h1bemployee
02-25 09:03 PM
Are you for real? USCIS has nothing to do with LCA amendment. That should be DOL (Department of Labor).
thats what my employer told me....
thats what my employer told me....
wallpaper amistad y amor
rocky74
07-20 12:35 AM
Only those whose labor got approved prior to July can apply for 140/485. August Bulletin says "U" for all categories
It is hard to predict when the numbers will be available again in the future. They may open up for EB1 and for other countires except India, China, Phillipphines and Mexico.
You mean labor approved in July or Labor filed in July and approved before August 17. I understand that Priority date of July means that you must have filed the LCP in July.
It is hard to predict when the numbers will be available again in the future. They may open up for EB1 and for other countires except India, China, Phillipphines and Mexico.
You mean labor approved in July or Labor filed in July and approved before August 17. I understand that Priority date of July means that you must have filed the LCP in July.
raj1998
04-21 09:51 AM
City of Houston eGovernment Center (http://www.houstontx.gov/)
2011 amor y amistad. mensajes
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
vicks_don
04-18 03:16 PM
All cases filed before april 1st would they be transfered to TSC or processed at VSC.
Mine was filed last october.
Thanks
Mine was filed last october.
Thanks
v2neha
04-25 11:26 AM
hello folks,
I am switching jobs after an approved I140 and over 180 days from 485 receipt.
I am expecting no problems when leaving my current company. but just incase they decide to revoke my 140,
- is it ok to file AC21 after i receive the NOID if some thing happens or is it better to file AC21 now?
one other complication is i will be changing address too. how long does it take for USCIS to update my new address in their records? the reason i am asking is if they send me RFE or NOID, i will totally miss the boat if they send it to the wrong address. i am sure they will send a copy to my attorney, but he works form my current employer and I will assume he is less likely to help. Does it help if i file G28 with my own name and my new address?
I need to join my new job in 10 days and i hev give my crrent company a notice so it is a bit urgent. Please help.
Thank you
Rex
Even if online address change thru AR-11 has not taken effect, post office will forward your mail to your new address for 12 months - make sure you fill out change of address form with postal dept immediately
I am switching jobs after an approved I140 and over 180 days from 485 receipt.
I am expecting no problems when leaving my current company. but just incase they decide to revoke my 140,
- is it ok to file AC21 after i receive the NOID if some thing happens or is it better to file AC21 now?
one other complication is i will be changing address too. how long does it take for USCIS to update my new address in their records? the reason i am asking is if they send me RFE or NOID, i will totally miss the boat if they send it to the wrong address. i am sure they will send a copy to my attorney, but he works form my current employer and I will assume he is less likely to help. Does it help if i file G28 with my own name and my new address?
I need to join my new job in 10 days and i hev give my crrent company a notice so it is a bit urgent. Please help.
Thank you
Rex
Even if online address change thru AR-11 has not taken effect, post office will forward your mail to your new address for 12 months - make sure you fill out change of address form with postal dept immediately
more...
ahaadi
01-08 01:46 PM
You can get the passport the same day using tatkaal service but you need to spend the whole day in consulate or you can get it in 3 days.
I got it from NY consulate. Also tatkaal service charges 140 bucks and regular one is 40 bucks.
I got it in a week, I got it from SF Consulate.
I got it from NY consulate. Also tatkaal service charges 140 bucks and regular one is 40 bucks.
I got it in a week, I got it from SF Consulate.
2010 images de amor y amistad amor
dixie
02-10 07:30 PM
I agree - the UK govt's policy statement, at least on the doctor's issue was clear : "We had a shortage earlier, therefore we needed foreign doctors. The shortage no longer exists, so we no longer need you. Please leave before mm-dd-yyyy". Contrast that with the US govts "we love your brains but hate your bodies policy" .. on one hand corporations cannot do without foreign skilled labor, at the same time folks like Lou FOULMOUTH and his cronies in congress and elsewhere cannot do without bashing them. In the tug-of-war between these two parties, we are left to rot on the sidelines - neither kicked out, nor allowed a rightful place to progress in society. If thats the case, why don't they simply remove the dual intent clause (and all those 1-yr / 3yr dole-outs aka extensions) from the H1-B program ? Thats better than having to live 15 years on an H1-B.
UK is at lease clear what is their immigration policy. I would like to have similar stand from US Govt where they come out and say in clear words "we don't want to in here" OR "Come here, work for 6 years and leave" OR "we cant you to stay and fix the GC process.
UK is at lease clear what is their immigration policy. I would like to have similar stand from US Govt where they come out and say in clear words "we don't want to in here" OR "Come here, work for 6 years and leave" OR "we cant you to stay and fix the GC process.
more...
DallasBlue
07-13 11:42 AM
How about " Thank you USCIS " banners ?:confused:
dont forget to get your watter bottles.
dont forget to get your watter bottles.
hair de amistad y amor. imagenes de
tinamatthew
07-21 04:08 PM
My PD is Nov 2004, I got 140 approved. Im not filing 485 now as im unmarried.
Any ideas when can be the date current again(for my PD atleast)?
Are you planning on getting married? Even if you are when you get married, your spouse can file as a derivative and incase your green card is approved. Your spouse will have 180 days in which to apply (i-485).
Talk to your lawyer, it may make sense to file now!
Any ideas when can be the date current again(for my PD atleast)?
Are you planning on getting married? Even if you are when you get married, your spouse can file as a derivative and incase your green card is approved. Your spouse will have 180 days in which to apply (i-485).
Talk to your lawyer, it may make sense to file now!
more...
inskrish
08-31 01:39 AM
So.. if anyone has the info on how to register a new country, I'd like to know.
Registering a new country? I hope you are not kidding, needhelp!:)
Regards,
IK
Registering a new country? I hope you are not kidding, needhelp!:)
Regards,
IK
hot tarjetas de amor y amistad
H1B-GC
02-01 08:30 AM
Finally after nine years in US my Green Card is approved.
On this very day in 2001 i was in flight to USA
1) Came to US on Feb 1st 2001
2) Changed employer in 2002 and GC applied in 2003 in EB3
3) After 2 years, changed the employer in 2004 and applied GC in EB2 at the end of 2004
4) Application with the DOL sent to the BEC
5) DOL approved the petition in Jan 2007
6) Applied I140 in April 2007
7) Applied I485 in July 2007
8) FP completed and EAD received in September 2007
9) I140 RFE Aug 2008
10) I140 denied in March 2009 - Reason is Too may petitions from the employer
11) Appeal sent in April 2009
12) Once the dates are current in Sep 2009, i talked to the attorney and decided to file a new I140 with the same labor
13) New I140 filed in Sep 2009
14) Received a notice from USCIS to withdraw the appeal inorder to process the new I140
15) Appeal withdrawn in October 2009
16) New I140 approved in Nov 2009
17) FP notices received in November for I485
18) FP done in December 2009
19) Infopass appointment in Jan 2010. Background check is completed
20) Received CPO emails for both the cases on Jan 21st 2010
21) Welcome notice mailed on Jan 22nd 2010
22) Welcome Notice and Cards received on Jan 30th.
22) I485 approval notices sent on Jan 26th 2010 - Did not received yet.
For me it is a bumpy ride. I went through most of the steps in the immigration (RFE's, Denials, MTR's, Appeals ..)
I wish all the best for all IV memebers waiting in GC queue or waiting to apply for I485.
Thanks
Congrats Buddy!!
On this very day in 2001 i was in flight to USA
1) Came to US on Feb 1st 2001
2) Changed employer in 2002 and GC applied in 2003 in EB3
3) After 2 years, changed the employer in 2004 and applied GC in EB2 at the end of 2004
4) Application with the DOL sent to the BEC
5) DOL approved the petition in Jan 2007
6) Applied I140 in April 2007
7) Applied I485 in July 2007
8) FP completed and EAD received in September 2007
9) I140 RFE Aug 2008
10) I140 denied in March 2009 - Reason is Too may petitions from the employer
11) Appeal sent in April 2009
12) Once the dates are current in Sep 2009, i talked to the attorney and decided to file a new I140 with the same labor
13) New I140 filed in Sep 2009
14) Received a notice from USCIS to withdraw the appeal inorder to process the new I140
15) Appeal withdrawn in October 2009
16) New I140 approved in Nov 2009
17) FP notices received in November for I485
18) FP done in December 2009
19) Infopass appointment in Jan 2010. Background check is completed
20) Received CPO emails for both the cases on Jan 21st 2010
21) Welcome notice mailed on Jan 22nd 2010
22) Welcome Notice and Cards received on Jan 30th.
22) I485 approval notices sent on Jan 26th 2010 - Did not received yet.
For me it is a bumpy ride. I went through most of the steps in the immigration (RFE's, Denials, MTR's, Appeals ..)
I wish all the best for all IV memebers waiting in GC queue or waiting to apply for I485.
Thanks
Congrats Buddy!!
more...
house fotos de amistad y amor.
desitechie
07-13 07:54 PM
Hi,
Recently I transfered my H1 B from X company to Y company & now I am going for my visa renewal. My previous employer is not providing me the experience letter. Though I am having all my paystubs, appointment letter etc. I think I need the experience letter also...So what should I do now. Please suggest me.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Experience letter is always useful for H1B and Green Card purposes. Try to take an affidavit from your supervisor(ideal) or colleague listing the duration and technologies involved.
Recently I transfered my H1 B from X company to Y company & now I am going for my visa renewal. My previous employer is not providing me the experience letter. Though I am having all my paystubs, appointment letter etc. I think I need the experience letter also...So what should I do now. Please suggest me.
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Experience letter is always useful for H1B and Green Card purposes. Try to take an affidavit from your supervisor(ideal) or colleague listing the duration and technologies involved.
tattoo de amor y amistad. de amor
hpandey
06-02 03:16 PM
you are right, but isnt that found only when you are travelling outside of the USA? If I am in USA till i get a gc and then add my wife, how will anyone know if she is out of status ?
As people have said above as soon as you move from H1 to EAD your H1 would be no longer be valid and hence the corresponding H-4 status will no longer be valid and since you cannot file for AOS for your wife now , your wife will be out of status.
This information will come up in future when you apply for I-485 for your wife.It does not matter if your wife is still in the US or not. She will be out of status if you lose your H1 status ( just like anyone who loses his H1 status the dependent also loses his status ).
As people have said above as soon as you move from H1 to EAD your H1 would be no longer be valid and hence the corresponding H-4 status will no longer be valid and since you cannot file for AOS for your wife now , your wife will be out of status.
This information will come up in future when you apply for I-485 for your wife.It does not matter if your wife is still in the US or not. She will be out of status if you lose your H1 status ( just like anyone who loses his H1 status the dependent also loses his status ).
more...
pictures amor y amistad gratis.
veni001
02-03 02:04 PM
anyone know if,
Bachelors Equivalent ( Bachelors-3Yrs + Masters-2Yrs ) + 5 years Experience
qualify for EB2 ?
thanks,
I think it can be, but when the job requirement Bachelor Equivalent+ 5Year then it opens up for a wide range.
You can show BS equivalence by 3 yr degree+1 yr degree or 3yr degree + 2 yr degree.....etc
For additional info Please click here (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60a RCRD) or here (http://www.murthy.com/eb2.html)
Bachelors Equivalent ( Bachelors-3Yrs + Masters-2Yrs ) + 5 years Experience
qualify for EB2 ?
thanks,
I think it can be, but when the job requirement Bachelor Equivalent+ 5Year then it opens up for a wide range.
You can show BS equivalence by 3 yr degree+1 yr degree or 3yr degree + 2 yr degree.....etc
For additional info Please click here (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCR D&vgnextchannel=816a83453d4a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60a RCRD) or here (http://www.murthy.com/eb2.html)
dresses hairstyles amistad y amor.
munnashi
10-31 06:08 AM
Guru's
My I140 is approved on October 24 2007 and original document has got my lawyer and employer, but I have not received any original document. My question is: Does I can get original document or I have to ask to my lawyer or employer?
My I140 is approved on October 24 2007 and original document has got my lawyer and employer, but I have not received any original document. My question is: Does I can get original document or I have to ask to my lawyer or employer?
more...
makeup Postales de amistad gratis
bigboy007
12-10 02:56 PM
Please consider contributing IV...IV need your help to resolve our immigration problems.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15905
Oh definately no worries i am going to contribute + i have requested 20 of my friends to join IV and participate the funding drive. I am comitted to IV
any more ideas on my question please reg. 140 porting i am not sure .. and if we dont have to intimate USCIS. Help me out
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15905
Oh definately no worries i am going to contribute + i have requested 20 of my friends to join IV and participate the funding drive. I am comitted to IV
any more ideas on my question please reg. 140 porting i am not sure .. and if we dont have to intimate USCIS. Help me out
girlfriend pictures de amistad y amor.
darsh678
12-26 03:17 PM
No you cant do that. One should not leave country when 485 pending. Once you laid off from sponsor you can not do counsural processing also. Travelling in AP should be for a mimimum period. It will be big mistake, if you leave country without job offer. No one knows when they issue RFE for employment verification during your 485 pending period. If you do not have job when they issue RFE, thats it. Bottomline is, it is better to be employed during 485 pending and stay in the country to reply any RFE.
Can we take vacation for 2 months when we have pending 485 and 140 approved for more than six months. I had applied for 485 and 140 when i was on h4 but have now lost that status...
I plan to be under new employer with the same job description while going on for vacation and returning back on AP.
Please clearify...
Can we take vacation for 2 months when we have pending 485 and 140 approved for more than six months. I had applied for 485 and 140 when i was on h4 but have now lost that status...
I plan to be under new employer with the same job description while going on for vacation and returning back on AP.
Please clearify...
hairstyles y amistad. amistad y amor.
saravanaraj.sathya
07-31 10:08 AM
I would like to know what are the primary reasons why employers revokes approved I-140 after invoking AC21 after 180 days.
a. I think one of the reason is Labor substitution. If they want to use it for someone else. Now that this is eliminated, I think there will be minimal chances of revocation in future.
b. Do big companies like Infy, Wipro do this?
c. They could revoke because of problems between employer and employees...I think we need to be patient and work this out..
Please reply with ur inputs.
a. I think one of the reason is Labor substitution. If they want to use it for someone else. Now that this is eliminated, I think there will be minimal chances of revocation in future.
b. Do big companies like Infy, Wipro do this?
c. They could revoke because of problems between employer and employees...I think we need to be patient and work this out..
Please reply with ur inputs.
gc4me
07-05 09:02 PM
Please let me know if anyone/your friend has port PD using receipt#. Logically it should be possible, as USCIS should pull everything from DB using receipt#. The question is has anyone successfully done this?
haifromsk@yahoo.com
09-06 02:50 PM
MS+0 is totally fine as long as the requirement is masters. It has least complications. When ppl with no masters apply no probs. When ppl with masters and exp apply, I am sure they will ask for more wage than labour cert. On those grounds u can deny those resumes. Its not worth to change employer just for that reason. There are many other big things that ur employer should back u in. So stay with someone who will back u well with apper work and with whome u have a rappo or will have a rappo.
No comments:
Post a Comment