TeddyKoochu
09-25 11:34 AM
I won't be surprised if they pull a quick July 07 or something on those lines to collect more money for filing and renewal of EAD/ AP
I hope this happens, looks like in the current atmosphere there is a high likelihood of it happening as well. It will be a great step forward for people who missed Jul 07, it will be an opportunity for us to have EAD / AP and have a peep at the next step!
I hope this happens, looks like in the current atmosphere there is a high likelihood of it happening as well. It will be a great step forward for people who missed Jul 07, it will be an opportunity for us to have EAD / AP and have a peep at the next step!
antihero
04-14 11:13 PM
IV does not support any fraudulent activity by anybody, whether employees or employers or anybody else.
It because of faking the resumes by unscrupulous individuals things have come to this pass. Many genuinely honest and hardworking folks are slogging on in the GC queue while many who can't even spell technology have got GCs in a matter of months by exploiting loopholes.
My advice, go back to your home country, get some education in your chosen vocation and restart your career through honest means.
It because of faking the resumes by unscrupulous individuals things have come to this pass. Many genuinely honest and hardworking folks are slogging on in the GC queue while many who can't even spell technology have got GCs in a matter of months by exploiting loopholes.
My advice, go back to your home country, get some education in your chosen vocation and restart your career through honest means.
gc28262
01-15 04:16 PM
I agree.
Visa Recapture or remove country limit for skilled labor (EB category). these would probably be the only ones that will fly.
Maybe they should also keep it low key so less people oppose it;)
Send it through when Mr.King is on vacation:D
Don't keep your expectations so low. Change is on the way ! Senate's color has changed. ;)
Visa Recapture or remove country limit for skilled labor (EB category). these would probably be the only ones that will fly.
Maybe they should also keep it low key so less people oppose it;)
Send it through when Mr.King is on vacation:D
Don't keep your expectations so low. Change is on the way ! Senate's color has changed. ;)
Green06
08-15 01:39 PM
Guys,
What is the NSC customer service number. I could not find it on the USCIS web site.
Regards
What is the NSC customer service number. I could not find it on the USCIS web site.
Regards
more...
gcnotfiledyet
03-27 01:53 AM
I don't know if these points are written as a joke. Technically H1B's are guest workers. If there is no work, they need not be here. "...Don't send RFE to those on EAD...", seems to tell don't do your job of checking whatever you are supposed to check before admitting a new immigrant.
Best thing is do nothing, just wait and hope for the best. Any actions are not likely to favour immigration or speedup GC granting, as these are not favoured in difficult economic times.
I agree about your comment on guest workers. But h1bs are also human beings. Rather than treating them like car imported from Japan treat them humane. Don't just think of h1bs as a number. There is a human being behind them. Its not easy to just uproot everything you have since last 10yrs and move back to where you came. This is not a treatment for a "guest".
Also how humane is this for a country touting horn of human rights all over the world (read Tibet/China)?
Best thing is do nothing, just wait and hope for the best. Any actions are not likely to favour immigration or speedup GC granting, as these are not favoured in difficult economic times.
I agree about your comment on guest workers. But h1bs are also human beings. Rather than treating them like car imported from Japan treat them humane. Don't just think of h1bs as a number. There is a human being behind them. Its not easy to just uproot everything you have since last 10yrs and move back to where you came. This is not a treatment for a "guest".
Also how humane is this for a country touting horn of human rights all over the world (read Tibet/China)?
140jibjab
01-08 04:36 PM
When you go to get social security # with I797 the Buddas/Buddis at the counter wil ask for the Passport and Stamping..... and just the 797 will not suffice....
more...
kondur_007
05-12 08:14 PM
CIS have been targeting reducing processing times for applications including I-485 (for I-485 they want it to be <180 days). Which they are doing, based on their definition of pending (non retrogressed approvable application). They can easily achieve this, give retrogressed countries/categories bare minimum and they process all other applications as quickly as possible. Which explains all of the following..
EB3 made unavailable (they have used all the visa numbers)
EB2-India move way back (they have used all the visa numbers)
EB1 and EB2 quick approvals (for all current categories) average down to 200 days
There were around 3000 visas for EB2-1 and EB3-I , considering 1.2 dependent this means GC for no more than 1400 families in each category. The math is simple getting that many applications processed in first 6-8 months was not difficult.
To add to the woes we have following, which add to the problem, but are not the primary problem.
Labor substitution
EB3-EB2 jumps
Very old name-check cases
Primary problem is 7% country cap, they way things are if CIS gets enough cases in EB1 and EB2 (none retrogressed categories), then they will be reluctant to issue GC to EB2-I and EB3-I above the minimum (7% quota), since that do not count in their definition of pending cases.
Right on point. To your list, you can add EB1-C cases.
At this time there is no way to predict the actual numbers of these...only next three visa bulletins will tell us the actual impact.
My guess (it is only a GUESS...can't be a prediction as there are no numbers to crunch...) is EB2 I will move forward to at least 2005 or 2006 (may be more) till the end of this fiscal year.
In any case, EB3 I is going to be very tough to be in...unless CIR has something nicer to offer to those waiting in that category...
EB3 made unavailable (they have used all the visa numbers)
EB2-India move way back (they have used all the visa numbers)
EB1 and EB2 quick approvals (for all current categories) average down to 200 days
There were around 3000 visas for EB2-1 and EB3-I , considering 1.2 dependent this means GC for no more than 1400 families in each category. The math is simple getting that many applications processed in first 6-8 months was not difficult.
To add to the woes we have following, which add to the problem, but are not the primary problem.
Labor substitution
EB3-EB2 jumps
Very old name-check cases
Primary problem is 7% country cap, they way things are if CIS gets enough cases in EB1 and EB2 (none retrogressed categories), then they will be reluctant to issue GC to EB2-I and EB3-I above the minimum (7% quota), since that do not count in their definition of pending cases.
Right on point. To your list, you can add EB1-C cases.
At this time there is no way to predict the actual numbers of these...only next three visa bulletins will tell us the actual impact.
My guess (it is only a GUESS...can't be a prediction as there are no numbers to crunch...) is EB2 I will move forward to at least 2005 or 2006 (may be more) till the end of this fiscal year.
In any case, EB3 I is going to be very tough to be in...unless CIR has something nicer to offer to those waiting in that category...
solaris27
03-13 09:59 AM
Congratulations
more...
indigokiwi
04-17 12:50 PM
^^^^^^^
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
eldrick
08-16 04:44 PM
Thanks that made feel better. Thank you again guys for your help.
vgayalu
01-24 11:33 AM
Please do not raise old hot topics.
The confusion created is enough. Do not confuse more and more.
Let IV work on one issue which ever is under consideration.
We need not to scare any body by mentioning H4 and nonsense.
Let everybody get some drink first. Then everyone wait for solid stuff.
[QUOTE=dionysus]My view is that IV must reassess and realign its goals. The goal of I-485 filing without a current PD is too ambitious to start with. Remember, I-485 is the most time-consuming and lengthy stage of a GC, what with security and background checks, tax records checks, prior legal stays in US and medical tests to name just a few. CIS is swamped with many I-485 applications as it is. If it opens the flood gates for 485 filing, its system will simply collapse under the stampede of estimated 1 million GC seekers. There is no chance in hell that CIS will throw open the gates of I-485 filing for all and sundry.
The confusion created is enough. Do not confuse more and more.
Let IV work on one issue which ever is under consideration.
We need not to scare any body by mentioning H4 and nonsense.
Let everybody get some drink first. Then everyone wait for solid stuff.
[QUOTE=dionysus]My view is that IV must reassess and realign its goals. The goal of I-485 filing without a current PD is too ambitious to start with. Remember, I-485 is the most time-consuming and lengthy stage of a GC, what with security and background checks, tax records checks, prior legal stays in US and medical tests to name just a few. CIS is swamped with many I-485 applications as it is. If it opens the flood gates for 485 filing, its system will simply collapse under the stampede of estimated 1 million GC seekers. There is no chance in hell that CIS will throw open the gates of I-485 filing for all and sundry.
more...
akhilmahajan
04-13 08:35 AM
I just checked what I had filed last time and this is what I have selected (c) (09).
Also, can anyone tell me, once they e-File, does it tell you where to send the documents to?
Thanks for the help.
Also, can anyone tell me, once they e-File, does it tell you where to send the documents to?
Thanks for the help.
guchi472000
03-18 04:27 PM
I Have my EAD card but my spouse was in India when i applied for EAD. That mean she doesn't have EAD card rite now.
Can she get EAD or SSN?
Pls help.....
Can she get EAD or SSN?
Pls help.....
more...
raysaikat
10-10 11:26 AM
Thank you!
I am not quiting my company but I am moving to India. In that case what will happen ?
Your valuable inputs are greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much!
I would have said what Phani said. Essentially, you must be on valid H1-B status; otherwise your husband's H-4 status is not valid. This means that you must remain employed in US as an US employee (get your paycheck in US, pay all US taxes, file US tax returns, etc.). For a short duration, it may be possible to remain an US employee and work from India (as a business trip), but I do not see that happening on a permanent basis.
I am not quiting my company but I am moving to India. In that case what will happen ?
Your valuable inputs are greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much!
I would have said what Phani said. Essentially, you must be on valid H1-B status; otherwise your husband's H-4 status is not valid. This means that you must remain employed in US as an US employee (get your paycheck in US, pay all US taxes, file US tax returns, etc.). For a short duration, it may be possible to remain an US employee and work from India (as a business trip), but I do not see that happening on a permanent basis.
apb
07-27 01:04 PM
If NSC had put all applications from July 2nd to July 17th on hold.
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/FAQ2.pdf
Did they open and timestamp it ? for received date ??????
If they did not , then I may be lucky.
Because my package had signatures and all other dates of June 29th . The day when we were planning to ship the package, but for july fiasco.
Do you guys think ? they might see this and enter it as received date ?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/FAQ2.pdf
more...
milind70
07-27 11:01 AM
I would file for 485, but maintain my H1, and bring her here on H4. A PD of EB3-March-2005 is not going to get current anytime soon, I would not miss out on the option to use AC21 to switch jobs...
He cant use AC21 as he will lose his H1 status and his wife will out of status.
He would be advised to keep his H1 status all the way till he gets his green card or till his wife is able to apply for 485.
He cant use AC21 as he will lose his H1 status and his wife will out of status.
He would be advised to keep his H1 status all the way till he gets his green card or till his wife is able to apply for 485.
technoboy
10-23 10:14 AM
Card Production Order. I saw this message on I- 765 application on-line check.
hope this help.
hope this help.
still_waiting
05-18 11:33 AM
It's working for me.... report covered issues very well .
md2003
11-19 10:53 AM
Does it required 6 months pay stub (till Dec 29th -- for July 2nd files) or after 180 days we can move to any company whether you have last month pay stub or not. Generally most of the companies hold 15 days amount.
bang
01-07 05:03 PM
Thank you all for your repiles. I have asked my wife to talk to their lawyer directly.
It is not a rule, but it depends on how the approval is given by USCIS. If you get a extended I94 along with the H1 approval then you are all set, if you get an approval with no I94 then you need to get a stamping before starting work. Consult lawyers they will explain it better.
My wife went through the H4 - H1 Conversion which got approved last week, we are still wating to see the approval document.
It is not a rule, but it depends on how the approval is given by USCIS. If you get a extended I94 along with the H1 approval then you are all set, if you get an approval with no I94 then you need to get a stamping before starting work. Consult lawyers they will explain it better.
My wife went through the H4 - H1 Conversion which got approved last week, we are still wating to see the approval document.
No comments:
Post a Comment