raj2007
04-24 05:16 PM
I agree with kshitijnt that you need past employer more than you need client. In my case I had received 485 query to supply some my employment related docs ( whether that I am working with responser or working with someone else, letter from company showing my current position,sal. etc). Since I didn't change my employer, it was very easy and quick to get such documents from current employer. Imagine if I would have switched on EAD then I would have to chase my past employer for letters, paystubs etc and by the I would got them from past employer,I faced the risk of PD moving back.
Your case is different becasue you filed your I-485 with them. Here he has not started 485 at all.I don't know how he can maintain good relation with them. Some employer are too torugh to deal and same goes with some employees too.
Your case is different becasue you filed your I-485 with them. Here he has not started 485 at all.I don't know how he can maintain good relation with them. Some employer are too torugh to deal and same goes with some employees too.
wallpaper Keychain (BACA0062)
capriol
09-13 03:10 PM
Create a new thread for TSC.
Sanjeev:
I don't know how to create a new thread. Will you please tell me how to do do? Thanks a lot.
Sanjeev:
I don't know how to create a new thread. Will you please tell me how to do do? Thanks a lot.
mirage
07-08 11:01 AM
People have been thinking that all along and have been lying motionless like a crocodile doing sunbath. USCIS have been retrogressing the Visas and at the same time consistently wasting Visa numbers every years. Shouldn't they have already been sued for that. We'll not do anything today just because it take 2-3 years. But what if they screw us again after 2-3 years. Dodn't you think we should keep fighting for injustice even if the benifit may not come to our generation but should pass to coming generation. If every body will become so much short sighted nobody would care for global warming, alternative eneryg options etc...
if it takes 2 or 3 years to fight this case, what is the use
if it takes 2 or 3 years to fight this case, what is the use
2011 Keychain (BACA0064)
cjain
11-01 04:48 PM
manderson,
thanks, but i believe this is incorrect. Per the 2005 Aytes memo (http://www.peludcarson.com/2007/01/aytes_memo_on_a.html) it is clearly stated that person can change jobs after 180 days irrespective of whether I-140 is approved or not. The key phrase is that I-140 should've been "approvable when filed".
cjain, wait till it's approved becoz if ur employer withdraws the 140 before it's approved (even after 180 days) then ur 485 will get rejected. if employer doesn't withdraw and 140 gets approved after 180 days, at that point u will be safe to change employers but might get RFEs later on. So instead of taking a big risk wait till 140 is approved and 180 days are over before you leave employer.
thanks, but i believe this is incorrect. Per the 2005 Aytes memo (http://www.peludcarson.com/2007/01/aytes_memo_on_a.html) it is clearly stated that person can change jobs after 180 days irrespective of whether I-140 is approved or not. The key phrase is that I-140 should've been "approvable when filed".
cjain, wait till it's approved becoz if ur employer withdraws the 140 before it's approved (even after 180 days) then ur 485 will get rejected. if employer doesn't withdraw and 140 gets approved after 180 days, at that point u will be safe to change employers but might get RFEs later on. So instead of taking a big risk wait till 140 is approved and 180 days are over before you leave employer.
more...
bingl
08-21 04:41 AM
Which service center??? NSC or TSC ?
RD - 16 th August
ND- 1 oct
NSC
RD - 16 th August
ND- 1 oct
NSC
Green.Tech
09-09 07:08 PM
Will EB-3 ever get out of 2001? :rolleyes:
more...
sumansk
05-23 11:10 PM
Guys,
Just finished sending the emails.It was very simple and the email from LogicLife was good one...
Used the autofill option and it was really very easy to do that...
Wish good luck and successful efforts to all.....
Just finished sending the emails.It was very simple and the email from LogicLife was good one...
Used the autofill option and it was really very easy to do that...
Wish good luck and successful efforts to all.....
2010 compass keychain
VMH_GC
07-20 10:00 AM
The thread is growing at an amazing speed.
With the least advertisement there are people joining the thread to do their fair share.
Very impressed !!!
TOGETHER WE CAN GET THIS DONE TODAY
Small suggestion, Please extend this drive until monday, lot of people might contribute on weekend.
With the least advertisement there are people joining the thread to do their fair share.
Very impressed !!!
TOGETHER WE CAN GET THIS DONE TODAY
Small suggestion, Please extend this drive until monday, lot of people might contribute on weekend.
more...
desi3933
06-26 10:13 AM
Basically if employers are not willing to sponsor they must have ads as "Non restrictive work authorization" required and if the job needs security clearance they must say "only security clearance"
There are some jobs that require US citizens only without any security clearance requirements. Many defense related projects are like that. Not everyone will need security clearance, but everyone in the project must be US citizen.
.
There are some jobs that require US citizens only without any security clearance requirements. Many defense related projects are like that. Not everyone will need security clearance, but everyone in the project must be US citizen.
.
hair promotional keychain
gcsucks
05-02 12:33 PM
Section 205. Retaining Workers Subject to Green Card Backlog.
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available
Section 201 item two says exemption for all advanced degree holder who worked in US for atleast 3 years in a "related" field. I know there might be issues with definition of "related" but seems job can be EB2/EB3 as long as the beneficiary has an advanced degree and the job is in related field - they are exempt. Am I reading it correctly? I think is how its in STEM right now. A very good back bill for us (if CIR fails to materialize).
Allows foreign workers who have started the green card process, but who are subject to green card backlogs, to pay a $500.00 supplemental fee to file an application to adjust status. This change would enable foreign workers to remain in the U.S. until the green card becomes available
Section 201 item two says exemption for all advanced degree holder who worked in US for atleast 3 years in a "related" field. I know there might be issues with definition of "related" but seems job can be EB2/EB3 as long as the beneficiary has an advanced degree and the job is in related field - they are exempt. Am I reading it correctly? I think is how its in STEM right now. A very good back bill for us (if CIR fails to materialize).
more...
SunnySurya
08-18 02:14 PM
So far I have abq_gc, Johnamit , Singhsa3 , SunnySurya and pamposh(5 and counting ) . I need more..
hot Keychain (BACA0070)
dish
12-10 12:21 PM
Kennedy, McCain, 2 congressmen meet
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
December 9, 2006
WASHINGTON � Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.
Sen. Edward Kennedy
�The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter,� said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.
The strategy session Wednesday came amid speculation about how the dynamics of the immigration debate might change, if at all, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate next month.
Flake said that Kennedy, who will be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, wants to let the new Congress deal first with issues such as the war in Iraq and proposals to raise the minimum wage.
�Then he'll be ready to go� with a new version of the bill that the Senate approved in April.
Sen. John McCain
Republicans ran the show in both houses of Congress then, and passionate divisions in their ranks over immigration policy became a dominant feature of the debate. Democrats, particularly in the House, were mostly content to sit back and enjoy the stalemate, even as they campaigned against the �do-nothing Republican Congress.�
Now Democrats face the hazards of immigration politics.
Immigration-law changes are conspicuously absent from the legislative agenda laid out by incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Observers here say it will be difficult for Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to honor her campaign-season pledge to work for a new comprehensive immigration law without splitting a caucus that includes freshly elected Democrats who vowed to secure the border and crack down on illegal immigration.
The November midterm elections seemed to send mixed messages.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez
In a cliffhanger contest, Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, a conservative Republican and strident foe of illegal immigration, was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell.
Immigration advocates such as Ben Johnson of the Immigration Policy Center say Hayworth's defeat showed that immigration �did not turn out to be the firebrand issue that some people thought it could be.�
But immigration restrictionists point out that Mitchell made getting tough on immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. They also say Mitchell cleverly used the issue against Hayworth, saying his Republican opponent was part of a political regime that wasn't competent enough to stop the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that sweep across Arizona's southern border each year.
While Mitchell said he favored legal status for long-established immigrants, he insisted that immigration policy can be fixed only by �members of Congress who are willing to enforce the law, produce real immigration reform and stop playing politics with the issue.�
Rep. Jeff Flake
That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is estimated to be at least 11 million.
Immigrant-rights advocates, along with their allies at the National Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations, also support a proposal to provide hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers every year for employers who demonstrate that they are unable to find Americans to fill the slots.
While McCain and Kennedy describe this as a �temporary-worker program,� the legislation they sponsored would put the workers on a path to citizenship.
At a time of anxiety about the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs, the McCain-Kennedy bill's efforts to import low-wage labor has drawn the anger of critics across the political spectrum. That is why Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates immigration restrictions, predicts Pelosi will be reluctant to get behind a proposal that could endanger the new Democratic majority.
�Nancy Pelosi knows the Democrats are on probation for the next two years,� Krikorian said.
He predicted that Pelosi would back less ambitious immigration change, such as a plan to provide legal status to undocumented students, rather than take on the explosive issue of mass legalization, which critics condemn as an amnesty that would spawn more illegal immigration.
But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for immigrant rights, argues that next year will be pivotal because of the presidential race that follows.
Advertisement
�I think that once we hit primary (election) season, controversial issues get a lot harder to do,� Sharry said. �Everybody I talk to says 2007 is the window of opportunity.�
Pelosi was noncommittal this week on whether the House would take up immigration legislation. She sought to deflect some of the responsibility to the White House, suggesting that she expects President Bush to offer more specifics than his call to �match willing worker with willing employer.�
�That's up to the president,� Pelosi said. �We want to work closely with him because it has to be comprehensive and bipartisan.�
President Bush's political advisers, meanwhile, have acknowledged that revamping immigration law may be necessary to shore up sagging support for Republicans among Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group. Republicans received just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote this year, down from 44 percent in 2004.
By Jerry Kammer
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
December 9, 2006
WASHINGTON � Two of the most liberal members of Congress met with two of their most conservative colleagues this week to revive immigration legislation that passed the Senate but was throttled by House Republican leaders who resisted its attempt to grant citizenship to illegal immigrants.
Sen. Edward Kennedy
�The plan is to bring the bill up in late winter,� said Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., a conservative stalwart who attended the meeting in the office of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. The other participants were Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill.
The strategy session Wednesday came amid speculation about how the dynamics of the immigration debate might change, if at all, when Democrats take control of the House and Senate next month.
Flake said that Kennedy, who will be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's immigration subcommittee, wants to let the new Congress deal first with issues such as the war in Iraq and proposals to raise the minimum wage.
�Then he'll be ready to go� with a new version of the bill that the Senate approved in April.
Sen. John McCain
Republicans ran the show in both houses of Congress then, and passionate divisions in their ranks over immigration policy became a dominant feature of the debate. Democrats, particularly in the House, were mostly content to sit back and enjoy the stalemate, even as they campaigned against the �do-nothing Republican Congress.�
Now Democrats face the hazards of immigration politics.
Immigration-law changes are conspicuously absent from the legislative agenda laid out by incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Observers here say it will be difficult for Pelosi, D-San Francisco, to honor her campaign-season pledge to work for a new comprehensive immigration law without splitting a caucus that includes freshly elected Democrats who vowed to secure the border and crack down on illegal immigration.
The November midterm elections seemed to send mixed messages.
Rep. Luis Gutierrez
In a cliffhanger contest, Arizona Rep. J.D. Hayworth, a conservative Republican and strident foe of illegal immigration, was defeated by Democrat Harry Mitchell.
Immigration advocates such as Ben Johnson of the Immigration Policy Center say Hayworth's defeat showed that immigration �did not turn out to be the firebrand issue that some people thought it could be.�
But immigration restrictionists point out that Mitchell made getting tough on immigration the centerpiece of his campaign. They also say Mitchell cleverly used the issue against Hayworth, saying his Republican opponent was part of a political regime that wasn't competent enough to stop the hundreds of thousands of immigrants that sweep across Arizona's southern border each year.
While Mitchell said he favored legal status for long-established immigrants, he insisted that immigration policy can be fixed only by �members of Congress who are willing to enforce the law, produce real immigration reform and stop playing politics with the issue.�
Rep. Jeff Flake
That enforcement-heavy approach is fine with immigration advocates as long as it is part of a package that provides permanent legal status to those who are beckoned across the border by agriculture, restaurant, construction, landscaping and janitorial jobs. The number of illegal immigrants in the United States is estimated to be at least 11 million.
Immigrant-rights advocates, along with their allies at the National Chamber of Commerce and other business organizations, also support a proposal to provide hundreds of thousands of low-wage workers every year for employers who demonstrate that they are unable to find Americans to fill the slots.
While McCain and Kennedy describe this as a �temporary-worker program,� the legislation they sponsored would put the workers on a path to citizenship.
At a time of anxiety about the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs, the McCain-Kennedy bill's efforts to import low-wage labor has drawn the anger of critics across the political spectrum. That is why Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates immigration restrictions, predicts Pelosi will be reluctant to get behind a proposal that could endanger the new Democratic majority.
�Nancy Pelosi knows the Democrats are on probation for the next two years,� Krikorian said.
He predicted that Pelosi would back less ambitious immigration change, such as a plan to provide legal status to undocumented students, rather than take on the explosive issue of mass legalization, which critics condemn as an amnesty that would spawn more illegal immigration.
But Frank Sharry, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, which advocates for immigrant rights, argues that next year will be pivotal because of the presidential race that follows.
Advertisement
�I think that once we hit primary (election) season, controversial issues get a lot harder to do,� Sharry said. �Everybody I talk to says 2007 is the window of opportunity.�
Pelosi was noncommittal this week on whether the House would take up immigration legislation. She sought to deflect some of the responsibility to the White House, suggesting that she expects President Bush to offer more specifics than his call to �match willing worker with willing employer.�
�That's up to the president,� Pelosi said. �We want to work closely with him because it has to be comprehensive and bipartisan.�
President Bush's political advisers, meanwhile, have acknowledged that revamping immigration law may be necessary to shore up sagging support for Republicans among Hispanics, the nation's fastest-growing ethnic group. Republicans received just 30 percent of the Hispanic vote this year, down from 44 percent in 2004.
more...
house vuitton keychains keyrings
GCStatus
09-17 03:09 PM
I don't think we are wasting energy/time by identifying gaps and answering questions to folks who want to know more about what exactly are we talking about here. Moving on and gaining more and more support etc., all these things need to be done in parallel.
Wanting to know more and talking trash/dumb - 2 different things.
Yes we are here to clarify for the former. For the later, is what my original comment was.
Also like i mentioned before, did we do some analysis on the links MadhuVJ sent few days ago?. I will be calling few lawyers today and keep you all posted
Wanting to know more and talking trash/dumb - 2 different things.
Yes we are here to clarify for the former. For the later, is what my original comment was.
Also like i mentioned before, did we do some analysis on the links MadhuVJ sent few days ago?. I will be calling few lawyers today and keep you all posted
tattoo Compass Keychain
rdehar
10-09 03:59 PM
"Sorry, we are closed now." ???
Heck, no !!! I want fries with that !!!
Heck, no !!! I want fries with that !!!
more...
pictures compass keychain
beautifulMind
10-08 04:33 PM
It already does, if you have an approved I-140 based on your LC.
Not really..before PERM LC tooks 4-5 years and a lot of people got laid off at the end of 4th 5th year and lost everything...Years of exp is best. based on Intial LC is good too....Ultimately anyone with a masters + 2-3 yrs exp or bachelors with 4-5 yrs exp should not have to wait in queue. Their priority dates should be current...I still support the whole Company GC and not just a points based system
Not really..before PERM LC tooks 4-5 years and a lot of people got laid off at the end of 4th 5th year and lost everything...Years of exp is best. based on Intial LC is good too....Ultimately anyone with a masters + 2-3 yrs exp or bachelors with 4-5 yrs exp should not have to wait in queue. Their priority dates should be current...I still support the whole Company GC and not just a points based system
dresses Promotion Keychain (K233)
sirinme
09-30 10:30 AM
I'm currently on my 4th EAD & AP, and I used AC21 twice so far to switch jobs (similar job descriptions, including the specific technologies I worked on). On both occasions, I have not informed USCIS. My attorney said one is not legally required to do so, and that we could respond if there is any RFE.
But I also know that there are lot of attorneys out there who recommend informing USCIS about the job change. I don't personally know of anyone who have used AC21 and went on to get the green card, so I can't really tell which approach is better. In either case, make sure to have all relevant paper work with you - specifically the experience letters from old employers with proper job descriptions.
As for the salary increases when changing jobs, I did talk to more than one attorney about this. And what I heard consistently was that higher salary is not as much of a problem as lower salary could be. In my case, I had salary increases of more than 30% each time I changed jobs, and I am doing fine so far. Whether that becomes a problem for me or not, I will deal with it when it happens.
I traveled out of the country a couple of times using AP. On my return to US, at the port of entry (SFO), I was asked if I still worked for the company that originally sponsored my GC application. I told them I changed employers using AC21, and that I was not legally required to inform USCIS about the job change. And they let me go without causing any trouble. Not sure if anyone else had different experiences in such case, but the immigration officers at SFO seem to be somewhat easier to deal with (assuming you haven't done anything wrong, of course).
I did have trouble with AC21 once. I ended up having a gap between my 2nd and 3rd EADs (so did my wife too), as we tried to do too much 'optimization' of EADs. Well, we learned the hard way that 'optimization' effort is bad, as both of us had to stop working during the gap. It's not a very pleasant feeling having to explain our respective employers that we had such issue. We lost money too, as we couldn't be legally paid during the gap - in addition to the unnecessary stress. I wish USCIS issues EADs with longer validity period - something like 3 years (but I once heard Aman say that they couldn't do so due to a software glitch in their system!!). In any case, we are now filing for EAD renewals well in advance of the current one's expiry.
Other issues with AC21 that we faced are things like having to pay for EAD and AP renewals every year, which is quite expensive. I guess you could negotiate this with your new employer when changing jobs. And the sheer inability to change your job roles or take on more responsibilities (on paper too!) is frustrating, but that is more of a lengthy GC processing symptom than an AC21 issue.
All things considered, I think AC21 is good. It's got it's set of issues, especially if you don't use it wisely, but it at least lets you have some kind of progress in your careers. The way I see it, if there is no career progress, I can at least make more money. You got to gain something over years of waiting to keep you going!
But I also know that there are lot of attorneys out there who recommend informing USCIS about the job change. I don't personally know of anyone who have used AC21 and went on to get the green card, so I can't really tell which approach is better. In either case, make sure to have all relevant paper work with you - specifically the experience letters from old employers with proper job descriptions.
As for the salary increases when changing jobs, I did talk to more than one attorney about this. And what I heard consistently was that higher salary is not as much of a problem as lower salary could be. In my case, I had salary increases of more than 30% each time I changed jobs, and I am doing fine so far. Whether that becomes a problem for me or not, I will deal with it when it happens.
I traveled out of the country a couple of times using AP. On my return to US, at the port of entry (SFO), I was asked if I still worked for the company that originally sponsored my GC application. I told them I changed employers using AC21, and that I was not legally required to inform USCIS about the job change. And they let me go without causing any trouble. Not sure if anyone else had different experiences in such case, but the immigration officers at SFO seem to be somewhat easier to deal with (assuming you haven't done anything wrong, of course).
I did have trouble with AC21 once. I ended up having a gap between my 2nd and 3rd EADs (so did my wife too), as we tried to do too much 'optimization' of EADs. Well, we learned the hard way that 'optimization' effort is bad, as both of us had to stop working during the gap. It's not a very pleasant feeling having to explain our respective employers that we had such issue. We lost money too, as we couldn't be legally paid during the gap - in addition to the unnecessary stress. I wish USCIS issues EADs with longer validity period - something like 3 years (but I once heard Aman say that they couldn't do so due to a software glitch in their system!!). In any case, we are now filing for EAD renewals well in advance of the current one's expiry.
Other issues with AC21 that we faced are things like having to pay for EAD and AP renewals every year, which is quite expensive. I guess you could negotiate this with your new employer when changing jobs. And the sheer inability to change your job roles or take on more responsibilities (on paper too!) is frustrating, but that is more of a lengthy GC processing symptom than an AC21 issue.
All things considered, I think AC21 is good. It's got it's set of issues, especially if you don't use it wisely, but it at least lets you have some kind of progress in your careers. The way I see it, if there is no career progress, I can at least make more money. You got to gain something over years of waiting to keep you going!
more...
makeup Bottle Opener Key Ring
CADude
08-01 01:14 PM
Yes
SRC - Texas Svc Cnt
LIN - Nebraska Svc Cnt
My i-140 no. starts with SRC 06, is this also from Texas?
SRC - Texas Svc Cnt
LIN - Nebraska Svc Cnt
My i-140 no. starts with SRC 06, is this also from Texas?
girlfriend Louis vuitton keyring high
fall2004us
08-13 08:14 PM
Here is my update:
EB2 - India
PD - Sep/2006
I 140 approved - Dec 2006
I 485 Date received July 2nd 2007
RD - checks were cashed (date - July 30, 2007)
FP - Got a mail from USCIS regarding finger printing (scheduled - August 29,2007)
So far no receipt by mail, application is at Nebraska.
EB2 - India
PD - Sep/2006
I 140 approved - Dec 2006
I 485 Date received July 2nd 2007
RD - checks were cashed (date - July 30, 2007)
FP - Got a mail from USCIS regarding finger printing (scheduled - August 29,2007)
So far no receipt by mail, application is at Nebraska.
hairstyles Marlow Keyring
rongha_2000
06-01 04:18 PM
Called my state (MO) senator. The staffer listened very patiently and thanked me for raising the issue. I will be calling others soon.
kshitijnt
07-09 02:05 PM
damn the attachment. Sorry buddy I tried cant upload here.
supreet
07-09 12:45 PM
Any suggestions?
No comments:
Post a Comment