raysaikat
07-10 07:53 PM
Hi raysaikat,
I talked to my attorney about the security clearance and he said my security clearance is done successfully. basically, FBI will do all that behind the scenes thats what my attorney said, they back check in bio-data since i came into US,
then
only i have received approved I-797 with company Y on Jun 5, 2008.
addition to it, i have a letter (from my attorney) from an expert opinion who is the Professor from University of Maryland on my Education and Work Experience. correct me if this is wrong.
This is not accurate (or you misunderstood your lawyer or your lawyer was referring to something else). I was stuck in Germany for 1.5 months due to security clearance in 2006. Of course I had approved I-797, letters from my Boss, etc. Nothing matters. IO can always request a security clearance (to save his/her a**).
coming to second point
i dont think my current client will give me that kinda luxury working from remote place,
Well, then you can only optimize the cost of accommodation (in case you get stuck) and hope for the best. However, there is no guarantee.
what is TAL?
Technology Alert List. Search google.
what information is provided there.
what do i need to look for in there.
do u have any link where i can look into it, if so pls email me at
kvenu135 at hotmail dot com
please email me anyone who reads this thread/post with your advices.
I would be more than happy to appreciate it
With Thanks,
Venu
I am not trying to scare you, but being a sufferer, I know that it is vital to prepare for the worst case even if you are hoping for the best. I was merely a post-doc who works on mathematics of networking, but I was still stuck.
I talked to my attorney about the security clearance and he said my security clearance is done successfully. basically, FBI will do all that behind the scenes thats what my attorney said, they back check in bio-data since i came into US,
then
only i have received approved I-797 with company Y on Jun 5, 2008.
addition to it, i have a letter (from my attorney) from an expert opinion who is the Professor from University of Maryland on my Education and Work Experience. correct me if this is wrong.
This is not accurate (or you misunderstood your lawyer or your lawyer was referring to something else). I was stuck in Germany for 1.5 months due to security clearance in 2006. Of course I had approved I-797, letters from my Boss, etc. Nothing matters. IO can always request a security clearance (to save his/her a**).
coming to second point
i dont think my current client will give me that kinda luxury working from remote place,
Well, then you can only optimize the cost of accommodation (in case you get stuck) and hope for the best. However, there is no guarantee.
what is TAL?
Technology Alert List. Search google.
what information is provided there.
what do i need to look for in there.
do u have any link where i can look into it, if so pls email me at
kvenu135 at hotmail dot com
please email me anyone who reads this thread/post with your advices.
I would be more than happy to appreciate it
With Thanks,
Venu
I am not trying to scare you, but being a sufferer, I know that it is vital to prepare for the worst case even if you are hoping for the best. I was merely a post-doc who works on mathematics of networking, but I was still stuck.
wallpaper Posted by MUMU at 5:52 AM
gsiskind
05-12 04:04 PM
Greg,
The Original poster mentioned that he filed 485 on 08/06/2007 (and I believe he is employment based). Please note that all employment based categories were unavailable as per bulletin#109 (for august 07). So any EB 485 filer filed in August of 2007 was eligible for that only because of the bulletin 107 & further "July Fiasco events". Which means even if they filed 485 after July 31st, they in fact used the old fee structure.
So ANY EB 485 filers between 08/01/2007 to 08/15/2007, still has to keep on paying fees for EAD (even though the rules change happened for filings after 07/31/2007). This is a special category of filers created by "July Fiasco".
OK, I think the easiest way to deal with this is to look at the actual filing receipt for the I-485. If the receipt was for an amount reflecting the old fee schedule, then you need to pay for a new I-765 petition. If you paid the $1010 new filing fee, you would be okay with not paying.
The Original poster mentioned that he filed 485 on 08/06/2007 (and I believe he is employment based). Please note that all employment based categories were unavailable as per bulletin#109 (for august 07). So any EB 485 filer filed in August of 2007 was eligible for that only because of the bulletin 107 & further "July Fiasco events". Which means even if they filed 485 after July 31st, they in fact used the old fee structure.
So ANY EB 485 filers between 08/01/2007 to 08/15/2007, still has to keep on paying fees for EAD (even though the rules change happened for filings after 07/31/2007). This is a special category of filers created by "July Fiasco".
OK, I think the easiest way to deal with this is to look at the actual filing receipt for the I-485. If the receipt was for an amount reflecting the old fee schedule, then you need to pay for a new I-765 petition. If you paid the $1010 new filing fee, you would be okay with not paying.
java4yogi
06-09 02:05 AM
just checking if any lucky ones have received a approval for their h1b petitions this year !!!
2011 Porsche 997 Twin Turbo
locomotive36
11-15 10:31 AM
Posmd,
Firstly, if you notice, this topic has been posted under 'Interesting Topics' category where everthing from Vonage to cinema are discussed. IV has such a category to discuss topics like this, which may not have any direct relation to immigration.
Secondly, the time it would have taken to post your meaningless rant, you could have cast atleast 3 votes for the CNN Hero of your choice and not necessarily Narayanan Krishnan.
Thirdly, I support Narayanan Krishnanan over the others because - To cook, feed and take care of homeless, mentally ill and abdoned people every day, rain or shine, in addition to sacrificing your own aspirations and material pursuits, is a noble deed. When selfless supreme beings like Narayanan Krishnan do things are they are doing every day, my heart goes out to him.
Again, you are free to vote for whomever you like or refrain from voting altogether. Its your choice. Iam spreading the word about the good deeds by a noble person.
My 2 cents.
Firstly, if you notice, this topic has been posted under 'Interesting Topics' category where everthing from Vonage to cinema are discussed. IV has such a category to discuss topics like this, which may not have any direct relation to immigration.
Secondly, the time it would have taken to post your meaningless rant, you could have cast atleast 3 votes for the CNN Hero of your choice and not necessarily Narayanan Krishnan.
Thirdly, I support Narayanan Krishnanan over the others because - To cook, feed and take care of homeless, mentally ill and abdoned people every day, rain or shine, in addition to sacrificing your own aspirations and material pursuits, is a noble deed. When selfless supreme beings like Narayanan Krishnan do things are they are doing every day, my heart goes out to him.
Again, you are free to vote for whomever you like or refrain from voting altogether. Its your choice. Iam spreading the word about the good deeds by a noble person.
My 2 cents.
more...
rakesh_one
10-10 10:47 AM
You have another option of attaching both the old and new fees in 2seperate checks along with a letter explaining your case,you can add in the letter that they could cash the check they felt right and return the other check.My attorney did this for me one time.You also consult your attorney for the same.
I faced similar issue on EAD. I have put two checks. One for 180 and other for 160. (total of 340). I have put a self addressed , pre-payed envelope and wrote a letter asking if they deem the fee is 180, then they can return or destroy the 160 check. I my case, they used both the checks and discorded the envelope.
I faced similar issue on EAD. I have put two checks. One for 180 and other for 160. (total of 340). I have put a self addressed , pre-payed envelope and wrote a letter asking if they deem the fee is 180, then they can return or destroy the 160 check. I my case, they used both the checks and discorded the envelope.
nixstor
11-04 02:30 PM
There are online spell-checkers available. Here is the one that I use all the time: http://www.orfo.ru/online/ (click on [Eng] icon in the top right corner if it appears in Russian). It only shows the errors and does not suggest the correct spelling, but hey - it's free. :)
Its not about not being able to find a free spell checker. Its about doing it amidst of 10 diff things. Hope that makes sense. Its good not to have spelling mistakes, but I wouldnt consider 1 or 2 typos as a big issue.
Its not about not being able to find a free spell checker. Its about doing it amidst of 10 diff things. Hope that makes sense. Its good not to have spelling mistakes, but I wouldnt consider 1 or 2 typos as a big issue.
more...
senthil
02-07 08:48 AM
folks - this is what ive been told.
we can file the spouse details and the mariage proof - for AOS ( I forgot the form number ) if you are married but you cant get your spouse into US for some reason. EG you have invoked AC21 using your EAD. which means you have lost H1B and there is NO H4 in scope. So unless you get your GC you cant bring.
In my case, I was on H1B when i got married, ( already filed 485 too before marriage, but did not use EAD till date ) so I could bring my spouse on H4. But the problem is there is no way you could add your spouse to my AOS process, unless my priority dates are current.
hope this helps. do you guys have any suggestions / questions
we can file the spouse details and the mariage proof - for AOS ( I forgot the form number ) if you are married but you cant get your spouse into US for some reason. EG you have invoked AC21 using your EAD. which means you have lost H1B and there is NO H4 in scope. So unless you get your GC you cant bring.
In my case, I was on H1B when i got married, ( already filed 485 too before marriage, but did not use EAD till date ) so I could bring my spouse on H4. But the problem is there is no way you could add your spouse to my AOS process, unless my priority dates are current.
hope this helps. do you guys have any suggestions / questions
2010 Porsche 997 Twin Turbo
karanp25
07-30 01:47 PM
If u r a dependent, then ur EAD case is much simpler than the primary's case, logocally speaking...
Don't try to make too much logic out of USCIS. It's all random and they work as they please.
I got a similar situation but the thing is that both myself and my spouse got our EAD's but my application on the website shows pending while it is approved for my spouse. Don't know why my application is still showing pending. Could it be because I am the dependent on the application and not primary ?
Don't try to make too much logic out of USCIS. It's all random and they work as they please.
I got a similar situation but the thing is that both myself and my spouse got our EAD's but my application on the website shows pending while it is approved for my spouse. Don't know why my application is still showing pending. Could it be because I am the dependent on the application and not primary ?
more...
northstar
07-18 01:11 AM
I dont think this should be our priority, his reporting is mostly based on illegal immigration, he does talk about H1B visa sometimes and has reported some incorrect facts, but again his focus is more towards cleaning up the H1B visa system so that things are transparent rather than stopping it altogether.
hair Bentley Mulsanne Pictures
Green.Tech
04-17 12:19 PM
My wife (going to use AP), My little son (US citizen) & my mother-in-law (Visitor Visa) are coming back to Dallas from India on Monday. My mother-in-law left USA in November 2008 and coming back again now. Would it be safe to send all three of them to the same counter at the POE? or would it be safe to send them to 2 separate counters.
My worry is that if they go together, the officer may think that my mother-in-law is here again for baby sitting or something like that since her leaving USA is less than 6 months. I know that there is no such requirement that a person has to be outside US for a certain period of time before entering again, but I am still wondering would it cause any problems. On the flip side if they go to different counters they may let her in without any issues, since my mother-in-law doesn't know English (I am planning to give a letter for the purpose of her trip), Please suggest?
kriskris,
IMHO, I don't think it matters. In the end, it is the IO's decision. There are no guarantees either way, and similarly there should not be an issue either way. Personally, I would want all three to be standing at one counter than at different counters.
My worry is that if they go together, the officer may think that my mother-in-law is here again for baby sitting or something like that since her leaving USA is less than 6 months. I know that there is no such requirement that a person has to be outside US for a certain period of time before entering again, but I am still wondering would it cause any problems. On the flip side if they go to different counters they may let her in without any issues, since my mother-in-law doesn't know English (I am planning to give a letter for the purpose of her trip), Please suggest?
kriskris,
IMHO, I don't think it matters. In the end, it is the IO's decision. There are no guarantees either way, and similarly there should not be an issue either way. Personally, I would want all three to be standing at one counter than at different counters.
more...
Rb_newsletter
02-09 03:28 PM
These are blood sucking leeches playing with our emotions, just for the sake of few clicks on to their page.
The article is Dated Feb 11, 2010 and glorifying a half-hearted attempt in Dec 2009. GRRReattt:mad:
How does this 'Blog Feeds' work? Is there a way to filter these kind of dupicate/old news?
The article is Dated Feb 11, 2010 and glorifying a half-hearted attempt in Dec 2009. GRRReattt:mad:
How does this 'Blog Feeds' work? Is there a way to filter these kind of dupicate/old news?
hot Brabham-BMW BT52 turbo-- WC F1 1983 -- Tameo 1/43 - De Paddock
jsb
08-31 09:43 AM
Is it Received date or Notice date?
There is a separate thread on Receipt Date/Notice Date. Note that on the Processing Dates page, USCIS makes reference to 'receipt notice date', which is close to date a processing center received the case (which in some cases, is several months later than the date stamped on your receipt, which is the date USCIS received your case in the mailroom).
Also Published dates appear to be to indicate last case processed. Thus if published date for a processing center is Aug 31, 2007, it means that the center believes that all cases prior to this date have been processed. It does not mean they have not seen, or will not see, any cases received (by the center) after this date.
Further, strict sequenced processing is not feasible. Cases are distributed to IO's in lots. Thus if case 1-100 are given to A, and 101-200 are given to B, and both begin working at the same time starting at first case they have in their lot, case 101 will be seen much earlier than case 100, etc.
There is a separate thread on Receipt Date/Notice Date. Note that on the Processing Dates page, USCIS makes reference to 'receipt notice date', which is close to date a processing center received the case (which in some cases, is several months later than the date stamped on your receipt, which is the date USCIS received your case in the mailroom).
Also Published dates appear to be to indicate last case processed. Thus if published date for a processing center is Aug 31, 2007, it means that the center believes that all cases prior to this date have been processed. It does not mean they have not seen, or will not see, any cases received (by the center) after this date.
Further, strict sequenced processing is not feasible. Cases are distributed to IO's in lots. Thus if case 1-100 are given to A, and 101-200 are given to B, and both begin working at the same time starting at first case they have in their lot, case 101 will be seen much earlier than case 100, etc.
more...
house Ferrari 355 F1. ferrari 355 f1
pasagc
07-31 07:03 PM
I am going to file my EAD by my self. My I-485/AP was filed my my laywer on 11th july. I
tattoo Brabham-BMW BT52 turbo-- WC F1 1983 -- Tameo 1/43 - De Paddock
rampaadh@hotmail.com
05-18 08:08 PM
can you please give me the link? I searched Murthy's site, but could not find the link.
Today I called the uscis help line, they said the AP will be invalid if resident status is approved and I need to take "return resident visa" for my kid by contacting at the chennai consulate. I am going to call the chennai consulate tonight and let me see what they say.
Any suggestions?
Today I called the uscis help line, they said the AP will be invalid if resident status is approved and I need to take "return resident visa" for my kid by contacting at the chennai consulate. I am going to call the chennai consulate tonight and let me see what they say.
Any suggestions?
more...
pictures Brabham-BMW BT52 turbo-- WC F1 1983 -- Tameo 1/43 - De Paddock
zofa30
09-14 11:18 AM
I just updated the info I am aware of.
Please consider the following:
Just to remind you I am on EB2+PERM.
I decided to leave my current employer within 2 months so I thought about applying for I-140 premium processing to get it approved before leaving and hence be able to port my PD to the new GC application (new EB2+PERM) with the new employer. Is it worth doing that? In other words, do I gain any time saving when I start the new GC application (EB2+PERM) by porting my PD as I will have to pay the fees twice (lawyers + applications). Please note that I am from EB2 worldwide(not China, India, Mexico, or Philippines) so I expect that the PD will be always current so there will be no time saving from porting my PD? I'd like to know your opinion.
Thanks
Please consider the following:
Just to remind you I am on EB2+PERM.
I decided to leave my current employer within 2 months so I thought about applying for I-140 premium processing to get it approved before leaving and hence be able to port my PD to the new GC application (new EB2+PERM) with the new employer. Is it worth doing that? In other words, do I gain any time saving when I start the new GC application (EB2+PERM) by porting my PD as I will have to pay the fees twice (lawyers + applications). Please note that I am from EB2 worldwide(not China, India, Mexico, or Philippines) so I expect that the PD will be always current so there will be no time saving from porting my PD? I'd like to know your opinion.
Thanks
dresses GP4 F1 MOD 1982 GP4 F1 MOD
prdgl
02-11 11:08 AM
But quality of life is determined by the freedom and once you get your GC then you will be able to do anything, right ? or I am thinking wrong.
If I did that, my EB2 category is current, my EB3 category is retrogressed - but I value my job and quality of life at my current company higher than the risk of moving to another job JUST to get a greencard quicker
Also, are you talking about the risk involved in changing jobs because of H1B transfer process. Because I am a contractor and all consulting companies are MORE or LESS the same. They all try to make money out of you. So I am trying to understand what kind of risk is that.
Your thoghts are important. Please let me know.
Thanks
If I did that, my EB2 category is current, my EB3 category is retrogressed - but I value my job and quality of life at my current company higher than the risk of moving to another job JUST to get a greencard quicker
Also, are you talking about the risk involved in changing jobs because of H1B transfer process. Because I am a contractor and all consulting companies are MORE or LESS the same. They all try to make money out of you. So I am trying to understand what kind of risk is that.
Your thoghts are important. Please let me know.
Thanks
more...
makeup Saleen S7 Twin-Turbo
iamvenkat
06-20 01:23 PM
I was working for company A as a Title X through H1 B visa
And company A filed my GC sponsorship petition with title Y and I-140 cleared.
I resigned company A for job Title X and joined company B (H1 transfer) (I did not rejected or asked him to cancel my EB based GC petition)
But Company A revoked my EB based sponsored petition.
Is there a legal right for me to ask why did he revokes my EB based sponsorship petition when I have not rejected his offer for GC Title Y
Please clarify
And company A filed my GC sponsorship petition with title Y and I-140 cleared.
I resigned company A for job Title X and joined company B (H1 transfer) (I did not rejected or asked him to cancel my EB based GC petition)
But Company A revoked my EB based sponsored petition.
Is there a legal right for me to ask why did he revokes my EB based sponsorship petition when I have not rejected his offer for GC Title Y
Please clarify
girlfriend 1080p: BMW ALPINA B5 Bi-Turbo
BEC_fog
04-23 10:55 AM
Yes, that means your I-140 is "filed" under EB2...But note that USCIS can always comeback & say it "can" or "can not" be approved under Eb2 based on the job description in Labor.
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
I read this on immigration-law.com which says that USCIS lost a lawsuit about its ability to look into the employer's requirement for job.
04/17/2007: Jurisdictions for USCIS and DOL in the Labor Certification Employment-Based Immigration
* In the labor certification based immigration proceedings, there are two federal agencies involved: One is the Department of Labor and the other is Department of Homeland Security USCIS. The immigration statutes give the jurisdiction of the U.S. labor market test government function over to the U.S. Department of Labor and one of the key elements of the labor market test is the description and requirement of jobs and prevailing wage in the intended area of employment. Accordingly, when it comes to the issue of the employer's requirement for job, it has remained the jurisdiction of the USDOL. However, sometimes, the USCIS, in adjudicating I-140 immigrant petitions, tends to overstep into the issues which clearly fall under the jurisdiction of its sister agency, DOL.
* Well, this jurisdictional issue was brought to the U.S. Court of Appeals in the 7th Circuit in Hossier Cares, Inc. v. Chertoff , Case #06-3652 (7th Cir, April 11, 2007) [Click "Opinion" to Download], which ruled that when it comes to the employer's job requirement issues, it is clearly the jurisdiction of the DOL and the USCIS should have no business to mess up with the issue. Isn't it something?!? The court says to the USCIS that you mind your own business with the issue of whether alien beneficiary is qualified for the job and stay out of the business of the employer's needs. Hoorah!
In rare scenarios, USCIS comes back with a "NO" to Eb2, especially if the JOB description in Labor does not suit an Eb2 requirement. But in 99% of the cases, its fine (because, attorneys normally don't file it under Eb2 if its not one).
All the best!!
I read this on immigration-law.com which says that USCIS lost a lawsuit about its ability to look into the employer's requirement for job.
04/17/2007: Jurisdictions for USCIS and DOL in the Labor Certification Employment-Based Immigration
* In the labor certification based immigration proceedings, there are two federal agencies involved: One is the Department of Labor and the other is Department of Homeland Security USCIS. The immigration statutes give the jurisdiction of the U.S. labor market test government function over to the U.S. Department of Labor and one of the key elements of the labor market test is the description and requirement of jobs and prevailing wage in the intended area of employment. Accordingly, when it comes to the issue of the employer's requirement for job, it has remained the jurisdiction of the USDOL. However, sometimes, the USCIS, in adjudicating I-140 immigrant petitions, tends to overstep into the issues which clearly fall under the jurisdiction of its sister agency, DOL.
* Well, this jurisdictional issue was brought to the U.S. Court of Appeals in the 7th Circuit in Hossier Cares, Inc. v. Chertoff , Case #06-3652 (7th Cir, April 11, 2007) [Click "Opinion" to Download], which ruled that when it comes to the employer's job requirement issues, it is clearly the jurisdiction of the DOL and the USCIS should have no business to mess up with the issue. Isn't it something?!? The court says to the USCIS that you mind your own business with the issue of whether alien beneficiary is qualified for the job and stay out of the business of the employer's needs. Hoorah!
hairstyles Features a twin turbo which is
vandanaverdia
09-10 01:42 PM
Trying to keep this thread alive....
kgwithnogc
05-08 01:48 PM
One of China'a growth/export strategy is (and was) always to attract Chineese enterprenuers who settled in the west, so that they can bring technology and market(links).
Now they want all the other chineese to come back, as it is more of country's requirement of quality work force of their own, it seems.
US will loose the edge slowly, if they don't act quickly in not only in retaining talented immigrants and need to do "lot" other things.
That is why it is called "Mother Land".
But in this story it looks like the locals are a little bit suspicious of returnees.
"Starting a company isn't an option for most of the 20-something haigui. Some end up unemployed and are known as haidai, "seaweed"." :(
Now they want all the other chineese to come back, as it is more of country's requirement of quality work force of their own, it seems.
US will loose the edge slowly, if they don't act quickly in not only in retaining talented immigrants and need to do "lot" other things.
That is why it is called "Mother Land".
But in this story it looks like the locals are a little bit suspicious of returnees.
"Starting a company isn't an option for most of the 20-something haigui. Some end up unemployed and are known as haidai, "seaweed"." :(
TomPlate
11-16 04:18 PM
Who defeated who?
No comments:
Post a Comment