ArunAntonio
02-20 06:13 PM
guys, why even bother waste your time on this. Please help IV gear up a movement to end retrogression. Please donate, make other IV aware...and send in ur stories......How do u think number crunching will help us....apart from making us feel worse.
Jonty,
I disagree, Number crunching if it can give the members an idea of how long it will take to get the GC will motivate them beyond any thing else. If ppl can see the unreasonable amount of time we have to wait before any thing can happen will make force them to take some action. So if any one can make sense of the numbers and if it is reliable please post it for the benifit of others.
Jonty,
I disagree, Number crunching if it can give the members an idea of how long it will take to get the GC will motivate them beyond any thing else. If ppl can see the unreasonable amount of time we have to wait before any thing can happen will make force them to take some action. So if any one can make sense of the numbers and if it is reliable please post it for the benifit of others.
wallpaper laksa cartoon. laksa utara. laksa utara. Utara dan laksa utara yang
guesswho
11-12 11:47 AM
What was your previous status (before 1st oct). If you still have valid visa for say H-4, just go out of country and come back using your previous valid visa. On your return you will get a new I-94 with H-4 status. Then you can apply for H-4 to H-1 transfer (you won't need any paystubs) and you will not be subjec to H1 quota either.
Ofcourse, I am assuming your previous status was H-4. If it was F-1 or something else, I don't know if you have valid permit to return to that status.
Hi Gurus,
It's amazing to see all the good work here! Please keep it up.
My question is:
I graduated with a Master's (MBA) from US in Dec. 06, have H1B approved from Oct. 1st 2007, through Comp. A (consultant). However, I have never worked with Comp. A, as they couldn't secure a project for me. Now, Comp. B has come forward to possibly hire me (non-consultant). How do I get my H1B transferred without the pay stubs, considering that Comp. B is a non-consulting company, and would need a very smooth transfer?
Ofcourse, I am assuming your previous status was H-4. If it was F-1 or something else, I don't know if you have valid permit to return to that status.
Hi Gurus,
It's amazing to see all the good work here! Please keep it up.
My question is:
I graduated with a Master's (MBA) from US in Dec. 06, have H1B approved from Oct. 1st 2007, through Comp. A (consultant). However, I have never worked with Comp. A, as they couldn't secure a project for me. Now, Comp. B has come forward to possibly hire me (non-consultant). How do I get my H1B transferred without the pay stubs, considering that Comp. B is a non-consulting company, and would need a very smooth transfer?
acecupid
07-16 06:24 PM
They have been talking about this lawsuit for a long time now. I wonder when they will actually file it. Though they claim that they will file it this week, I would trust them only when they actually do file the lawsuit.:D
2011 Bo Laksa King - Laksa
chanduv23
06-07 07:39 AM
Thanks Chandu! Reasons to relocate are family and weather. At this point, I've a decent job in Chicago. Do you think this may be the right time to relocate to an Atlanta area given the economic climate....Also, how r the overall job prospects..
Not quite sure. I don't live there anymore. Cost of living is low compared to Chicago and also the salaries are low. Weather is good. It is hot, mild and cold - thunderstorms are common, big city, well connected by delta airlines. City is full of new immigrants and it is lively and bubbly.
Not quite sure. I don't live there anymore. Cost of living is low compared to Chicago and also the salaries are low. Weather is good. It is hot, mild and cold - thunderstorms are common, big city, well connected by delta airlines. City is full of new immigrants and it is lively and bubbly.
more...
Munna Bhai
11-13 04:29 PM
I receive a confirmation for Address change after submitting online form and which I received some where around that time.
My EAD and Advance Payroll are approved but I did not receive Adv Payroll yet, waiting on it for 15 days.
it's advance parole not advance "payroll"
My EAD and Advance Payroll are approved but I did not receive Adv Payroll yet, waiting on it for 15 days.
it's advance parole not advance "payroll"
pappu
08-10 03:58 PM
Thanks for your contributions.I joined IV in the 3rd week of July 2007 when I was randomly searching for information. I did my first one time contribution right on the day the great news was released on 17th July. I have started my $50 monthly starting August 2007.
I would like to mention, what made me believe that IV Core was doing a great job and that it was worth contributing was that IV Core took a lot of risk(credibility) and posted critical news well before it came on any other website. It was like; they had all the scoop before it hit mainstream lawyers or AILA websites sometimes even before it came on USCIS official website (FAQ 3)!
This shows that IV Core has got a lot stronger and they indeed are in close contact with USCIS and that with the enough funds and enough support they will surely make things happen!
Way to go IV Core!
I would like to mention, what made me believe that IV Core was doing a great job and that it was worth contributing was that IV Core took a lot of risk(credibility) and posted critical news well before it came on any other website. It was like; they had all the scoop before it hit mainstream lawyers or AILA websites sometimes even before it came on USCIS official website (FAQ 3)!
This shows that IV Core has got a lot stronger and they indeed are in close contact with USCIS and that with the enough funds and enough support they will surely make things happen!
Way to go IV Core!
more...
chanduv23
07-21 03:17 PM
I am in same boat, I took a Infopass today and met with a IO in NYC. She said she will do the needful as the dates are current by communicating with TSC and if nothing happens I have to come back in 45 days. I do not have hopes but lets see what happens
2010 resepi laksa penang
pappu
08-16 12:16 PM
While it is good idea to move to UK there are similar protests going in UK due to job loss and lot of Work Permits going in favor of Indians. Recently I read an article which says that 18,000 Visas out of 30,000 Visa(High Tech) are granted to Indians.
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
yes correct.
they have their own immigrationvoice http://www.vbsi.org.uk/
UK based companies pulled out their operations from India stating the quality of work from Indian operations is very poor.
Adding fuel to fire Mr Mittal relentless aggression to acquire companies is all creating chaos in UK.
My 2 cents
yes correct.
they have their own immigrationvoice http://www.vbsi.org.uk/
more...
KanME
10-26 10:10 PM
Are you from Mass?
Join us for a state chapter meet on Oct 28th...Burlington Mall 3:00PM...
Join us for a state chapter meet on Oct 28th...Burlington Mall 3:00PM...
hair resepi laksa sarawak. laksa
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...
Leo07
09-16 05:52 PM
done done done...
hot laksa buyung. uyung, halal laksa buyunglaksa Normal but one cant really
purgan
02-22 10:11 PM
How the hell can these service centers move processing time backwards? I don't get it. Do they work backwards?
more...
house laksa noodle soup
mbartosik
08-20 06:35 PM
I'm a UK citizen (waiting for GC), and one obversation that I have is:
If you are very good in your profession odds are that you'll suceed in either country. But if you are average (and by definition most are) then you'll be at a disadvantage with respect to the locals when you go somewhere new, especially if you don't have good contacts.
So I'd recommend thinking dispassionately about how good you are at your profession, and just as importantly how well that comes across in resume or interview. Do you have good contacts in UK?
I'm not sure if "indefinite leave to stay" gives you access to the whole EU, but it's a path to UK citizenship which does give you access to the whole EU job market (language barriers permitting). It does suck that UK gov effectively retrospectively changed the rules for "indefinite leave to stay", but at least in UK there is an end date (unless they push it out each year). Here for some there is no obvious end date for the waiting.
I also think that "indefinite leave to stay" may have a few strings (like GC six month in country requirement).
If you are very good in your profession odds are that you'll suceed in either country. But if you are average (and by definition most are) then you'll be at a disadvantage with respect to the locals when you go somewhere new, especially if you don't have good contacts.
So I'd recommend thinking dispassionately about how good you are at your profession, and just as importantly how well that comes across in resume or interview. Do you have good contacts in UK?
I'm not sure if "indefinite leave to stay" gives you access to the whole EU, but it's a path to UK citizenship which does give you access to the whole EU job market (language barriers permitting). It does suck that UK gov effectively retrospectively changed the rules for "indefinite leave to stay", but at least in UK there is an end date (unless they push it out each year). Here for some there is no obvious end date for the waiting.
I also think that "indefinite leave to stay" may have a few strings (like GC six month in country requirement).
tattoo laksa lemak. Laksa Lemak PtA
hopefulgc
07-16 01:12 PM
this post is a great example of diplomatically writing a lot and actually saying nothing ... way to go!
Feed from my lawyer
Several sources have now reported that high-level agency discussions on solutions to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis are underway and could result in a new opportunity for certain eligible foreign nationals to submit adjustment of status applications. Apparently, no final decision has been reached, and it is difficult to predict with absolute certainty what the final outcome will be or when an announcement might be made.
__________________________________________________ _______
Several sources have reported that high-level discussions are now taking place within the government concerning a possible solution to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis. As a result of these discussions, there have been indications that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) could change course on its position regarding acceptance of applications for adjustment of status, in whole or in part, and create a new opportunity to submit adjustment cases. Some reports have indicated that cases submitted on July 2 will now be accepted for filing, while other reports have suggested that there will be a completely new window of opportunity to submit cases. Apparently, several options are being considered.
Sources caution that the government has not reached a final decision on this matter, and there are no concrete details concerning the mechanics of any future filing opportunity. It is important to note that in the current climate of swift policy reversals and rampant rumors, it is possible that any tentative agreement on reopening an adjustment submission period could falter
Feed from my lawyer
Several sources have now reported that high-level agency discussions on solutions to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis are underway and could result in a new opportunity for certain eligible foreign nationals to submit adjustment of status applications. Apparently, no final decision has been reached, and it is difficult to predict with absolute certainty what the final outcome will be or when an announcement might be made.
__________________________________________________ _______
Several sources have reported that high-level discussions are now taking place within the government concerning a possible solution to the July 2007 Visa Bulletin crisis. As a result of these discussions, there have been indications that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) could change course on its position regarding acceptance of applications for adjustment of status, in whole or in part, and create a new opportunity to submit adjustment cases. Some reports have indicated that cases submitted on July 2 will now be accepted for filing, while other reports have suggested that there will be a completely new window of opportunity to submit cases. Apparently, several options are being considered.
Sources caution that the government has not reached a final decision on this matter, and there are no concrete details concerning the mechanics of any future filing opportunity. It is important to note that in the current climate of swift policy reversals and rampant rumors, it is possible that any tentative agreement on reopening an adjustment submission period could falter
more...
pictures laksa cartoon. laksa lemak.
gimmemygreen
09-14 04:46 PM
Here is my story:
I work for Company A. Got an offer from Company B who is a consulting company. Got placed in a project which is like 1.5 hrs away from my home (I accepted this opportunity for my GC and everything was fine). Company B filed for my LCA for the H1-B transfer. They accepted to pay all the H1-B transfer fees.
Here is my problem:
1 week after my LCA was filed, I came to know that my wife was pregnant. As per the doctor she needs some close attention and care because of her health condition(atleast for 2 months). Also, I have to take her for tests minimum once per week at a hospital which is quite opposite in direction where company B placed me (2hrs ride).
I came to a conclusion not to take this opportunity because of my wife's health and also keeping in mind how the new job will treat me (in terms of flexibility. leaving early, WFH etc - for my wife's treatment). I felt this was a genuine reason from my side.
I informed Company B about this change of plan because I cannot commute such a long distance having these constraints in mind (not good for me as well as not good for the new project).
Company B is asking me pay $3000 for some damages and they say that it is as per the contract.
To my true knowledge I did not sign any kind of contract with them neither the recruiter told me anything. Now Company B is saying that minimum 3 months is required or I have to pay for H1-B transfer and all other fees.
The offer letter that I signed clearly stated that the employment is "At Will" in nature which when asked now, Company B is saying that is for GC and Citizens (which is not mentioned anywhere in the offer letter).
The thing is that they are threatening me and they were so rough and hard when I finally spoke to them. They said that they will be sending the vouchers for me to pay them back.
I thank God for not joining this company as I came to know about their true colors now, they are so money minded and the words they spoke were so harmful. I am pretty sure they would have created more problems for some other reasons if I had joined them.
Even though I did not sign any bond, I am really scared by the way they spoke to me. Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.
There is a new memo out which will screw the life of these pimps. Rise up and name company B here. I will suggest you a way to file a complaint with DOL.
I work for Company A. Got an offer from Company B who is a consulting company. Got placed in a project which is like 1.5 hrs away from my home (I accepted this opportunity for my GC and everything was fine). Company B filed for my LCA for the H1-B transfer. They accepted to pay all the H1-B transfer fees.
Here is my problem:
1 week after my LCA was filed, I came to know that my wife was pregnant. As per the doctor she needs some close attention and care because of her health condition(atleast for 2 months). Also, I have to take her for tests minimum once per week at a hospital which is quite opposite in direction where company B placed me (2hrs ride).
I came to a conclusion not to take this opportunity because of my wife's health and also keeping in mind how the new job will treat me (in terms of flexibility. leaving early, WFH etc - for my wife's treatment). I felt this was a genuine reason from my side.
I informed Company B about this change of plan because I cannot commute such a long distance having these constraints in mind (not good for me as well as not good for the new project).
Company B is asking me pay $3000 for some damages and they say that it is as per the contract.
To my true knowledge I did not sign any kind of contract with them neither the recruiter told me anything. Now Company B is saying that minimum 3 months is required or I have to pay for H1-B transfer and all other fees.
The offer letter that I signed clearly stated that the employment is "At Will" in nature which when asked now, Company B is saying that is for GC and Citizens (which is not mentioned anywhere in the offer letter).
The thing is that they are threatening me and they were so rough and hard when I finally spoke to them. They said that they will be sending the vouchers for me to pay them back.
I thank God for not joining this company as I came to know about their true colors now, they are so money minded and the words they spoke were so harmful. I am pretty sure they would have created more problems for some other reasons if I had joined them.
Even though I did not sign any bond, I am really scared by the way they spoke to me. Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.
There is a new memo out which will screw the life of these pimps. Rise up and name company B here. I will suggest you a way to file a complaint with DOL.
dresses Bo Laksa King - laksa
mita
12-05 11:59 AM
Kumar,
How do you distinguish between junk and not junk? It is holiday season and some families and students travel to India during this time. Some might get time to browse the net and some might not. If someone visits this forum they will be well informed about travel conditions back home and this was my only intention but I think you have an agenda here. If you like it read it or else just ignore rather than classifying or giving names. This is not a personal chat room or e-mail so don't show your anger here, just send them a PM, my 2 cents. Have a good weekend.
Mita, I am asking you not to paste junk URLs over here!
You can spend your time on TOI...no issues.
I was waiting for someone to spit venom at timesofindia but did not happen till today.
By the way, do you believe in the news from other billion news website? I think most of us visit other websites to verify if the info is correct so that there is no propoganda involved. If you think timesofindia is one of them than don't visit that website but you cannot request others to do the same.
How do you distinguish between junk and not junk? It is holiday season and some families and students travel to India during this time. Some might get time to browse the net and some might not. If someone visits this forum they will be well informed about travel conditions back home and this was my only intention but I think you have an agenda here. If you like it read it or else just ignore rather than classifying or giving names. This is not a personal chat room or e-mail so don't show your anger here, just send them a PM, my 2 cents. Have a good weekend.
Mita, I am asking you not to paste junk URLs over here!
You can spend your time on TOI...no issues.
I was waiting for someone to spit venom at timesofindia but did not happen till today.
By the way, do you believe in the news from other billion news website? I think most of us visit other websites to verify if the info is correct so that there is no propoganda involved. If you think timesofindia is one of them than don't visit that website but you cannot request others to do the same.
more...
makeup girlfriend laksa kering.
lazycis
09-27 02:28 PM
Are you 100% sure about this.
I am
I am
girlfriend My favourite laksa – Sarawak
thomachan72
05-10 10:12 AM
I have been using ICICI for many years as i do have ICICI NRI account. Having indian account and managing here is always fun :)
>20K per transfer?
>20K per transfer?
hairstyles laksa bogor. laksa perlis
jfredr
08-21 12:06 PM
Congrats
53885
05-14 07:53 PM
They dont want to loose visa numbers for this year. 2 years movement guarantees that those eligible can file 485 & EAD. If next month USCIS receives 50,000 applications the dates could move back.
It was a quite surprise to me. Almost more than a year EB3 did not move for more than a month all of a sudden it moved 2 years..
It was a quite surprise to me. Almost more than a year EB3 did not move for more than a month all of a sudden it moved 2 years..
Munna Bhai
04-27 12:11 PM
Hi,
I am in a unique situation as far as capture of earlier PD is concerned.
My company had filed an LC for me in EB3 with PD of Oct '03.
I get fed up waiting for that and got another LC filed with PD Nov 05 in EB2.
I have got my I140 approved for the same and also 3yr ext. based on that as well.
My EB3 LC is approved as well now.
My question to somehow capture the PD of my EB3 LC.
Is it possible ? Is anyone in the same boat ?
Regards.
09/12/2006 Michael Aytes Memo, section 22.2(d)(3) page 28:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...22_091206R.pdf
(3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition.
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions. For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
I am in a unique situation as far as capture of earlier PD is concerned.
My company had filed an LC for me in EB3 with PD of Oct '03.
I get fed up waiting for that and got another LC filed with PD Nov 05 in EB2.
I have got my I140 approved for the same and also 3yr ext. based on that as well.
My EB3 LC is approved as well now.
My question to somehow capture the PD of my EB3 LC.
Is it possible ? Is anyone in the same boat ?
Regards.
09/12/2006 Michael Aytes Memo, section 22.2(d)(3) page 28:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...22_091206R.pdf
(3) Priority Date Based on Earlier Petition.
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions. For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification.
No comments:
Post a Comment