kanakabyraju
07-31 02:09 PM
My wife arrived on Saturday and we completed the medical exam on Monday.
My lawyer did receive the original RFE along with the original medical that we submitted. I had to carry the document to the doctor.
Doctor did miss MMR last time because of pregnancy. He completed that and update the same document with new dates of vaccination with signature and gave us back in sealed envelope.
RFE Response had reached Texas center yesterday.
PS: Do not complete the pending medical exam though you are aware of this. You will have to wait till you get RFE. looks like the doctor would have to complete again the original document with new dates.
Thanks for everything.
My lawyer did receive the original RFE along with the original medical that we submitted. I had to carry the document to the doctor.
Doctor did miss MMR last time because of pregnancy. He completed that and update the same document with new dates of vaccination with signature and gave us back in sealed envelope.
RFE Response had reached Texas center yesterday.
PS: Do not complete the pending medical exam though you are aware of this. You will have to wait till you get RFE. looks like the doctor would have to complete again the original document with new dates.
Thanks for everything.
wallpaper tattoo designs for girls side.
satyachowdary
03-09 07:44 PM
Hi
Can some one suggest a good lawyer in NJ/NY areas to handle my AC-21 case.
Can some one suggest a good lawyer in NJ/NY areas to handle my AC-21 case.
Blog Feeds
02-10 08:50 PM
Most lawyers that are versed in the H1B visa process, are getting busier and busier these days. As we are nearing the April 1, 2010 filing deadline for the H1B visa. Many speculations out there as to when will the Cap be reached this year. The economy is still in recovery mode, and employers are careful before hiring. Yet, many Immigration experts feel the Cap will be met early this year, but when is the big question.
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
2011 Hot Sexy Star Girls Tattoo
GC08
04-08 09:56 AM
If the law is changed. All dates will be current. if it's not changed your date from 2005 means squat. There are abt 200K ppl in the line ahead of you.. no way you are getting anything this life.. maybe you can leave your PD in inheritance to your kid born in India :)
So your GC process shouldn't be a factor.. you got great offer.. leave..!
Go for the better job... Nobody knows what's going to happen. I wish I had done that 3 years ago. :(
This is especially true considering the uncertain, erratic nature of U.S. immigration. The only thing you can do is to grap whatever is "certain" to you right now. Otherwise, you may get stuck with a bad job, a bad company, a bad boss and still not getting your green card, either because of the backlog or unforeseen lay-off. At that time, you will realize you have got nothing... That feeling really sucks!!! :mad:
So your GC process shouldn't be a factor.. you got great offer.. leave..!
Go for the better job... Nobody knows what's going to happen. I wish I had done that 3 years ago. :(
This is especially true considering the uncertain, erratic nature of U.S. immigration. The only thing you can do is to grap whatever is "certain" to you right now. Otherwise, you may get stuck with a bad job, a bad company, a bad boss and still not getting your green card, either because of the backlog or unforeseen lay-off. At that time, you will realize you have got nothing... That feeling really sucks!!! :mad:
more...
saint_2010
08-13 11:26 AM
looks like they will make us wait till 17th and accept/reject case from July 2nd...and most of the rejected cases might not be eligible to refile :mad:...this is my guess!
EB2_Jun03_dude
11-29 04:49 PM
I got this RFE email Nov 28th. Yet to receive the letter so do not have the "response time window".
Assuming they give me 6 weeks (Jan 7th) to respond. I will request my attorney to fax and then courier the Response to USCIS on Jan 3rd(Friday). I am planning to fly back on Jan 5th(Sunday). This way when I am at POE the I-485 status is still pending. It s..ks to do all these manipulations... but this trip is long pending and some urgent issues need to be taken care during this trip.
Assuming they give me 6 weeks (Jan 7th) to respond. I will request my attorney to fax and then courier the Response to USCIS on Jan 3rd(Friday). I am planning to fly back on Jan 5th(Sunday). This way when I am at POE the I-485 status is still pending. It s..ks to do all these manipulations... but this trip is long pending and some urgent issues need to be taken care during this trip.
more...
factoryman
02-09 07:46 PM
Feel free to use this material and beat the efforts to snatch unused EB3 visas. Demand that these be allocated to all retrogressed categories.
U.S. Plan to Lure Nurses May Hurt Poor Nations
As the United States runs short of nurses, senators are looking abroad. A little-noticed provision in their immigration bill would throw open the gate to nurses and, some fear, drain them from the world's developing countries.
............
The exodus of nurses from poor to rich countries has strained health systems in the developing world, which are already facing severe shortages of their own. Many African countries have begun to demand compensation for the training and loss of nurses and doctors who move away.
....................
Public health experts in poor countries, told about the proposal in recent days, reacted with dismay and outrage, coupled with doubts that their nurses would resist the magnetic pull of the United States, which sits at the pinnacle of the global labor market for nurses.
..............
Removing the immigration cap, they said, would particularly hit the Philippines, which sends more nurses to the United States than any other country, at least several thousand a year. Health care has deteriorated there in recent years as tens of thousands of nurses have moved abroad. Thousands of ill-paid doctors have even abandoned their profession to become migrant-ready nurses themselves, Filipino researchers say.
................
Holly Burkhalter, with Physicians for Human Rights, an advocacy group, said the nurse proposal could undermine the United States' multibillion-dollar effort to combat AIDS and malaria by potentially worsening the shortage of health workers in poor countries. "We're pouring water in a bucket with a hole in it, and we drilled the hole," she said.
LINK at NYTIMES.COM (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/24/world/americas/24nurses.html?ex=1171170000&en=5f216b04314ec71c&ei=5070) (requires free registration)
U.S. Plan to Lure Nurses May Hurt Poor Nations
As the United States runs short of nurses, senators are looking abroad. A little-noticed provision in their immigration bill would throw open the gate to nurses and, some fear, drain them from the world's developing countries.
............
The exodus of nurses from poor to rich countries has strained health systems in the developing world, which are already facing severe shortages of their own. Many African countries have begun to demand compensation for the training and loss of nurses and doctors who move away.
....................
Public health experts in poor countries, told about the proposal in recent days, reacted with dismay and outrage, coupled with doubts that their nurses would resist the magnetic pull of the United States, which sits at the pinnacle of the global labor market for nurses.
..............
Removing the immigration cap, they said, would particularly hit the Philippines, which sends more nurses to the United States than any other country, at least several thousand a year. Health care has deteriorated there in recent years as tens of thousands of nurses have moved abroad. Thousands of ill-paid doctors have even abandoned their profession to become migrant-ready nurses themselves, Filipino researchers say.
................
Holly Burkhalter, with Physicians for Human Rights, an advocacy group, said the nurse proposal could undermine the United States' multibillion-dollar effort to combat AIDS and malaria by potentially worsening the shortage of health workers in poor countries. "We're pouring water in a bucket with a hole in it, and we drilled the hole," she said.
LINK at NYTIMES.COM (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/24/world/americas/24nurses.html?ex=1171170000&en=5f216b04314ec71c&ei=5070) (requires free registration)
2010 of women#39;s tattoo designs.
n4nature
02-05 12:41 PM
You need to check with your HR and Attorney for the legal requirements. Make sure you are not breaking any law.
snathan,
I checked with my attorney and according to him, I have to go with MS+4. A friend of mine got the labor approved with MS+0 and he was MS+5 already. Hence I thought someone here might know better.
Thanks!
snathan,
I checked with my attorney and according to him, I have to go with MS+4. A friend of mine got the labor approved with MS+0 and he was MS+5 already. Hence I thought someone here might know better.
Thanks!
more...
senthil1
05-04 11:06 PM
You can do it. But if you are not responding properly then you may end up paying more to Lawyer.
Hi All,
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
Hi All,
Recently I received an RFE on my Wife's 485 application asking to prove that we both are still married. My lawyer is asking for around $400 to respond to this RFE, We have already paid the lawyer about $7500 until now for our GC process and she is no longer the preferred lawyer for the company that I am working for, but I had to keep my case with her as she has processed all of my applications until now. My questions are:
1. Can we ourselves respond to the RFE and save the $400.00,
2. If so, What's the process and what documents that we need to send to prove that we are still married.
Appreciate all of your help in this regard.
Thanks
hair hot tattoo designs for girls
sundarpn
07-17 07:32 PM
In the same boat...
if the principal files 485 now and then gets married say 2-3 months later when the dates are NOT current, can a dependent 485 be filed for the spouse so that she can get EAD?
I was told that even in the case of a dependent 485 filing, the dates have to be current for the application to be accepted :(
On related lines, if the principal application gets EAD and after 6 months moves to a new job based on EAD, and then he gets married, can he bring his spouse on H4? I think the answer is NO.
if the principal files 485 now and then gets married say 2-3 months later when the dates are NOT current, can a dependent 485 be filed for the spouse so that she can get EAD?
I was told that even in the case of a dependent 485 filing, the dates have to be current for the application to be accepted :(
On related lines, if the principal application gets EAD and after 6 months moves to a new job based on EAD, and then he gets married, can he bring his spouse on H4? I think the answer is NO.
more...
fall1998
05-16 10:12 AM
So, the count of people still waiting is reducing (many users are saying they got approved in last couple of days).
I am getting a feeling that USCIS is really clearing out the backlog this time.
I am getting a feeling that USCIS is really clearing out the backlog this time.
hot tattoo designs for girls side.
shana04
05-18 01:05 PM
RFE for Dependent - To show the valid status from day of entery till we filed I 485
One of the supporting document is I-94, but we gave at port of departure.
We have the second I-94 which we received while coming back. Is this copy good enough or do we need to get the second copy.
any body with similar experience please share your thoughts.
Thanks,
Shana
One of the supporting document is I-94, but we gave at port of departure.
We have the second I-94 which we received while coming back. Is this copy good enough or do we need to get the second copy.
any body with similar experience please share your thoughts.
Thanks,
Shana
more...
house body side tattoo
vallabhu
09-10 10:04 AM
Currently on H1B 8th year extension which will expire on 25th June, 2009.
Labor PD: 9th August, 2004
Labor cleared: 11th September, 2007.
I-140 (approval pending) filed on 4th October, 2007. Received at USCIS on 5th October, 2007.
Can’t file for I-485 since the EB3 date for India is unavailable.
There is a high chance that I might be laid off at my current employer in the next 2-3 weeks.
Can I transfer my H-1 upto June 25th, 2009 (or later) as well as start a new PERM case in EB2 category?
In case of the above H-1 transfer, will the new H-1 be valid for 1 year from the filing or will it be upto 25th June, 2009?
What are my other options not to go out of status or leave the country?
To my knowledge you do not need have Labor pending from the same company you apply for H1 extension we did the same thing for on of my colleague here he had labor pending form his previous company and we hired him in his 7th year extension with no issues
So find a new job apply for H1 do premium show this pending labor and pending I140 as basis for H1 extension and transfer
an then apply for new perm and if your existing company is willing the share copy of your I140 if it is approved you can carry over the priority date too.
if they revoke I140 nothing can be done even you H1 extension will be in jeopardy it will totally depend on the adjudicator's understanding of the law to process your application
Labor PD: 9th August, 2004
Labor cleared: 11th September, 2007.
I-140 (approval pending) filed on 4th October, 2007. Received at USCIS on 5th October, 2007.
Can’t file for I-485 since the EB3 date for India is unavailable.
There is a high chance that I might be laid off at my current employer in the next 2-3 weeks.
Can I transfer my H-1 upto June 25th, 2009 (or later) as well as start a new PERM case in EB2 category?
In case of the above H-1 transfer, will the new H-1 be valid for 1 year from the filing or will it be upto 25th June, 2009?
What are my other options not to go out of status or leave the country?
To my knowledge you do not need have Labor pending from the same company you apply for H1 extension we did the same thing for on of my colleague here he had labor pending form his previous company and we hired him in his 7th year extension with no issues
So find a new job apply for H1 do premium show this pending labor and pending I140 as basis for H1 extension and transfer
an then apply for new perm and if your existing company is willing the share copy of your I140 if it is approved you can carry over the priority date too.
if they revoke I140 nothing can be done even you H1 extension will be in jeopardy it will totally depend on the adjudicator's understanding of the law to process your application
tattoo tattoo designs for girls feet.
gc_hopful
06-04 04:06 PM
Hi,
My status on the DOL website shows 'CERTIFIED'. How long after status 'certified' will the attorney get hard copy of the approval notice so we can proceed wth I-140. It has been almost 1 and 1/2 weeks since I saw my status as certified.
Also, how soon after applying I-485 can we travel abroad.
Thanks in advance.
GC_HOPFUL
My status on the DOL website shows 'CERTIFIED'. How long after status 'certified' will the attorney get hard copy of the approval notice so we can proceed wth I-140. It has been almost 1 and 1/2 weeks since I saw my status as certified.
Also, how soon after applying I-485 can we travel abroad.
Thanks in advance.
GC_HOPFUL
more...
pictures Anchor tattoo on girl#39;s body
sparky_jones
09-30 07:49 PM
Thanks for your response. I guess option 1 would be preferable. However, the fact that there is no straightforward way of confirming if USCIS took action on the request to remove the attorney is a little unnerving.
Option 1:
You could write a letter to USCIS to let them know that this attorney who filed your I-485 does not represent you anymore and future correspondence be addressed to you directly and also to revoke the G-28. You will not get any letter from USCIS confirming that your request was processed.
Option 2:
You could hire a new attorney to represent you. In that case he would file a new G-28, the USCIS does send a letter confirming that they accepted your new attorney representation. Meanwhile, until this happens, all the correspondence will go to the old attorney who could potentially screw up your case.
If you are lucky enough and don't get a RFE till the new G-28 is accepted, You are SAFE. Also, any attorney you hire will charge you the FULL fees for I-485 filing that will be at least $3000.00 plus additional $5000.00 (If your case gets complicated). My best bet for you is to use option 1 and save your hard earned $. As you'll be taking your chances anyways.
You should urge LIVE to start up an emergency rescue service (similar to what AAA does), i.e., to get an attorney who would help taking up cases for members only who suffer from unscrupulous attorneys for free and charge a low monthly membership fees till one gets the green card. I hope someone from LIVE is reading this post?
Option 1:
You could write a letter to USCIS to let them know that this attorney who filed your I-485 does not represent you anymore and future correspondence be addressed to you directly and also to revoke the G-28. You will not get any letter from USCIS confirming that your request was processed.
Option 2:
You could hire a new attorney to represent you. In that case he would file a new G-28, the USCIS does send a letter confirming that they accepted your new attorney representation. Meanwhile, until this happens, all the correspondence will go to the old attorney who could potentially screw up your case.
If you are lucky enough and don't get a RFE till the new G-28 is accepted, You are SAFE. Also, any attorney you hire will charge you the FULL fees for I-485 filing that will be at least $3000.00 plus additional $5000.00 (If your case gets complicated). My best bet for you is to use option 1 and save your hard earned $. As you'll be taking your chances anyways.
You should urge LIVE to start up an emergency rescue service (similar to what AAA does), i.e., to get an attorney who would help taking up cases for members only who suffer from unscrupulous attorneys for free and charge a low monthly membership fees till one gets the green card. I hope someone from LIVE is reading this post?
dresses house tattoo designs for girls
Blog Feeds
02-10 08:50 PM
Most lawyers that are versed in the H1B visa process, are getting busier and busier these days. As we are nearing the April 1, 2010 filing deadline for the H1B visa. Many speculations out there as to when will the Cap be reached this year. The economy is still in recovery mode, and employers are careful before hiring. Yet, many Immigration experts feel the Cap will be met early this year, but when is the big question.
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
With drastic changes to the Labor Condition Application (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/07/icert_portal_for_lca_filing.html)process (now taking more than 7 days to process), as well as unreasonable denials (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2009/08/h1b_visa_lawyer_about_icert_wo.html), planning early is the key to a successful H1B case this year. But in this post, I want to go back to the basics, the Cap and the legislative background.
Background
On October 21, 1998 Congress passed, and the President signed into law, the much debated American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-277 (hereinafter ACWIA). This legislation was first introduced by Senator Spencer Abraham (R-MI), the Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Immigration, in response to the inadequate numbers of H-1B visas available in any fiscal year. As part of the Immigration Act of 1990, Congress imposed a 65,000 per year cap on these visas. In 1997, the cap was reached prior to the end of the fiscal year. The situation grew to crisis proportions in fiscal year 1998 when all 65,000 visas numbers were taken in May of 1998.
In early March 1998, Senator Abraham introduced a bill entitled, "The American Competitiveness Act." The legislation was introduced on the heels of numerous reports and hearings concerning the high tech worker shortage in the United States. The primary goal of the legislation was to address the looming exhaustion of the H-1B professional or specialty occupation worker visa numbers. (http://www.h1b.biz/lawyer-attorney-1137085.html)
The ACWIA went through many different stages before an agreement could be reached. A complete elimination of the cap had originally been proposed by Senator Abraham. The legislation was then modified to increase the number of H-1B visa numbers available during the government fiscal year; provide additional funds for scholarships in the computer science and mathematics areas; increase enforcement of the Department of Labor component of the H-1B visa process; and provide clarification on the prevailing wage requirements of the process. The legislation also addressed permanent residence by providing for an extension of the H-1B visa should a permanent residence petition be pending, and through restructuring the allocation of the employment-based immigrant visa numbers.
This legislative game between conservative isolationists/liberal protectors of the U.S. workforce and moderate Democrats and Republicans supporting business needs and demands, caused chaos among U.S.-based businesses in need of skilled professional workers. From May 11, 1998 until October 1, 1998 U.S. businesses, research institutions and other organizations were unable to recruit foreign workers as temporary professionals. With the U.S. economy still booming and unemployment rates remaining at an all-time low, businesses, especially in the high tech sector, encountered many problems as a result of the cut-off in H-1B visa availability. These problems included, but were not limited to, taking employees off the U.S. payroll, sending employees back to their home country or to sites outside the U.S. as well as the termination of some critical development projects.
Requirements in the Statute
The ACWIA purportedly balances the need for increased professional visas numbers for foreign workers and the desire to protect the U.S. workforce. The following is a summary of the significant changes made by the legislation.
A. Temporary Increase in the Number of Professional Visas Available
There will be an increase from 65,000 to 115,000 visas for fiscal year 1999 and 2000 (through September 30, 2000). In fiscal year 2001, 107,500 visas will be available. Beginning October 1, 2001 the numbers will revert back to 65,000.
B. Electronic Postings
LCA notices may be posted electronically in situations without a bargaining representative. This provision was effective upon date of enactment.
C. Attestations Required for Employers Dependent Upon Foreign Professionals
U.S. employers of 51 or more employees, whose workforce is comprised of 15% or more foreign nationals in the H-1B category are considered dependent employers and must make certain attestations. Employers will also be considered dependent if they employ 26- 50 full time employees and have more than 12 H-1B employees or if they employ 7 -25 employees and have more than 7 H-1B employees.
The dependent employer must attest that it has not and will not displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before and 90 days after filing the visa application. This attestation carries through to employers who place employees at another worksite. The H-1B dependent employer must also attest that it has taken good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers using industry wide standards and has offered the position to any U.S. worker who is equally or better qualified for the job the foreign worker is sought.
H-1B employees with a Master�s degree or a salary of $60,000 or higher are not included in the attestation requirements and for the first 6 months following the implementation will not be included in the dependent employer calculation.
D. Increased Enforcement and Penalties for Violations
The Department of Labor may fine employers between $1,000-$35,000 per violation and preclude participation in the H-1B program for up to three years.
E. Back Benching H-1B Employees
Employers must pay H-1B nonimmigrants the wage stated on the H-1B petition even if the beneficiary is in nonproductive status. This does not apply to non-productive time due to non work related factors.
F. Benefits
Employers must offer foreign workers benefits and eligibility for insurance, disability, retirement and savings plans, stock options, etc., on the same basis as offerings made to U.S. workers.
G. Additional Fee for Use of H-1B Program
Beginning December 1, 1998, employers are required to pay an additional fee of $500 for an initial H-1B petition and for the first extension. These fees are to be used to support job training programs and scholarships for U.S. workers.
H. Prevailing Wage Computations
For institutions of higher education, related or affiliated non-profit entities or non profit or governmental research organizations, the prevailing wage shall take into account employees at such institutions in the area of employment.
I. Academic Honoraria
Payments of honoraria may now be made to B-1 and B-2 visitors for usual academic activity lasting 9 days at an academic institution or affiliated non-profit entity or a non-profit governmental research organization. No more than 5 honorarium may be received within a six month period.
Employers based in the U.S. now have a temporary reprieve when hiring foreign professionals. However, it is uncertain whether the 65,000 visas for this fiscal year will be adequate to meet the demand for this year and next. Some government officials estimate that visas will be unavailable as early as the beginning of May 2010. In addition, it is still unclear what is on the legislative horizon, reform or not. Pro Immigrants want to come with a proposal to reform legal immigration. U.S. employers employing foreign nationals in any capacity would be well advised to carefully monitor future legislative and regulatory proposals on the horizon. All I can say is that if you plan on hiring a foreign worker, you better call your lawyer now!!!
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/02/h1b_visa_lawyer_the_filing_sea.html)
more...
makeup side. girls tattoo designs
saimrathi
07-10 08:33 AM
No checks cashed yet...
PD Mar '05
485 + 140 Concurrently sent on 6/30 recd at NSC on 7/2/07.
PD Mar '05
485 + 140 Concurrently sent on 6/30 recd at NSC on 7/2/07.
girlfriend tattoo designs down side.
wellwisher02
03-29 09:37 PM
Hello All,
I have an Appointment in Halifax Canada but I was wondering if I am eligible for the following
1 ) My H1B visa expired on 12/09/2006 from Company A
2) I have I94 from Company B and I want H1B visa from Company B
In Halifax appointment letter it says that they "issue visas for residents of our Consular district and for state-side revalidations only".
I am from India and I going to Canada on Visitors visa.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
SG
---
As far as I believe, you should not have any problem whatsoever in getting your H1B visa from Company B stamped in your passp
ort. You need to carry all relevant documents related to H1B (including old H1B approvals, old passport (if any), employment credentials, proof of address, W2 forms, etc) so that you're not caught unawares during the H1B visa validation process. Before you board the flight back to the US with your new H1B visa, the US Immigration/Customs counter will issue you a new I-94.
God forbid, even if they deny your H1B visa from your new employer, you should still be able to return to the US on the expired H1B visa since you made an honest H1B visa trip.
On "issue visas for residents of our Consular district and for state-side revalidations only", I'd suggest you call up the US Consulate to make it doubly-sure you do not run into any issue.
I had been to Vancouver, Canada a couple of times to get my H1B visa stamped. On both occasions, the H1B visa stamping was successful.
I have an Appointment in Halifax Canada but I was wondering if I am eligible for the following
1 ) My H1B visa expired on 12/09/2006 from Company A
2) I have I94 from Company B and I want H1B visa from Company B
In Halifax appointment letter it says that they "issue visas for residents of our Consular district and for state-side revalidations only".
I am from India and I going to Canada on Visitors visa.
Please let me know.
Thanks,
SG
---
As far as I believe, you should not have any problem whatsoever in getting your H1B visa from Company B stamped in your passp
ort. You need to carry all relevant documents related to H1B (including old H1B approvals, old passport (if any), employment credentials, proof of address, W2 forms, etc) so that you're not caught unawares during the H1B visa validation process. Before you board the flight back to the US with your new H1B visa, the US Immigration/Customs counter will issue you a new I-94.
God forbid, even if they deny your H1B visa from your new employer, you should still be able to return to the US on the expired H1B visa since you made an honest H1B visa trip.
On "issue visas for residents of our Consular district and for state-side revalidations only", I'd suggest you call up the US Consulate to make it doubly-sure you do not run into any issue.
I had been to Vancouver, Canada a couple of times to get my H1B visa stamped. On both occasions, the H1B visa stamping was successful.
hairstyles Girl#39;s Side Tattoo Designs
looneytunezez
04-24 01:58 PM
As per my understanding 10 days is from the time you change your permanent address. Due to lease constraint I also had two apartments at same time. I filled online AR-11 within 10 days after I moved to new apartment.
Thanks folks
LT.
why the red dot btw?
Thanks folks
LT.
why the red dot btw?
tnite
09-12 03:23 PM
Where do guys see the LUD? And what number do you call the USCIS on? Thanx.
Register in USCIS.gov and then enter the I140 info in your portfolio and you will see the LUD(last updated date)
18003755283
and then press 12126
Register in USCIS.gov and then enter the I140 info in your portfolio and you will see the LUD(last updated date)
18003755283
and then press 12126
bsbawa10
08-15 07:06 AM
How to add an enty?
it does not let me.
Try it now
it does not let me.
Try it now
No comments:
Post a Comment