Kitiara
10-17 05:10 AM
I've got one of Sephiroth and Vincent too somewhere... I'll dig it out. :)
wallpaper No New Justin Timberlake Music
GCVivek
05-13 08:26 PM
Diversity lottery numbers are deemed invalid due to computer glitch.
thomasstuart
11-22 05:59 AM
Hi there,
I haven't got any ideas, but I was wondering if you ever got a solution
as I would like to do the same thing. Cheers!
I haven't got any ideas, but I was wondering if you ever got a solution
as I would like to do the same thing. Cheers!
2011 T-Pain amp; Justin Timberlake
eers
07-17 11:03 PM
if u go to the doc, they will perform the the tests that are ok to perform..
Check with doc if they will accept the test results (PAP , HIV , etc) from your obgyns office. These tests are already done during initial stages of pregnancy.
Finally the doc will add a note to the medical report that some tests/shots are omited due to pregnancy.
I went through same thing..
Will the case be accepted with this partial report-- It will be.
Will there be an RFE? -- i dont know.. may be
Check with doc if they will accept the test results (PAP , HIV , etc) from your obgyns office. These tests are already done during initial stages of pregnancy.
Finally the doc will add a note to the medical report that some tests/shots are omited due to pregnancy.
I went through same thing..
Will the case be accepted with this partial report-- It will be.
Will there be an RFE? -- i dont know.. may be
more...
coopheal
03-13 04:37 AM
Hello,
For case where GC and H1b sponsoring employer is same, please tell (as per USCIS rules/guidelines):
1. When switching from H1b to EAD (while working for GC sponsoring employer) does GC/H1b sponsoring employer have to cancel H1b ?
2. If on AP/EAD WITHOUT work, is there any liability to GC/H1b sponsoring employer ? Does he have to cancel H1b ?
Than You.
I am not sure why you are switching from valid H1B to EAD and while still working for the GC sponsoring employer.
However Employer DOES have to inform (and request cancellation) to USCIS about H1B employee no longer working for them on H1B visa. Its the law.
Again not sure why you are moving from H1B to EAD when H1B is still valid?
For case where GC and H1b sponsoring employer is same, please tell (as per USCIS rules/guidelines):
1. When switching from H1b to EAD (while working for GC sponsoring employer) does GC/H1b sponsoring employer have to cancel H1b ?
2. If on AP/EAD WITHOUT work, is there any liability to GC/H1b sponsoring employer ? Does he have to cancel H1b ?
Than You.
I am not sure why you are switching from valid H1B to EAD and while still working for the GC sponsoring employer.
However Employer DOES have to inform (and request cancellation) to USCIS about H1B employee no longer working for them on H1B visa. Its the law.
Again not sure why you are moving from H1B to EAD when H1B is still valid?
haeveingridseyn
09-09 07:56 AM
Hi Everyone..
Thanks for providing this information . I am also searching this type of topic.
Its really helpful to forum members and solve many problem.
Keep it up.
Thanks for providing this information . I am also searching this type of topic.
Its really helpful to forum members and solve many problem.
Keep it up.
more...
sanprabhu
10-02 09:40 AM
Don't go by the online status messages at all. They are meaningless and not connected to your real case status. I think the worker made a mistake in selecting the online case message when they adjudicated your application.
Hi All
Cheques were encashed for my and my wife's I-485, I-765, I-131 application.
I have received the receipt numbers for all from the back of the cheques.
When I access the receipt number for one of the I-765 Uscis shows the following update :
On September 19, 2007, we received this I765 APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION and request that we waive the filing fee. We have waived the filing fee and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
What does waived the filling fee mean ?? why did they do that ?? Also if they waived the filling fee, why did USCIS encash the cheques ??
Anybody in a similar situation ?
Hi All
Cheques were encashed for my and my wife's I-485, I-765, I-131 application.
I have received the receipt numbers for all from the back of the cheques.
When I access the receipt number for one of the I-765 Uscis shows the following update :
On September 19, 2007, we received this I765 APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT AUTHORIZATION and request that we waive the filing fee. We have waived the filing fee and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail when we make a decision or if we need something from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service. We process cases in the order we receive them. You can use our processing dates to estimate when yours will be done. This case is at our NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER location. Follow the link below to check processing dates. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
What does waived the filling fee mean ?? why did they do that ?? Also if they waived the filling fee, why did USCIS encash the cheques ??
Anybody in a similar situation ?
2010 justin timberlake album
lazycis
01-04 02:15 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=71d9903772614512bc3881aaefb1d 8d8
10.11 Order of Processing.
(a) Routine and Expedited Cases . Generally, applications and petitions should be processed in the order in which they are received. Exceptions can, and should, be made for a number of different reasons, and sometimes those reasons may appear to conflict with one another.
10.11 Order of Processing.
(a) Routine and Expedited Cases . Generally, applications and petitions should be processed in the order in which they are received. Exceptions can, and should, be made for a number of different reasons, and sometimes those reasons may appear to conflict with one another.
more...
gc4me
04-07 03:58 PM
I was in the same situation. Got my I-140 through FOIA, my I-824 got rejected (applied both whichever comes first). Check the bellow thread that I created and posted my experience.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16863&highlight=FOIA
I am planning to change jobs using the EAD / AC-21 in the next couple of months. To start off the process I wanted to get all the approval notices from the lawyer so that I have all the documents in place before I change jobs.
My employer uses a popular law firm to handle the immigration filing etc. I sent an email to the lawyer asking them to send me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.The lawyer responded that according to my company's internal policy they will not provide me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
I would like to know the following -
1) Has someone else also faced a similar issue ?
2) If so , is there a way to get them to send me a copy of th 140 approval notice
3) Does the employer by law have the authority to restrict the distribution of the 140 approval notice
4) Do I need the 140 approval notice in order to use EAD/AC-21 to change jobs ?
Thanks
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=16863&highlight=FOIA
I am planning to change jobs using the EAD / AC-21 in the next couple of months. To start off the process I wanted to get all the approval notices from the lawyer so that I have all the documents in place before I change jobs.
My employer uses a popular law firm to handle the immigration filing etc. I sent an email to the lawyer asking them to send me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.The lawyer responded that according to my company's internal policy they will not provide me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
I would like to know the following -
1) Has someone else also faced a similar issue ?
2) If so , is there a way to get them to send me a copy of th 140 approval notice
3) Does the employer by law have the authority to restrict the distribution of the 140 approval notice
4) Do I need the 140 approval notice in order to use EAD/AC-21 to change jobs ?
Thanks
hair Justin Bieber Wants To Be Like
reedandbamboo
09-14 10:37 AM
Till now EB2 India has much to cover till 2006 and then it will move fast. Also it seems very few People actually filed for EB2 after 2006 knowing the wait. Though we have aroun 24000 Perm for India (EB2/EB3) combined for 2007. Needless to say that USCIS data is very much required for Predicting Priority dates accurately
OR,
it could be because 2007 & 2008 folks, not having waited as long as the pre-2007 folks, haven't had as much cause to seek reprieve..
OR,
it could be because 2007 & 2008 folks, not having waited as long as the pre-2007 folks, haven't had as much cause to seek reprieve..
more...
Dalai Lama
12-20 03:38 PM
It is a great Idea.
hot Timberlake#39;s last album
thepaew
02-10 10:35 AM
Sent you a PM with my email address. Thx
Please PM me and I can give out the details.
THX
Please PM me and I can give out the details.
THX
more...
house Justin Timberlake Recording
shirish
09-11 06:37 AM
Thankx for the info.
did you send ur 485 application directly to TSC or was it transfered to TSC?
EB2 - India - July 2005
RD - 7/26/2007
ND - 09/27/2007
Hard LUD on I-485 on 9/3/08 saying that RFE was sent on 9/2. RFE recvd on 9/8. Last date to reply RFE by 10/6.
Hope this helps
did you send ur 485 application directly to TSC or was it transfered to TSC?
EB2 - India - July 2005
RD - 7/26/2007
ND - 09/27/2007
Hard LUD on I-485 on 9/3/08 saying that RFE was sent on 9/2. RFE recvd on 9/8. Last date to reply RFE by 10/6.
Hope this helps
tattoo Justin Timberlake - 83rd
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
more...
pictures Justin Timberlake amp; Timbaland
somegchuh
08-22 12:41 PM
I think you are absolutely right. Starting a business without a partnership is nearly impossible because you will be violating the H1 by working for it.
However, if you go into a partnership, that will be like owning stocks of a company. You don't have to work for it.
But you raise a good point about tax return scrutiny when you go for stamping. They can ask how you were making business income.
Has anyone here run a business on H1? What are the tax implications?
I have looked into this and talked to my lawyer. The basic consensus seems to be -- yes you can start your own business (wither alone or in partnership with someone else). But as long as you are on H1B VISA and do not have at least an EAD, you cannot actively(which means you cannot be running the day to day operations) work on your business. You can promote the business perform occasional volunteer work, but cannot be paid for this work.
I believe you can derive profits from the business (check with your lawyer because he's the one who will have to deal with any USCIS headaches), but as with all things, if the profits are high enough, your business may be scrutinized by the USCIS. Also remember when you go to the consulate to stamp your H1B, they will examine your tax records, and you will have to have a good enough explanation as to how you owned the business without violating the H1B status (by actively working on it). It's tricky and unless you are talking about small amounts of money think very carefully about starting your own business.
Since you cannot actively run the business, it makes sense to partner with a person who is authorized to run the day to day operations of the business (either a citizen of the US or a perm resident).
However, if you go into a partnership, that will be like owning stocks of a company. You don't have to work for it.
But you raise a good point about tax return scrutiny when you go for stamping. They can ask how you were making business income.
Has anyone here run a business on H1? What are the tax implications?
I have looked into this and talked to my lawyer. The basic consensus seems to be -- yes you can start your own business (wither alone or in partnership with someone else). But as long as you are on H1B VISA and do not have at least an EAD, you cannot actively(which means you cannot be running the day to day operations) work on your business. You can promote the business perform occasional volunteer work, but cannot be paid for this work.
I believe you can derive profits from the business (check with your lawyer because he's the one who will have to deal with any USCIS headaches), but as with all things, if the profits are high enough, your business may be scrutinized by the USCIS. Also remember when you go to the consulate to stamp your H1B, they will examine your tax records, and you will have to have a good enough explanation as to how you owned the business without violating the H1B status (by actively working on it). It's tricky and unless you are talking about small amounts of money think very carefully about starting your own business.
Since you cannot actively run the business, it makes sense to partner with a person who is authorized to run the day to day operations of the business (either a citizen of the US or a perm resident).
dresses Updated: Jun 16, 2011 11:00 AM
Prashanthi
08-21 01:54 PM
I received an RFE from USCIS 10 days after the date on the letter and need to respond in 33 days.
I came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006. This Company A had applied for my labor and I140 and both of them were approved through them. I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. I joined Company C in April 2007(change of H1) and been with them since. Company C would not do my GC.
During the July 2007 fiasco, Company A agreed to give me an offer letter that I submitted with my 485 application and my attorney (a good reputed one) mentioned in the application that I was working for company C.
I got an RFE now stating that I did not send my sealed medical exam which I had done and we have a scan of what was sent. They also want �a current letter of employment attesting to your offer of proposed employment. This letter should be written on the company�s official letterhead and cite the date you will begin working, whether the position is temporary or permanent , a description of the position, a description of the position that you currently hold for the company (if any), and offered salary�
Is this RFE bad? What might have triggered this RFW? Now my attorney suggests that since I had filed 485 through company A and I did not really invoke AC21 that I should give a new offer letter from Company A (they are willing to give one). My question is if I do that will there be further questions? The company I work for is a bigger one and Company A is really a body shopper, so I want to go with the letter from the current company. Also since it more than 2 years since I applied for 485 can I say I invoked AC 21? When can I disassociate myself from company A as I do not want to lose my current job.
I would like the attorneys or the members valuable help. Please do offer your opinions. Thank you all in advance.
__________________
The RFE is not unusual, they are sending RFE's on all pending I-485 applications in an attempt to pre-process the applications and have them ready before the priority date becomes available.
Even though the beneficiary does not have to be working for the GC sponsoring company and the offer of employment can be a future offer, i always advice my clients to work for the sponsoring employer, if possible, otherwise the USCIS might raise the issue of the validity of the job offer, they have done this in the past. I also always advice clients to do AC-21 whenever they can, rather than depend on future employment.
It is difficult to predict what the Officers decision will be and what factors he will look at, and your attorney is not wrong in his response, however if you were my client i would advice you to use AC-21. The USCIS has not indicated that AC-21 has to be invoked as soon as you join the new employer, no deadline for invoking AC-21. However, you should have a GC sponsor at all times to keep your GC alive. In your case, company A was your sponsor until the time that company C has agreed to be your sponsor and invoke AC-21.
It is also good to invoke AC-21 because at the time of filing for citizenship they will see if you worked for your sponsoring employer for at least 6 months after getting the GC and if you did not, they will ask why dint you.
I came to US through Company A in June 2007 and was with them until Dec 2006. This Company A had applied for my labor and I140 and both of them were approved through them. I joined Company B in Jan of 2007(change of H1) and was with them until April of 2007. I joined Company C in April 2007(change of H1) and been with them since. Company C would not do my GC.
During the July 2007 fiasco, Company A agreed to give me an offer letter that I submitted with my 485 application and my attorney (a good reputed one) mentioned in the application that I was working for company C.
I got an RFE now stating that I did not send my sealed medical exam which I had done and we have a scan of what was sent. They also want �a current letter of employment attesting to your offer of proposed employment. This letter should be written on the company�s official letterhead and cite the date you will begin working, whether the position is temporary or permanent , a description of the position, a description of the position that you currently hold for the company (if any), and offered salary�
Is this RFE bad? What might have triggered this RFW? Now my attorney suggests that since I had filed 485 through company A and I did not really invoke AC21 that I should give a new offer letter from Company A (they are willing to give one). My question is if I do that will there be further questions? The company I work for is a bigger one and Company A is really a body shopper, so I want to go with the letter from the current company. Also since it more than 2 years since I applied for 485 can I say I invoked AC 21? When can I disassociate myself from company A as I do not want to lose my current job.
I would like the attorneys or the members valuable help. Please do offer your opinions. Thank you all in advance.
__________________
The RFE is not unusual, they are sending RFE's on all pending I-485 applications in an attempt to pre-process the applications and have them ready before the priority date becomes available.
Even though the beneficiary does not have to be working for the GC sponsoring company and the offer of employment can be a future offer, i always advice my clients to work for the sponsoring employer, if possible, otherwise the USCIS might raise the issue of the validity of the job offer, they have done this in the past. I also always advice clients to do AC-21 whenever they can, rather than depend on future employment.
It is difficult to predict what the Officers decision will be and what factors he will look at, and your attorney is not wrong in his response, however if you were my client i would advice you to use AC-21. The USCIS has not indicated that AC-21 has to be invoked as soon as you join the new employer, no deadline for invoking AC-21. However, you should have a GC sponsor at all times to keep your GC alive. In your case, company A was your sponsor until the time that company C has agreed to be your sponsor and invoke AC-21.
It is also good to invoke AC-21 because at the time of filing for citizenship they will see if you worked for your sponsoring employer for at least 6 months after getting the GC and if you did not, they will ask why dint you.
more...
makeup Hey, all you Justin Timberlake
abhis0
09-18 07:13 PM
got receipt today . 07/02 10:25am the famous J.Barrett .
Guys, keep up, you will be fine and get it soon.
Congrats Buddy.....Was your I140 approved from TSC?
Guys, keep up, you will be fine and get it soon.
Congrats Buddy.....Was your I140 approved from TSC?
girlfriend too, Justin Timberlake,
bigboy007
11-04 02:53 PM
will they then transfer back to VSC ? i might even move out from this area after a year or less ?
hairstyles Justin Timberlake Tells
centrum
09-25 02:33 AM
Hi,
I just got approved for H-1B this year and I have some questions. I'm from a small country where they do not easily let their citizens to become citizens of other counties. So unless it's for educational purpose (undergraduate/graduate), they will not renew my passport for me.
My passport expires at the end of this year, and I was wondering if it's possible to obtain the following with an expired passport:
a) H-1B extension
b) PERM
c) green card
If it's not possible to obtain any of them with an expired passport, I must enroll in a graduate school to renew my passport. (Before my passport expires) I really prefer not to do this.
I would really appreciate if you could reply with cases you've seen or experienced in the past.
Thanks in advance.
I just got approved for H-1B this year and I have some questions. I'm from a small country where they do not easily let their citizens to become citizens of other counties. So unless it's for educational purpose (undergraduate/graduate), they will not renew my passport for me.
My passport expires at the end of this year, and I was wondering if it's possible to obtain the following with an expired passport:
a) H-1B extension
b) PERM
c) green card
If it's not possible to obtain any of them with an expired passport, I must enroll in a graduate school to renew my passport. (Before my passport expires) I really prefer not to do this.
I would really appreciate if you could reply with cases you've seen or experienced in the past.
Thanks in advance.
ktroche
11-01 12:03 AM
Sounds familiar. Family friendsfailed to file for an I94 extension on time. I believe they are here on a tourists VISA. Their VISAs are valid for 5 more years. They have not been expired for more than 180 days (right now around 120). How "automatic" is their return I94 if they leave and come back? We are willing to sponsor their return and have financial means as necessary. Argentina is their birth country. Help!!
raghuram
11-10 12:57 PM
Even though the immigration is the highest priority for all of us on this web site, that is not the same with Mr. President elect. He has to take care of other pressing issues like economy, Iraq war etc. first.
Therefore, I don't think it would be worthwhile to spend our resources for at least 6 more months. Once he settles down in the office and other things start moving, we can try at that time.
Therefore, I don't think it would be worthwhile to spend our resources for at least 6 more months. Once he settles down in the office and other things start moving, we can try at that time.
No comments:
Post a Comment