denverindians.com/forum/display_topic_threads.asp?ForumID=9&TopicID=152&PagePosition=1&ThreadPage=1
http://denverindians.com/forum/display_topic_threads.asp?ForumID=9&TopicID=152&PagePosition=1&ThreadPage=1
more...
GCHPLC
10-31 03:14 PM
It is EB3 India vote, is it right? I can't place my vote if I am from another country...
2010 makeup Quotes from Marilyn
srkamath
07-20 01:26 PM
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
more...
Buran
02-15 01:09 PM
Everybody stands in one single queue......one line not five lines......one line my friend, irrespective of your nationality. so if you wait 2 years, or 2 hours..I wait the same. Unlike NOW, where some people wait 5-8 years and others 1-2 years.
I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.
I don\'t want to stand in line three times longer just because 60 percent of the applicants are natives of one country. Look what\'s going on with H-1B. There is no per-country quota and ROW is simply screwed.
hair love quotes marilyn monroe. Tagged as: marilyn monroe,
Dakota Newfie
07-03 11:27 AM
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!
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!
more...
coolmanasip
06-19 03:09 PM
My lawyer is asking for the tax returns for last three years for 485 filing??? I read W2s in the USCIS list but I do not know why he is asking for tax returns?? Any clue.....
hot Marilyn Monroe Give a girl the
murali77
08-06 07:38 PM
Hello Gurus.
My wife's and my I-485 status changed to 'Card Production' . PD Jan 2006.
My wife is in India and scheduled to return on 25th of August on Valid AP. My question is if my can still use to AP to enter USA ?
Appreciate your inputs.
Thanks
Mo
My wife's and my I-485 status changed to 'Card Production' . PD Jan 2006.
My wife is in India and scheduled to return on 25th of August on Valid AP. My question is if my can still use to AP to enter USA ?
Appreciate your inputs.
Thanks
Mo
more...
house i Marilyn Monroes utsagn
vishwak
02-09 01:49 PM
What exactly is this???
tattoo love quotes marilyn monroe.
abstractvision
03-19 11:31 AM
I called USCIS this morning and the lady took 3 mnute to explain me why the delay was happening. She mentioned that they will conduct a sweep on Fri Apr 4th to determine the I-485 cases in light of new visa bulletin and that cases will be assigned to IOs by Mon Apr 14th.
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.
Not that I believe on help desk type of info with their primary job is get the caller off the phone but I have to admit that she was polite.
I will call again on Apr 4th and keep the forum updated.
more...
pictures life quotes marilyn monroe
Gate_jj
05-07 09:56 PM
My friend was on situation. He consulted lawyer. If already change of status is applied from October 1 you will be in H1. But if you go out of country and come back before October 1st with L1 visa, you are COS will not be valid. Youcan continue in L1. But only problem is you can not switch to H1 later without stamping.
Can you please explain the above ....
I am on L1 and wife on L2 with EAD , Now I applied for H1 for both of us with a New company. I would like continue with the L1 from the old company, in case only I get the H1 !!.
None of the explaination says this explicitly , does any one know something more in detail ..
Thanks for all the help
-j
Can you please explain the above ....
I am on L1 and wife on L2 with EAD , Now I applied for H1 for both of us with a New company. I would like continue with the L1 from the old company, in case only I get the H1 !!.
None of the explaination says this explicitly , does any one know something more in detail ..
Thanks for all the help
-j
dresses Marilyn - Flashback of 50#39;s
nozerd
12-27 06:46 PM
Dude,
That is what they are afraid off. They want you to go to your home country and not sneak into their country.
Many ppl go through European airports during transit and then ask for Political asyslum. Many Tamil Tigers did that so did sardars during khalistan times.
if i'm travelling TO India and transiting through paris/london
and I have an Indian passport, WHY should I need to show a US Visa to avoid a transit visa? Does this make any sense? I'm not going to the US?????
That is what they are afraid off. They want you to go to your home country and not sneak into their country.
Many ppl go through European airports during transit and then ask for Political asyslum. Many Tamil Tigers did that so did sardars during khalistan times.
if i'm travelling TO India and transiting through paris/london
and I have an Indian passport, WHY should I need to show a US Visa to avoid a transit visa? Does this make any sense? I'm not going to the US?????
more...
makeup tattoos of marilyn monroe
.png "i Marilyn Monroes utsagn")
a_yaja
12-28 03:05 PM
You mean 529? Thanks of telling. I was planning to open an account for my kid's college.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
Your kid has to be a US citizen/ GC holder. You don't need to be either - except tht you need to be a resident of US with SSN (not sure if you need to be a legal resident). I live in Ohio and I opend a 529 for my daughter.
Are you sure they wont let you open an account even if the kid is american citizen by birth?
Your kid has to be a US citizen/ GC holder. You don't need to be either - except tht you need to be a resident of US with SSN (not sure if you need to be a legal resident). I live in Ohio and I opend a 529 for my daughter.
girlfriend hairstyles love quotes marilyn
h1techSlave
07-28 03:04 PM
Would you be offended if the image of Ganesh is used on a sack of rice or sugar or a bottle of cooking oil? If not, then what's the problem in using it on an alcoholic beverage bottle?
I always thought in the same angle. Why people are so jittery about alcohol? Alcohol is harmless in reasonable quantities. It is bad when consumed excessively; so are oil, rice etc. What's the big deal about alcohol alone?
I always thought in the same angle. Why people are so jittery about alcohol? Alcohol is harmless in reasonable quantities. It is bad when consumed excessively; so are oil, rice etc. What's the big deal about alcohol alone?
hairstyles Marilyn Monroe Quotes
GCneeded
10-25 01:52 PM
PD is Dec 2002 / EB3 India / I 140 Approved / 485 Pending
pappu
06-10 12:28 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
vandanaverdia
09-11 12:45 PM
This aint my fight... This aint your fight..
THIS IS OUR FIGHT!!!
We need to come together & let our voices be heard!!!
Come to DC...
There is very little time & lots to achieve...
There are miles to go before I sleep.....
THIS IS OUR FIGHT!!!
We need to come together & let our voices be heard!!!
Come to DC...
There is very little time & lots to achieve...
There are miles to go before I sleep.....
No comments:
Post a Comment