pd_recapturing
09-26 10:51 AM
You made my day. Thanks so much. :):):):):):):)
I don't understand why people are right now so worried about priority date retrogression. If you have passed 180 days after I140 approval, go ahead, change your job and incase your 485 gets denied, reapply with new employer, with new new job description, using old PD and get GC soon as your priority date will be current. Am I missing something?
There is no way I am going to spend 6-7 years in the same job with the same title(maybe even same company).
ohhhh wow !! .. Man ...It not so easy as it looks on paper ...U will find tons of ppl in the stage of limbo after doing all this ... (including me though :(
My sincere advice, DO not even think about it ..
I don't understand why people are right now so worried about priority date retrogression. If you have passed 180 days after I140 approval, go ahead, change your job and incase your 485 gets denied, reapply with new employer, with new new job description, using old PD and get GC soon as your priority date will be current. Am I missing something?
There is no way I am going to spend 6-7 years in the same job with the same title(maybe even same company).
ohhhh wow !! .. Man ...It not so easy as it looks on paper ...U will find tons of ppl in the stage of limbo after doing all this ... (including me though :(
My sincere advice, DO not even think about it ..
wallpaper prince william raf uniform
diptam
07-17 12:09 AM
I mean i filed without both of those. Theyare required in the 140 phase , not in 485.
But keep them handy - in case they wants mail by next day air
Hi,
My attorney is requesting that I need to submit Tax return for filing AOS.
I had sent W2 forms
Is tax return separate from W2 , I am confused..:confused:
Pls help
But keep them handy - in case they wants mail by next day air
Hi,
My attorney is requesting that I need to submit Tax return for filing AOS.
I had sent W2 forms
Is tax return separate from W2 , I am confused..:confused:
Pls help
tnite
07-30 02:19 PM
I wouldnt be surprised if this thread is referenced by numbersusa and alipac.us as " H1B's using anchor babies to get Green cards"
They did have it in their fax campaign but removed it.
They did have it in their fax campaign but removed it.
2011 prince william speedo. Prince William Middleton said
logiclife
08-03 07:23 PM
Hi logiclife,
I agree with you. You're spot on. My other friend, please take a note of Logiclife's comments.
Do you have any sections from USCIS, which states that there is no need of job duties on the experience letter and just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. much appreciated. Thx.
No, I dont have any code or INA section for that. And I never said that just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. No, that wont suffice, coz that only shows what happened in the past. The employer letter is supposed to assure USCIS that the job offer is still valid and if USCIS gives you greencard then the employer is still offering employment which was the basis for filing greencard. The future component is a must. What happened in past and what happened so far (up until 485 filing) is irrelevant. Therefore just the title and dates of employment ARE NOT ENOUGH.
What is relevant is the job described in labor cert is still available to you IN FUTURE and whether employer is willing to say it on a letter to USCIS that "Hey, take care of this guy's 485 coz I still plan to hire him on XYZ position IN FUTURE ".
I am telling you from my own experience with what my lawyer had prepared for my HR to sign.
My employer's letter simply states that A) they will pay me X amount at the minimum (which is my current salary) and B) the job is still being offered as per job described in ETA 750 and I-140.
That covers everything. Labor cert has job description. 140 has other credentials. If a letter with 485 says that job offer is still valid a per job described in labor and 140, that covers everything.
I agree with you. You're spot on. My other friend, please take a note of Logiclife's comments.
Do you have any sections from USCIS, which states that there is no need of job duties on the experience letter and just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. much appreciated. Thx.
No, I dont have any code or INA section for that. And I never said that just the job title and dates of employment will suffice. No, that wont suffice, coz that only shows what happened in the past. The employer letter is supposed to assure USCIS that the job offer is still valid and if USCIS gives you greencard then the employer is still offering employment which was the basis for filing greencard. The future component is a must. What happened in past and what happened so far (up until 485 filing) is irrelevant. Therefore just the title and dates of employment ARE NOT ENOUGH.
What is relevant is the job described in labor cert is still available to you IN FUTURE and whether employer is willing to say it on a letter to USCIS that "Hey, take care of this guy's 485 coz I still plan to hire him on XYZ position IN FUTURE ".
I am telling you from my own experience with what my lawyer had prepared for my HR to sign.
My employer's letter simply states that A) they will pay me X amount at the minimum (which is my current salary) and B) the job is still being offered as per job described in ETA 750 and I-140.
That covers everything. Labor cert has job description. 140 has other credentials. If a letter with 485 says that job offer is still valid a per job described in labor and 140, that covers everything.
more...
WillIBLucky
12-22 01:48 PM
I did not say that you cannot. I only said if the previous I140 was revoked due to fraud by USICS then you cannot port the PD to your new application.
Yes even if the I140 is cancelled by previous employer but was clean then you can still use the PD with your new application.
Check in the Sheela murthy chat session dated : December 18, 2006 and search for "my employer cancels I-I40?"
Looks like we can port the priority date ..., even our employers cancels I-140....
Yes even if the I140 is cancelled by previous employer but was clean then you can still use the PD with your new application.
Check in the Sheela murthy chat session dated : December 18, 2006 and search for "my employer cancels I-I40?"
Looks like we can port the priority date ..., even our employers cancels I-140....
piyu7444
05-08 02:21 PM
:confused:
I am changing job and moving to EAD from h1b. My 140 is approved and 485 has been pending more than 180 days. I am in EB2 category.
Question 1 - New employer wants to inform USCIS about job change and I dont want to do so as it just might delay AOS process? suggestions/thoughsts?
Question 2 - New employer wants to apply for EAD and AP via corporate attorney and I prefer that my attorney do that but if i will have no choice I will have to give up BUT can corporate lawyers apply for my EAD and AP without me changing my legal rep with USCIS?
Question 3 - The job title was "Sr Systems Analyst" and now it would be "System Quality Analyst 5" 5 is the highest level in this company after which it goes to Tech. Manager. I dont see issue with the title...do you see any issue? (job description are similar-I would say about 70%)
Question 4 - Salary at the time of filing 140 was 60k offered for the Sr. System Analyst position and now with the new job is 100k. Can that be a problem?
I am changing job and moving to EAD from h1b. My 140 is approved and 485 has been pending more than 180 days. I am in EB2 category.
Question 1 - New employer wants to inform USCIS about job change and I dont want to do so as it just might delay AOS process? suggestions/thoughsts?
Question 2 - New employer wants to apply for EAD and AP via corporate attorney and I prefer that my attorney do that but if i will have no choice I will have to give up BUT can corporate lawyers apply for my EAD and AP without me changing my legal rep with USCIS?
Question 3 - The job title was "Sr Systems Analyst" and now it would be "System Quality Analyst 5" 5 is the highest level in this company after which it goes to Tech. Manager. I dont see issue with the title...do you see any issue? (job description are similar-I would say about 70%)
Question 4 - Salary at the time of filing 140 was 60k offered for the Sr. System Analyst position and now with the new job is 100k. Can that be a problem?
more...
Humhongekamyab
07-15 02:14 PM
All,
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Congrats buddy.
What is your priority date?
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Congrats buddy.
What is your priority date?
2010 prince william speedo
JazzByTheBay
07-11 10:03 PM
Thanks to the person who posted the link to the Ombundsman report earlier - this is beginning to make sense now.
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
USCIS Ombundsman report from JUNE 2007 says:
"For example, when employment-based visas are not used during the year they are authorized, they are lost and are not available for future use without special legislation. In FY 06, over 10,000 employment-based visas were lost, even though USCIS had an estimated 100,000 to 150,000 pending applications for employment-based green cards.36 - Based on USCIS use of visa numbers as of May 2007, at present consumption rates approximately 40,000 visas will be lost in FY 07 without a dramatic increase in USCIS requests of visa numbers.37
- As illustrated below, since 1994 there have been over 218,000 un-recaptured employment-based visas lost due to underutilization of the employment-based visas."
Dept of State: Sees visa numbers not being used, chances of visas going unutilized/unused/wasted/lost again this year. Makes July visa bulletin CURRENT for all countries & categories.
USCIS: Scrambles to approve as many visas as possible to 1) Prove they're working hard, in light of the Ombundsman Report from June 2) Save themselves from the avalanche of I-485s, EADs and AP filings in June, knowing 3) Filing fees go up like crazy on 30th July.
End Result: More visa numbers requested (but they didn't complete issuing all of them, even over the weekend).
As things stand, if they approved stuff on 1st July, it means visa numbers were in fact available on 1st July.
If they approved without completing FBI check - that's going to raise a stink and isn't entirely legal anyways.
If they *still had visa numbers available on July 2* - request from DoS but not approved, they're in bigger trouble, imho.
Anybody thinks the above makes sense?
jazz
more...
baburob2
02-16 01:17 PM
Hi Logiclife
The 2004-2005 more usuage of EB visas for Indians is done because those were approved through AC21's unused visas i believe between 1999-2000 which are quota independent and not just from the annual quota of 140K. Hence in 2004-2005 there were more usuage. Starting from 2006 only thing left is the annual quota of 140K with per country quota of 7% at the max which has to be split among several EB categories in some proportions (roughly 1/3 among EB1, EB2, Eb3).The spillovers within 7% alone can be redistributed within a country's EB quota in the final quarter of the year. Hence the max India can get is 7% no matter how much gets spilled over from the rest of the world. THe only way to get the spillover back into the picture is another law enactment everytime it happens to get it back which is slow and painful process. Hence in nutshell to remove retrogression the easiest way is to remove country cap is or increase it . Else it is always going to stay even if annual quota is increased or through anyother measures. Hence I would recommend positively IV to focus on doing it and not mere increasing the quota.
The 2004-2005 more usuage of EB visas for Indians is done because those were approved through AC21's unused visas i believe between 1999-2000 which are quota independent and not just from the annual quota of 140K. Hence in 2004-2005 there were more usuage. Starting from 2006 only thing left is the annual quota of 140K with per country quota of 7% at the max which has to be split among several EB categories in some proportions (roughly 1/3 among EB1, EB2, Eb3).The spillovers within 7% alone can be redistributed within a country's EB quota in the final quarter of the year. Hence the max India can get is 7% no matter how much gets spilled over from the rest of the world. THe only way to get the spillover back into the picture is another law enactment everytime it happens to get it back which is slow and painful process. Hence in nutshell to remove retrogression the easiest way is to remove country cap is or increase it . Else it is always going to stay even if annual quota is increased or through anyother measures. Hence I would recommend positively IV to focus on doing it and not mere increasing the quota.
hair prince william kate engagement
Libra
08-10 02:58 PM
thanks another_one
more...
jkays94
04-09 11:22 AM
Its still better to try than not to try at all. If any IV members are in Sensenbrenner's, Peter King's (NY) (co-sponsor HR4437) districts as well as Lamar Smith's (TX) they could try and set up some meetings. I think meetings may potentially have a positive effect. As is evident from other postings, some congressional staff members do not know the difference between GC's and H1-Bs, others view high skilled workers the same way they view low skilled workers, and others have no idea about the hardships EB applicants go through, yet it is these same staff members who are charged with keeping the law makers informed or conducting research. While it might be futile to try in some of these cases, it doesn't hurt to do so.
hot Studly
eb3India
02-21 11:08 AM
who really cares what they put up on those stupdi dates,
they can make up anything and call the that as a law, no body to question them, not checks and balances
they can make up anything and call the that as a law, no body to question them, not checks and balances
more...
house prince william speedo
cableching
10-20 11:44 AM
You can go visit India after your AP has been applied for, and you can ask your lawyer ( if you are using one ) to send the docs to you in India , so that you can come back with the new approved AP, off course you can't enter USA on an expired AP.
My lawyer has confirmed that one is only required to be present in the USA when applying and it's recommended that one is in US when it's approved, but due to the varying time USCIS is taking to process AP applications that is not a requirement and they can forward the documents to someone not in US.
You can go out of Country after applying for an AP, using an old unexpired AP, but you must return before the old AP expires??? This is what I read somewhere. You may not be able to use the New AP which is approved after you leave the country.
I read it somewhere! Just take openion of a good lawyer, before taking such an action.
My lawyer has confirmed that one is only required to be present in the USA when applying and it's recommended that one is in US when it's approved, but due to the varying time USCIS is taking to process AP applications that is not a requirement and they can forward the documents to someone not in US.
You can go out of Country after applying for an AP, using an old unexpired AP, but you must return before the old AP expires??? This is what I read somewhere. You may not be able to use the New AP which is approved after you leave the country.
I read it somewhere! Just take openion of a good lawyer, before taking such an action.
tattoo prince william speedo prince
raj2007
02-18 10:32 PM
Unfortunately, we won't be able to do anything in your wife's matter. The people you are referring to as the ones whose cases got accepted are the ones with bounced checks. There is a difference between the manner in which USCIS treats cases with bounced checks and cases where checks are missing, are in an incorrect amount, there is a mismatch between words and figures in the check, check is not dated, check is not signed, etc.
In the first category, there is prima fascie evidecne that the check is in the proper amount, check is dated, signed, made payable to the proper authority. In those cases, the USCIS considers bounced checks as a matter for collection. The reason that there is a difference is that in the first case, the properly signed check IS NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT AND COMPLETELY VALID UNDER LAW.
In your case, the check was deficient because it put the party (the USCIS/Government) on notice of a defect. A party to whom a defective negotiable instrument is given with notice of the defect does not become a HOLDER IN DUE COURSE (VERY IMPORTANT UNDER THE LAW ). IN OTHER WORDS, THE CHECK LOSES ITS POWER OF NEGOTIABILITY UNDER LAW. Even if the Check is deficient that it does not affect its negotiability ( for example, check is not dated, or the check only contains the amount in words), the party to whom it is presented is under no liability to accept the check. For these reasons, THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR WIFE'S MATTER AND THE EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE.
For this reason, I advised you to wait until the PD for your category become current again.
I see no harm to take infopass and explain your situation in person.
In the first category, there is prima fascie evidecne that the check is in the proper amount, check is dated, signed, made payable to the proper authority. In those cases, the USCIS considers bounced checks as a matter for collection. The reason that there is a difference is that in the first case, the properly signed check IS NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT AND COMPLETELY VALID UNDER LAW.
In your case, the check was deficient because it put the party (the USCIS/Government) on notice of a defect. A party to whom a defective negotiable instrument is given with notice of the defect does not become a HOLDER IN DUE COURSE (VERY IMPORTANT UNDER THE LAW ). IN OTHER WORDS, THE CHECK LOSES ITS POWER OF NEGOTIABILITY UNDER LAW. Even if the Check is deficient that it does not affect its negotiability ( for example, check is not dated, or the check only contains the amount in words), the party to whom it is presented is under no liability to accept the check. For these reasons, THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR WIFE'S MATTER AND THE EXAMPLES YOU PROVIDE.
For this reason, I advised you to wait until the PD for your category become current again.
I see no harm to take infopass and explain your situation in person.
more...
pictures prince william speedo prince
eb3_nepa
10-13 03:11 PM
I have ALWAYS gone in T-shirt and Jeans and never had a problem. They dont really care about your appearance, although it is a good idea to dress decently.
dresses speedo pics last summer .
fortune50
07-17 09:24 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
more...
makeup prince william speedo
eb3_nepa
04-27 06:13 PM
Apologise for 2 threads on the same thing. Tried going back and modifying the text a little bit, only to create a new thread.
girlfriend prince william speedo prince
RanchCharm
07-17 08:47 PM
Hi Sivamayam,
Thanks for the information. I will listen to the calls. It is soothing though to here something favourable.
I will keep checking this forum & others for similar questions & replies.
Thanks,
Nachi
Thanks for the information. I will listen to the calls. It is soothing though to here something favourable.
I will keep checking this forum & others for similar questions & replies.
Thanks,
Nachi
hairstyles prince william speedo apartments prince william.
sands_14
09-23 09:59 AM
I e-filed my EAD and AP;but when I sent the supporting documentation to the PO Box in Mesquite,Texas;it was not delivered on Friday,a notice was left.I am very anxious if it comes back.Is there a Phone Number I can call to ask them Reason for Non-delivery;what should I do???Is there an address different from the PO Box where I can FEDEX
Madhuri
04-06 10:05 PM
Is the bill really dead? There is a different news on Yahoo.
Can anybody explain?
Can anybody explain?
DDLMODES
10-09 07:47 PM
Service request ?? What is that ??
Anyway, I understand that many people are in the same situation and that makes it a bit better. I will wait... Thanks for the replies...
Its just scary that after all these years they might consider the case abandoned if you don't receive the damn FP letter. Some guys didn't even get the receipts yet. I feel for those...
P.S.: Anybody got the case closed because they missed the FP appointment ? Is there a way to reopen it ?
Thanks again guys !
Anyway, I understand that many people are in the same situation and that makes it a bit better. I will wait... Thanks for the replies...
Its just scary that after all these years they might consider the case abandoned if you don't receive the damn FP letter. Some guys didn't even get the receipts yet. I feel for those...
P.S.: Anybody got the case closed because they missed the FP appointment ? Is there a way to reopen it ?
Thanks again guys !
No comments:
Post a Comment