gctex
02-11 05:41 PM
I guess the confusion about the future employer being unable to extend the H1 after one enters on AP may have come a couple of responses on Murthy's forum:
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/ch071006_P.html
Chat User : I changed jobs. H1B transfer was approved in the U.S. (no visa stamp). Can I keep H-1 status if using AP to travel?
Attorney Murthy : A person may reenter on the AP status and is legally allowed to extend H1B status after that in the U.S. but cannot be on H1B status if the person entered as a parolee. A person has to enter on the H1B status to be in H1B status but is allowed to file an H1B extension if s/he continues to work for the H1B sponsoring employer.
Chat User : Informative website, Murthyji. Thanks for the service. Once the EAD is approved, what do you have to do to change from H1B to EAD? Is approval status on the USCIS WebSite enough or do we have to receive it?
Attorney Murthy : A person has to receive the EAD in order to work for a new employer on the EAD. Merely having an approval notice or seeing the approval status on the USCIS WebSite is not sufficient to be able to work legally on the EAD. A person does not need to do anything to switch from H1B to EAD. Merely by working for another employer on an EAD, a person is deemed to abandon the H1B status and opt for the EAD, unless the person requests the new employer to file an H1B petition extension with the new employer, in which case a person maintains both statuses at the same time, which is legally permissible. Only after travel abroad and reentering the U.S., a person has to choose to enter as a parolee or on H1B status, but, then, as stated above, one may revert to H1B status by filing an H1B extension even if one enters as a parolee, if one is still working for the same H1B employer.
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/chat1124_P.html
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/ch071006_P.html
Chat User : I changed jobs. H1B transfer was approved in the U.S. (no visa stamp). Can I keep H-1 status if using AP to travel?
Attorney Murthy : A person may reenter on the AP status and is legally allowed to extend H1B status after that in the U.S. but cannot be on H1B status if the person entered as a parolee. A person has to enter on the H1B status to be in H1B status but is allowed to file an H1B extension if s/he continues to work for the H1B sponsoring employer.
Chat User : Informative website, Murthyji. Thanks for the service. Once the EAD is approved, what do you have to do to change from H1B to EAD? Is approval status on the USCIS WebSite enough or do we have to receive it?
Attorney Murthy : A person has to receive the EAD in order to work for a new employer on the EAD. Merely having an approval notice or seeing the approval status on the USCIS WebSite is not sufficient to be able to work legally on the EAD. A person does not need to do anything to switch from H1B to EAD. Merely by working for another employer on an EAD, a person is deemed to abandon the H1B status and opt for the EAD, unless the person requests the new employer to file an H1B petition extension with the new employer, in which case a person maintains both statuses at the same time, which is legally permissible. Only after travel abroad and reentering the U.S., a person has to choose to enter as a parolee or on H1B status, but, then, as stated above, one may revert to H1B status by filing an H1B extension even if one enters as a parolee, if one is still working for the same H1B employer.
http://www.murthy.com/chatlogs/chat1124_P.html
wallpaper Flag Day, celebrated in the
DesiGuy
09-17 12:27 PM
there are 6 sections in 6020...think they are discussing ammendment to the final section (6th) so hoping ours will be next
JazzByTheBay
12-12 10:16 PM
Excuse my cynicism, but that hasn't quite worked out with the crowd in question (so far... ), has it? :)
Context: the highlighted part in your quote...
jazz
We already have chapters as the first and foremost source of valuable information. Once someone becomes involved and committed, they will signup for monthly contributions themselves. If we have enough of that to guarantee a decent source of recurring income like 20 40 k or whatevr, I dont see the need to deprive some depressed soul surfing the net looking for some reassuring information from having to goto bed in peace.
Context: the highlighted part in your quote...
jazz
We already have chapters as the first and foremost source of valuable information. Once someone becomes involved and committed, they will signup for monthly contributions themselves. If we have enough of that to guarantee a decent source of recurring income like 20 40 k or whatevr, I dont see the need to deprive some depressed soul surfing the net looking for some reassuring information from having to goto bed in peace.
2011 Day Magnet Flag craft the
annsheila79
04-21 07:15 AM
Yes...it proves.
thanks for agreeing with me :)
thanks for agreeing with me :)
more...
thomachan72
10-27 12:58 PM
Congrats alterego !
Are you both physicians ? (the J-1's)
Looking at your RD reminds me of a friend of mine who has a I-485 RD of Dec 2004, but he is in EB3. Unfortunately his NameCheck was not clear even in the July 2007 fiasco, the reason he is still not green !
He and his wife recently sold their house and everything else and left their jobs and moved back to India! Enjoying themselves there while their I-485 application papers turn yellow !
You paid 68K for legal and immigration fees... that is steeep man ! I wonder how...
bought a car to visit the attorney :D:D
Are you both physicians ? (the J-1's)
Looking at your RD reminds me of a friend of mine who has a I-485 RD of Dec 2004, but he is in EB3. Unfortunately his NameCheck was not clear even in the July 2007 fiasco, the reason he is still not green !
He and his wife recently sold their house and everything else and left their jobs and moved back to India! Enjoying themselves there while their I-485 application papers turn yellow !
You paid 68K for legal and immigration fees... that is steeep man ! I wonder how...
bought a car to visit the attorney :D:D
qasleuth
05-14 12:21 PM
and one more point, we are never going to get treated with respect and equality, just get used to it. every American knows we left our country to come to his. he is always gonna look down upon us. Immigrants are never treated with love, respect and dignity, no matter which country they go to. Case in point, Bangladeshi and Nepali migrant workers in India. We treat them like dirt back home, so discrimination against immigrants is part of immigration process. hopefully our ABCD offspring's will face less of it
Excuse me ?? Why did you leave your country and come here ? Your motivations maybe totally different than mine, so don't assume they are the same. For the reason I came over here, why would any 'American' treat me like dirt ? Many countries in Asia are not lands of the immigrant like USA. So your anology of treating migrant workers like 'dirt' to folks over here the same way is totally wrong. Please for heaven sake do some reading before you open your mouth again...you are talking nonsense man....people who are encouraging you are perhaps doing it to see you make a bigger fool of yourself...get off the forums do some reading.
Excuse me ?? Why did you leave your country and come here ? Your motivations maybe totally different than mine, so don't assume they are the same. For the reason I came over here, why would any 'American' treat me like dirt ? Many countries in Asia are not lands of the immigrant like USA. So your anology of treating migrant workers like 'dirt' to folks over here the same way is totally wrong. Please for heaven sake do some reading before you open your mouth again...you are talking nonsense man....people who are encouraging you are perhaps doing it to see you make a bigger fool of yourself...get off the forums do some reading.
more...
pd_recapturing
04-27 12:36 AM
It seems that Indian govt cant do much to raise this issue in WTO.
http://business.rediff.com/report/2009/apr/27/india-can-do-little-on-us-visa-proposal.htm
http://business.rediff.com/report/2009/apr/27/india-can-do-little-on-us-visa-proposal.htm
2010 Free Flag Day Printables:
logiclife
03-08 11:23 AM
The FEAR I see among many people is really pathatic, I know couple of friends does not even want to talk to me on phone about this matter thinking that some one might be listening,
Sometimes, the fears arise from watching too many movies. Like the movie "Enemy of the State" where some govt agencies hunt down Will Smith and unravel his life apart. Remember? Gene Hackman : "US Govt has computers underground that are several square miles and they track every wire, every airwave....".
What a bunch of ****.
Firstly, its a movie. Secondly even if its true, what's there to be afraid of??? If you talk on the phone about legal course of action to lobby, why would you be afraid of.
Like I said, you have to give some credit to the Irish. They have the chutzpah of going to lawmaker's offices in DC and say "I am an illegal...I broke the laws and overstayed my visa...please change to law to make everything ok again for me please...". And our community thinks that someone is listening to their phone conversation about how to raise money and lobby for the legal immigrants?????
Sometimes, the fears arise from watching too many movies. Like the movie "Enemy of the State" where some govt agencies hunt down Will Smith and unravel his life apart. Remember? Gene Hackman : "US Govt has computers underground that are several square miles and they track every wire, every airwave....".
What a bunch of ****.
Firstly, its a movie. Secondly even if its true, what's there to be afraid of??? If you talk on the phone about legal course of action to lobby, why would you be afraid of.
Like I said, you have to give some credit to the Irish. They have the chutzpah of going to lawmaker's offices in DC and say "I am an illegal...I broke the laws and overstayed my visa...please change to law to make everything ok again for me please...". And our community thinks that someone is listening to their phone conversation about how to raise money and lobby for the legal immigrants?????
more...
garamchai2go
01-01 06:36 AM
with all the sescenarios, We can't collect stamped passport on the same dat at chennai? - Is this correct?
while booking appointment I said I will collect my passport at local VFS office.
?
There are few people who got their passport on same day. If your petetion information is already in PIMS database you might passport back get on same day. Good Luck!
while booking appointment I said I will collect my passport at local VFS office.
?
There are few people who got their passport on same day. If your petetion information is already in PIMS database you might passport back get on same day. Good Luck!
hair Flag Day Crafts Pictures
desi485
02-18 02:28 PM
I recently went to South Korea and entered the US on the AP since I didn't feel that I had enough time to wait for my H-1B stamped in my passport at the US emabassy in Seoul. Before leaving the US, I consulted with my attorney on this issue and she assured me that my H-1B is valid as long as I file the extension and maintain terms of the H-1B visa.
This is her opinion in quotes:
"I wanted to emphasize that you do not need to obtain the H visa as long as you have an unexpired Advance Parole document to use instead. To clarify, you are then entering in parolee status but in later filing an H extension or change of employer petition, DHS will terminate the grant of parole and admit you back into H classification. Additionally, if you enter on the advance parole and work consistent with the terms of your underlying current H petition, you are not violating your status nor do you need a separate EAD work card."
I hope this helps.
greenlight: Thank you indeed to share such useful information with rest of us.
As your lawyer used the words "change of employer petition", it seems that one can use AP to travel and still after coming back he/she can file for either extension, amendment or transfer. This answers the main concern that I started this thread for.
Also, on other threads I read that its possible to file H1 amendement even if your H1 is still valid. This is one way to come back to H1 status and get a New I-94 card.
Some one also mentioned that if you have a valid I-797 extenstion approval notice and if you show that at POE to IO, he/she may issue an I-94 till expiry of I-797 (3 years) instead of AP (1 year).
I would appreciate input from others who have some knowledge or experience of above situations.
This is her opinion in quotes:
"I wanted to emphasize that you do not need to obtain the H visa as long as you have an unexpired Advance Parole document to use instead. To clarify, you are then entering in parolee status but in later filing an H extension or change of employer petition, DHS will terminate the grant of parole and admit you back into H classification. Additionally, if you enter on the advance parole and work consistent with the terms of your underlying current H petition, you are not violating your status nor do you need a separate EAD work card."
I hope this helps.
greenlight: Thank you indeed to share such useful information with rest of us.
As your lawyer used the words "change of employer petition", it seems that one can use AP to travel and still after coming back he/she can file for either extension, amendment or transfer. This answers the main concern that I started this thread for.
Also, on other threads I read that its possible to file H1 amendement even if your H1 is still valid. This is one way to come back to H1 status and get a New I-94 card.
Some one also mentioned that if you have a valid I-797 extenstion approval notice and if you show that at POE to IO, he/she may issue an I-94 till expiry of I-797 (3 years) instead of AP (1 year).
I would appreciate input from others who have some knowledge or experience of above situations.
more...
santb1975
06-02 07:17 PM
Keep calling
Called all of them, updated poll:)
Called all of them, updated poll:)
hot Flag Day Crafts Pictures
gk_2000
04-20 02:03 PM
@ryan,
Some here are not the gentlemen whom you would have any pleasure discussing with. Better to leave them alone with their rants
Some here are not the gentlemen whom you would have any pleasure discussing with. Better to leave them alone with their rants
more...
house Easy Flag Day Craft
kdprasad
07-10 09:10 PM
ANYONE who received a rejection who filed on or after July 2nd.!!!!
I haven't seen one at least in this forum.
I haven't seen one at least in this forum.
tattoo Its a GRAND Old Flag!
sin94
03-30 04:35 PM
Question do we have to stop working upon receipt of the denial and wait until receipt of MTR? What are work options when a situation like this occurs
I have used ac21 and moved to a new employer and although my former employer have indicated that they will not revoke the approved I-140 (485 pending since Oct 07) if they do and USCIS does the same situation as described above for me & wife would I be out of status from that period?
Me being the primary applicant and wife the derivative are not using our H1's (I have 9 months remaining of my 6 year period and wife 3 years) I accepted a full time invoking Ac21 with the new company and joined using EAD. My wife has accepted a contract position using her EAD
I read somewhere that if you get a NOID and its the 485 gets rejected (even upon providing supporting documents) are we allowed to work during any of that period? what happens if we respond with MTR? how long will it normally take to respond?
ADVAthanksNCE :) to all
I have used ac21 and moved to a new employer and although my former employer have indicated that they will not revoke the approved I-140 (485 pending since Oct 07) if they do and USCIS does the same situation as described above for me & wife would I be out of status from that period?
Me being the primary applicant and wife the derivative are not using our H1's (I have 9 months remaining of my 6 year period and wife 3 years) I accepted a full time invoking Ac21 with the new company and joined using EAD. My wife has accepted a contract position using her EAD
I read somewhere that if you get a NOID and its the 485 gets rejected (even upon providing supporting documents) are we allowed to work during any of that period? what happens if we respond with MTR? how long will it normally take to respond?
ADVAthanksNCE :) to all
more...
pictures Flag Day Fun: Crafts and
Humhongekamyab
07-02 04:58 PM
We all will have to work to make the injustice visible; only then will the employers start behaving.
We all remember there used to be a IV voice member who used to leave abusive comments to everybody. Once we all made a hue and cry about this Pappu took action against him by disclosing his identity and since that day we have not seen any complaints by members.
We all remember there used to be a IV voice member who used to leave abusive comments to everybody. Once we all made a hue and cry about this Pappu took action against him by disclosing his identity and since that day we have not seen any complaints by members.
dresses Flag Day Crafts Pictures
h1b_slave
02-05 04:40 PM
Not all professions can apply for H1Bs. You need to have specific skills that the US does NOT have. Someone on here had once posted that his wife could not work as a teacher although the school was ready to offer her a job, coz there is no H1B category for teachers. The H1B visa cannot help spouses in all professions. Hence my suggestion.
About how this will solve retrogression, IT WONT. My point is instead of trying to bring this retrogression beast down, maybe we should look at alternatives to work around it.
If it is not the skill that US does not have then what argument are we going to give to lawmakers for asking for such a provision ?
You need to restart ur GC process but you can keep ur PD (if not revoked) and get a 3 year extension immediately based on the Approved I-140.
what if it is revoked, do we any options for getting PD back ?
About how this will solve retrogression, IT WONT. My point is instead of trying to bring this retrogression beast down, maybe we should look at alternatives to work around it.
If it is not the skill that US does not have then what argument are we going to give to lawmakers for asking for such a provision ?
You need to restart ur GC process but you can keep ur PD (if not revoked) and get a 3 year extension immediately based on the Approved I-140.
what if it is revoked, do we any options for getting PD back ?
more...
makeup Craft Stick Flag
bebar
09-15 04:49 PM
Called NSC on 9/3 and IO initiated an inquiry. Not sure if this is equivalent to SR. With in few hours I got a reply email stating the exact following message. It says awaiting review by an officer, but then the last line says "Service is waiting for VISA availability". It's too confusing and it sucks.
************************************************** *************
Due to the pending caseload at the Nebraska Service Center, the processing time of your I-485 application has been extended. Allow extra time for an Officer to review your application. Furthermore, if all initial evidence was not included with you application, or a question arose during adjudication that required a Request for Evidence, additional time would be needed. Your application remains awaiting review by an Officer and you will be notified as soon as a decision is made. The Service is waiting for VISA availability.
************************************************** *************
************************************************** *************
Due to the pending caseload at the Nebraska Service Center, the processing time of your I-485 application has been extended. Allow extra time for an Officer to review your application. Furthermore, if all initial evidence was not included with you application, or a question arose during adjudication that required a Request for Evidence, additional time would be needed. Your application remains awaiting review by an Officer and you will be notified as soon as a decision is made. The Service is waiting for VISA availability.
************************************************** *************
girlfriend Flag Day Crafts Free Pictures
unitednations
03-31 11:51 AM
I (and I�m sure others too) would like to know how the following works,
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
hairstyles Memorial Day flag template
desi3933
08-19 03:38 PM
Seriously, folks. What's with this thread? Total waste of time.
Someone announces his 'greatest achievement' ... others challenge him to show true patriotism... yet others ask him to continue supporting India etc., AND this chap actually responds :)!
Wow! Seriously we all have too much time on our hands to be self promoting / congratulating / reminiscing etc...
Glad that this person will call US Senators etc., lets thank him for that and keep moving... instead of grilling him on things that matter to you! He owes you all no explanations or apologies.
Peace!
>> Welcome to the FIRST Indian who is a US Citizen
Not sure what you mean here. :confused:
>> He owes you all no explanations or apologies.
Thanks and I appreciate that.
Someone announces his 'greatest achievement' ... others challenge him to show true patriotism... yet others ask him to continue supporting India etc., AND this chap actually responds :)!
Wow! Seriously we all have too much time on our hands to be self promoting / congratulating / reminiscing etc...
Glad that this person will call US Senators etc., lets thank him for that and keep moving... instead of grilling him on things that matter to you! He owes you all no explanations or apologies.
Peace!
>> Welcome to the FIRST Indian who is a US Citizen
Not sure what you mean here. :confused:
>> He owes you all no explanations or apologies.
Thanks and I appreciate that.
matreen
06-13 01:20 AM
This is becoming a messy going forward ...we are keeping hopes that it will be better next month.....so far our hopes are left over as hopes only...
Yes, due to CIS lack of capability they have wasted thousands of visas, that is not our fault then why we are suffering......we have been working hard and contributing this economy in all the ways......then why can't we treated to get our legitimate benefits??????
We have wasted/spent years and year here by treating US as our home country....hopeing one day we will get our GC.....but now the way things are moving ..totally we lost our destiny.....and for me (I am sure quite a few out there too) it is not that easy to go out and start the life from scratch again...
IV should stand up and do something...we are with you.
Thanks,
M
Yes, due to CIS lack of capability they have wasted thousands of visas, that is not our fault then why we are suffering......we have been working hard and contributing this economy in all the ways......then why can't we treated to get our legitimate benefits??????
We have wasted/spent years and year here by treating US as our home country....hopeing one day we will get our GC.....but now the way things are moving ..totally we lost our destiny.....and for me (I am sure quite a few out there too) it is not that easy to go out and start the life from scratch again...
IV should stand up and do something...we are with you.
Thanks,
M
sledge_hammer
01-31 09:46 AM
- from immigration-law.com
After we reported this news, we learned that there were some readers who gravely misunderstood the "final" rule making process. They were confused with the "proposed" rule making process. In the final rule making process, there is no comment period before the rule takes effect. On the date when the final rule is published in the federal register, it becomes a binding rule and the rule-making process is complete. Certain provisions in the final rule may take effect on certain specific later date or dates, but the rule itself becomes a binding law on the date of publication of the rule in the federal register. Accordingly, unless the DOL changed the proposed rule, substitution of the beneficiary of the labor certification will be eliminated on the date of publication which includes the substitution of the beneficiary in the pending labor certification by amendment as well as the substitution of the beneficiary in the approved labor certification. For those who filed the substitution I-140 petition, the proposed rule provided that only "substitution approved" on the date of publication of the rule would survive. Substitution approved can be interpreted to mean approval of the substitution I-140 petition. For the 45-day validity of the certified labor certification, under the proposed rule, the certified labor certification on the date of publication was supposed to have 45 days to file the I-140 petitions. For the labor certifications which are approved after publication of the final rule must file the I-140 petitions within 45 days from the date of certification.
The DOL could have changed part of the proposed rules in the final rule and the readers are cautioned to wait for the release of the final rule before they jump into any conclusion and take a misguided action.
1. I was wondering how this rule would affect people like me. My labor has been approved and its been about 50 days. I will be applying for I-140 this week. Will this 45-day rule affect me?
2. If what is stated in immigrationportal about the labor substitution is true, then we don't have any real benefit from the this rule, because all labors certified before the implementation of this rule are not bound by the 45-days time constraint?!? All the so called desi companies may not sell the labors, but would not spend money to cancel it either. So those old labors are going waste as they are still active.
After we reported this news, we learned that there were some readers who gravely misunderstood the "final" rule making process. They were confused with the "proposed" rule making process. In the final rule making process, there is no comment period before the rule takes effect. On the date when the final rule is published in the federal register, it becomes a binding rule and the rule-making process is complete. Certain provisions in the final rule may take effect on certain specific later date or dates, but the rule itself becomes a binding law on the date of publication of the rule in the federal register. Accordingly, unless the DOL changed the proposed rule, substitution of the beneficiary of the labor certification will be eliminated on the date of publication which includes the substitution of the beneficiary in the pending labor certification by amendment as well as the substitution of the beneficiary in the approved labor certification. For those who filed the substitution I-140 petition, the proposed rule provided that only "substitution approved" on the date of publication of the rule would survive. Substitution approved can be interpreted to mean approval of the substitution I-140 petition. For the 45-day validity of the certified labor certification, under the proposed rule, the certified labor certification on the date of publication was supposed to have 45 days to file the I-140 petitions. For the labor certifications which are approved after publication of the final rule must file the I-140 petitions within 45 days from the date of certification.
The DOL could have changed part of the proposed rules in the final rule and the readers are cautioned to wait for the release of the final rule before they jump into any conclusion and take a misguided action.
1. I was wondering how this rule would affect people like me. My labor has been approved and its been about 50 days. I will be applying for I-140 this week. Will this 45-day rule affect me?
2. If what is stated in immigrationportal about the labor substitution is true, then we don't have any real benefit from the this rule, because all labors certified before the implementation of this rule are not bound by the 45-days time constraint?!? All the so called desi companies may not sell the labors, but would not spend money to cancel it either. So those old labors are going waste as they are still active.
No comments:
Post a Comment