indianindian2006
08-28 02:06 PM
Link not working.
Here is what he wrote and later removed his posting....
Originally Posted by venkat80
FYI - U.S. Department of State (DOS) indicated today that EB-2 visa numbers for India and China for the current fiscal year were exhausted on August 21, 2008. However, USCIS has not announced plans to cease accepting AOS applications with a current priority date in the EB-2 category for India and China. Further, the DOS has not stated whether it will issue a revised September Visa Bulletin. Our understanding at this time is that the August and September Visa Bulletins stand and USCIS will continue to accept cases pursuant to the September Visa Bulletin through September. Fragomen will continue to monitor DOS and USCIS activity on this issue and will update you with any new information as it is released
Originally Posted by venkat80
It is internal mail.
Here is what he wrote and later removed his posting....
Originally Posted by venkat80
FYI - U.S. Department of State (DOS) indicated today that EB-2 visa numbers for India and China for the current fiscal year were exhausted on August 21, 2008. However, USCIS has not announced plans to cease accepting AOS applications with a current priority date in the EB-2 category for India and China. Further, the DOS has not stated whether it will issue a revised September Visa Bulletin. Our understanding at this time is that the August and September Visa Bulletins stand and USCIS will continue to accept cases pursuant to the September Visa Bulletin through September. Fragomen will continue to monitor DOS and USCIS activity on this issue and will update you with any new information as it is released
Originally Posted by venkat80
It is internal mail.
wallpaper irthday party invitation
yorstruly
07-19 02:37 PM
WOW! I am amazed by the effectiveness of this forum. So many specific advice within minutes!!!! :) :)
I am looking at all the websites...
I am looking at all the websites...
sailing_through
02-18 02:29 PM
oh ok. thanks desi 3933 for rechecking that for me. i think you are right. i found that h4 can only do work for which they are not paid. thank you all guys, you were all a big help..
2011 party invitation wording
retropain
09-07 03:48 PM
I guess a lot of folks (including me) have not had the opportunity to file for the 485. And most of the folks who did file 485's have already been approved.
more...
ArkBird
10-04 08:34 PM
How did they pull it off?
We have been waiting for data like this since umm..... last ice age??
Something is drastically wrong. Either they have MUCH MORE influence than us(IV) in USCIS/DOS or someone knows right handshake and wink....
We can't even get official clarification on AC21 rule from "babus" at USCIS forget influencing "netas" for recapturing & CIR!!!
In 2007 PD fiasco, we take too much credit for so called "Flower Campaign" and think that because of that USCIS reversed the decision and accepted all the 485. DEAD WRONG!!! It was because of Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA). She wrote letters to Michael Chertoff, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Condoleezza Rice, Secretary, U.S. Department of State (DOS)
I have been long time member, may be one of the first few members and I will keep supporting IV in whatever way I can in the future also but I am convinced that unless we gain critical mass, nothing is going to happen.
Let the Reds rain!
We have been waiting for data like this since umm..... last ice age??
Something is drastically wrong. Either they have MUCH MORE influence than us(IV) in USCIS/DOS or someone knows right handshake and wink....
We can't even get official clarification on AC21 rule from "babus" at USCIS forget influencing "netas" for recapturing & CIR!!!
In 2007 PD fiasco, we take too much credit for so called "Flower Campaign" and think that because of that USCIS reversed the decision and accepted all the 485. DEAD WRONG!!! It was because of Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA). She wrote letters to Michael Chertoff, Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Condoleezza Rice, Secretary, U.S. Department of State (DOS)
I have been long time member, may be one of the first few members and I will keep supporting IV in whatever way I can in the future also but I am convinced that unless we gain critical mass, nothing is going to happen.
Let the Reds rain!
amitga
07-15 12:47 PM
You are not allowed to re-capture unused photos. This would require a legislative change.:D
When my AP came up for renewal my attorney asked to get new set of photos.
In addition my cousin's EAD application got RFE'ed to get new set of photos even though the photos were recent. The reason given was that they had used same photos to renew their visa few months back (less than 6 months).
Is USCIS coming up some new rule about photos being 'unused' ?? The guidelines say that photos should be recent (taken in last 6 months). However nowhere I do I see that the photos should be 'unused' previously ?
Anyone else had same experience ?
When my AP came up for renewal my attorney asked to get new set of photos.
In addition my cousin's EAD application got RFE'ed to get new set of photos even though the photos were recent. The reason given was that they had used same photos to renew their visa few months back (less than 6 months).
Is USCIS coming up some new rule about photos being 'unused' ?? The guidelines say that photos should be recent (taken in last 6 months). However nowhere I do I see that the photos should be 'unused' previously ?
Anyone else had same experience ?
more...
Morty
04-19 01:45 AM
My pleasure. MOTIC will resolve your issue. Your lawyer will manage it. Good luck.
What does MOTIC means? Thanks in advance for your reply...
What does MOTIC means? Thanks in advance for your reply...
2010 irthday party invitations
p1234
02-17 07:52 PM
Congrats!
Was your service center Nebraska or Texas?
Was your service center Nebraska or Texas?
more...
bkarnik
01-21 06:25 PM
There are 2 different dates: Notice and Receipt Date.
Receipt date is when they got it, which in your case is July 30th. This date is used to count 180 days for your 485 File date.
Notice Date is the date when they entered the information in to their system, which in your case is September 5th. This date is used for processing dates and all.
I hope this helps.
See this link http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/cbo_30sept08.pdf
See Q.18. I think your case is one of the TSC-VSC-TSC or NSC-CSC-NSC transfers. Your attorney needs to follow up with USCIS and USCIS will issue new receipts with the correct receipt dates. Contrary to earlier post, cases are processed per receipt dates, not notice dates. Check your latest 485 receipts for the dates.
"18.Question: There are I-140 and I-485 cases that were originally filed TSC, then transferred to VSC, then transferred back to TSC 3 months later. As a result of the transfer, the original receipt date was replaced with the date of last transfer which is 3 months behind. This causes such cases behind the current processing dates at TSC. What could TSC do to pull those cases forward in the line of cases waiting for processing to correct the problem?
Response: Cases should always retain their original receipt date. If you are aware of cases that lost that date because of work flow transfers, please let us know so we can correct the problem."
Receipt date is when they got it, which in your case is July 30th. This date is used to count 180 days for your 485 File date.
Notice Date is the date when they entered the information in to their system, which in your case is September 5th. This date is used for processing dates and all.
I hope this helps.
See this link http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/cbo_30sept08.pdf
See Q.18. I think your case is one of the TSC-VSC-TSC or NSC-CSC-NSC transfers. Your attorney needs to follow up with USCIS and USCIS will issue new receipts with the correct receipt dates. Contrary to earlier post, cases are processed per receipt dates, not notice dates. Check your latest 485 receipts for the dates.
"18.Question: There are I-140 and I-485 cases that were originally filed TSC, then transferred to VSC, then transferred back to TSC 3 months later. As a result of the transfer, the original receipt date was replaced with the date of last transfer which is 3 months behind. This causes such cases behind the current processing dates at TSC. What could TSC do to pull those cases forward in the line of cases waiting for processing to correct the problem?
Response: Cases should always retain their original receipt date. If you are aware of cases that lost that date because of work flow transfers, please let us know so we can correct the problem."
hair irthday party invitations
inthehole
08-24 01:22 AM
I made an infopass appt on Aug 20th and got it for 26th. I do not know why you couldn't?
Hi,
I was wondering under what option you are able to get info pass at Hartford. Is there is any specific time in a day you tried?
Hi,
I was wondering under what option you are able to get info pass at Hartford. Is there is any specific time in a day you tried?
more...
lostinbeta
11-17 03:29 PM
No more votes?
If not, this poll is going to close pretty early :-\
If not, this poll is going to close pretty early :-\
hot 16th birthday party
gc_lover
07-24 07:36 AM
^^^^
more...
house party invitation templates
n2b
04-17 01:41 PM
I am currently on EAD and used AC 21. Just in case if I suspect that there might be some issue during final I 485 approval, can I have my company apply for my H1 transfer before I 485 is approved?
If I do so, what will be the status of the I 485 application after H1B transfer?
This is a bit confusing question to answer but if I apply for my H1B transfer now, what will be its validity date?
All help appreciated. Thanks all in advance.
If I do so, what will be the status of the I 485 application after H1B transfer?
This is a bit confusing question to answer but if I apply for my H1B transfer now, what will be its validity date?
All help appreciated. Thanks all in advance.
tattoo sweet 16th birthday party
starving_dog
10-17 06:31 AM
It took me 6 days to get my approval and about another week to get the card in the mail. This happened in September of this year and I was registered in the Texas Service Center.
That is assuming that you have gone through your biometrics appointment.
That is assuming that you have gone through your biometrics appointment.
more...
pictures sweet 16th birthday party
EkAurAaya
09-24 10:43 PM
his question was will bad credit affect GC? answer is "no it wont"
please dont suddenly become "Edward Jones" or "Suze orman" and give financial advice because you may be doing bettter than the person asking the question. God forbid, but one major illness can wipe out anyone's good credit, even with insurance. watch "Sicko" and "Maxed Out". Eye-opening documentaries about the predatory greed of the insurance and financial firms. Dont be so smug. kidding about other people's misfortune isnt funny.
Ok you just twisted my words, took it out of context and made new meaning out of it... oh man relax, i was not trying to kid about anyones misfortune here! I was not even thinking about it from that angel!
If you read carefully i did reply to his question although i do agree it is a bit cryptic ;) and if my reply sounded like kidding about "misfortune" then i really do apologize to the original poster, that was not my intent.
Green_Card: Thanks for policing... :rolleyes:
please dont suddenly become "Edward Jones" or "Suze orman" and give financial advice because you may be doing bettter than the person asking the question. God forbid, but one major illness can wipe out anyone's good credit, even with insurance. watch "Sicko" and "Maxed Out". Eye-opening documentaries about the predatory greed of the insurance and financial firms. Dont be so smug. kidding about other people's misfortune isnt funny.
Ok you just twisted my words, took it out of context and made new meaning out of it... oh man relax, i was not trying to kid about anyones misfortune here! I was not even thinking about it from that angel!
If you read carefully i did reply to his question although i do agree it is a bit cryptic ;) and if my reply sounded like kidding about "misfortune" then i really do apologize to the original poster, that was not my intent.
Green_Card: Thanks for policing... :rolleyes:
dresses party invitation templates
nogc_noproblem
04-09 04:34 PM
If your I-140 is approved and if your I485 is pending for more than 180 days, you can move to a new employer. In such case you can use your valid EAD for the employment with the new employer OR you can transfer your valid H1B to the new employer. AC21 is about just informing USCIS about your job change, no matter whether you are using EAD and H1 transfer.
Note:
- Informing USCIS is not mandatory, it is a gray area.
- 180 days waiting period is just to be on the safer side. After 180 days of filing I485, invoking of approved I140 by your previous employer will not have any effect.
Hope it is clear.
If you are planning to work on EAD, then you are not using AC21.
Is my understanding correct?
Note:
- Informing USCIS is not mandatory, it is a gray area.
- 180 days waiting period is just to be on the safer side. After 180 days of filing I485, invoking of approved I140 by your previous employer will not have any effect.
Hope it is clear.
If you are planning to work on EAD, then you are not using AC21.
Is my understanding correct?
more...
makeup Whether your dinner party is
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKQrqRFXGGL-9uoXMr7s5AZ5qhCh3mx_bPTLVW-YcCHkaZ11AQBydDy6c5pidUieBdrBu1sAy4owHtTL5zt7qkSmjnkQA3Bcrcqy90703peNusatlJgNghG_24hYiDNQjHFnWUTTEN4Sd-/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKQrqRFXGGL-9uoXMr7s5AZ5qhCh3mx_bPTLVW-YcCHkaZ11AQBydDy6c5pidUieBdrBu1sAy4owHtTL5zt7qkSmjnkQA3Bcrcqy90703peNusatlJgNghG_24hYiDNQjHFnWUTTEN4Sd-/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
girlfriend slumber party invitations
wellwishergc
04-05 08:01 AM
Thank you for starting this thread.
I still feel that we need a separate bill for legal immigration or some amendments to the existing law to ease our plight. Clubbing us together with issues of 'undocumented workers' have two possible outcomes:
1) The bill does not clear at all. If there is so much resistance to the bill in the senate, imagine the resistance that it will receive in the house and the various voting processes that it has to go through.
2) The bill clears along with the provisions for the 'undocumented workers'. The USCIS is understaffed to handle the rush of applications that will flow in due to the passage of the bill, making the backlogs much more time-consuming than what it is today. Even though there would be enough visa numbers available, the wait times will nullify any mileage that is gained for legal immigration through the bill.
I think, passage of Frist bill with no 'guest worker' provisions for 'undocumented workers' or a separate bill altogether dedicated to legal immigration provisions are our safest bets.
Any thoughts?
All,
I posted another thread asking folks to thank core members for their sacrifice and great leadership. But at the same time few members like to "excercise their
freedom of voice" & We should all agree that constructive debate & sometimes criticism brings in new ideas and better path.
We should define ground rules for ourselves which will lead to efficient use of core members time:
1) Ensure that we make every effort to find answer before asking question/suggestion/complaint.
2) Keep one long thread without duplication.
3) Understand that Core members have job/family , so they have limited bandwidth .. please exercise patience.
4) Maintain civil constructive discourse, Which has a referanceble information if You want to send a link to a lawmaker or any other authority/influencer/potential volunteer or help someone become a wellwisher.
5) Understand the limitations of IV/lobbyist , So help them to make things happen & don't expect gurantees.
6) Never use derogatory remarks, even against proven distractors.
7) Please put forward only genuine concerns clearly to avoid misunderstanding
8) Ignore "whiners", But fully respect people with genuine concern/objection.
9) Please put forward only thoughts relevent to scope of current forum/discussion..
.. eg. "Discussing the gramatical mistake of someone's message is not relavent to this forum .." .
10) Always keep in mind that this is public forum , so It is our responsibility to show ourselves collectively in positive light
by not only passionate for our cause , But also professional in our responses.
Please add other ground rules, So that we can have a good platform to discuss our issues and influence the working of IV to begin with & US congress eventually.Thisshould be good forum for members like me, who can't fully participate because of demanding schedule, others please participate other ways too.
I still feel that we need a separate bill for legal immigration or some amendments to the existing law to ease our plight. Clubbing us together with issues of 'undocumented workers' have two possible outcomes:
1) The bill does not clear at all. If there is so much resistance to the bill in the senate, imagine the resistance that it will receive in the house and the various voting processes that it has to go through.
2) The bill clears along with the provisions for the 'undocumented workers'. The USCIS is understaffed to handle the rush of applications that will flow in due to the passage of the bill, making the backlogs much more time-consuming than what it is today. Even though there would be enough visa numbers available, the wait times will nullify any mileage that is gained for legal immigration through the bill.
I think, passage of Frist bill with no 'guest worker' provisions for 'undocumented workers' or a separate bill altogether dedicated to legal immigration provisions are our safest bets.
Any thoughts?
All,
I posted another thread asking folks to thank core members for their sacrifice and great leadership. But at the same time few members like to "excercise their
freedom of voice" & We should all agree that constructive debate & sometimes criticism brings in new ideas and better path.
We should define ground rules for ourselves which will lead to efficient use of core members time:
1) Ensure that we make every effort to find answer before asking question/suggestion/complaint.
2) Keep one long thread without duplication.
3) Understand that Core members have job/family , so they have limited bandwidth .. please exercise patience.
4) Maintain civil constructive discourse, Which has a referanceble information if You want to send a link to a lawmaker or any other authority/influencer/potential volunteer or help someone become a wellwisher.
5) Understand the limitations of IV/lobbyist , So help them to make things happen & don't expect gurantees.
6) Never use derogatory remarks, even against proven distractors.
7) Please put forward only genuine concerns clearly to avoid misunderstanding
8) Ignore "whiners", But fully respect people with genuine concern/objection.
9) Please put forward only thoughts relevent to scope of current forum/discussion..
.. eg. "Discussing the gramatical mistake of someone's message is not relavent to this forum .." .
10) Always keep in mind that this is public forum , so It is our responsibility to show ourselves collectively in positive light
by not only passionate for our cause , But also professional in our responses.
Please add other ground rules, So that we can have a good platform to discuss our issues and influence the working of IV to begin with & US congress eventually.Thisshould be good forum for members like me, who can't fully participate because of demanding schedule, others please participate other ways too.
hairstyles free printable party
div_bell_2003
10-16 02:16 PM
As far as my understanding goes , AC-21 is nothing but a rule/memo that allows you to change your GC sponsoring employer. You can decide not to send the AC-21 papers , which pretty much means that your previous company is still your GC sponsoring employer and you are required to work for them once the GC ( also please understand that GC is for a future position ) is approved and stay with them at least 6(or more) months otherwise later down the road ( when you might want to become citizen of this wonderful country) , it might cause some problems to the extent of USCIS determining that as some sort of immigration fraud.
My lawyer , who is with a pretty big law firm in the SF Bay area, had informed me that it is always a good idea to port the GC sponsoring employer when you change jobs, if you have no intention of going back to your previous employer and work after the GC is approved.
I've changed jobs and and my lawyer has sent the AC-21 papers recently (I don't exactly know what he has sent, but he did ask for my 485 receipt and if my I-140 has been approved )
I'd suggest not getting side tracked by the USCIS errors and do things the right way. Good luck.
My lawyer , who is with a pretty big law firm in the SF Bay area, had informed me that it is always a good idea to port the GC sponsoring employer when you change jobs, if you have no intention of going back to your previous employer and work after the GC is approved.
I've changed jobs and and my lawyer has sent the AC-21 papers recently (I don't exactly know what he has sent, but he did ask for my 485 receipt and if my I-140 has been approved )
I'd suggest not getting side tracked by the USCIS errors and do things the right way. Good luck.
gapala
08-02 07:21 PM
Without reentry permit, they cannot enter USA.
If you need reentry permit and if you are outside US, then you can kiss your gc goodbye. You must be in US to apply for reentry permit, otherwise it will be denied...Even the appeal will be denied...Then need to check with local US consulate...
If this is the case, can they take the route of "Follow to join" what are the other options for folks in india?
If you need reentry permit and if you are outside US, then you can kiss your gc goodbye. You must be in US to apply for reentry permit, otherwise it will be denied...Even the appeal will be denied...Then need to check with local US consulate...
If this is the case, can they take the route of "Follow to join" what are the other options for folks in india?
upuaut
09-15 07:34 PM
Ha!! great to see it worked for you right off the bat. I'll have to check out that feature once I get MX.
It is, by far the biggest pain in the butt effect I've seen done which contains absolutely no action script.
It is, by far the biggest pain in the butt effect I've seen done which contains absolutely no action script.
No comments:
Post a Comment