kevinkris
11-17 02:12 PM
Since you applied for H1 extension it means that you are out of parolee status
and on H1 again.
Get visa stamping next time when you go for home country and come on H1 instead of using AP.
Use AP only if GC is approved when you are outside of country..
I think it's little risk if AP is approved and you are outside of country and wants to use it. They prohibit sending AP on postal mail.
All,
Any help in answering my queries is appreciated.
Thanks
and on H1 again.
Get visa stamping next time when you go for home country and come on H1 instead of using AP.
Use AP only if GC is approved when you are outside of country..
I think it's little risk if AP is approved and you are outside of country and wants to use it. They prohibit sending AP on postal mail.
All,
Any help in answering my queries is appreciated.
Thanks
IV2007
05-11 10:13 AM
Guys,
I found this site where in we can send letters to our senate members or house representatives regarding the issues we face.
http://capwiz.com/aila2/issues/alert/?alertid=9589591
Letter content pre-exists if needed you can change.
Let's inundate senate & other members with what we are facing..
-IV2007
EB2 Labor Pending
I found this site where in we can send letters to our senate members or house representatives regarding the issues we face.
http://capwiz.com/aila2/issues/alert/?alertid=9589591
Letter content pre-exists if needed you can change.
Let's inundate senate & other members with what we are facing..
-IV2007
EB2 Labor Pending
vineet
01-17 07:32 PM
Heard about a similar issue with the EAD for a colleague at work today. Will let you know what the company lawyers recommend him to do....
-Viny
-Viny
spicy_guy
04-08 04:58 PM
I believe the intention of not moving too much beyond jul 06 , may be to make some spill over benfit happen to EB3 also. If they open the gate for EB2 now, lots of 485 application may come in and there may not be spill over to EB3. :)
Krupa
See how bad EB3 I shape is...
7,100 until 2002 Dec. That means, 2.5+ years before it hits Jan 1, 2003.
What about the people with PD > 2005. 33,400 / 2800 per year. 11+ years. :)
Retire!
Krupa
See how bad EB3 I shape is...
7,100 until 2002 Dec. That means, 2.5+ years before it hits Jan 1, 2003.
What about the people with PD > 2005. 33,400 / 2800 per year. 11+ years. :)
Retire!
more...
pappu
07-16 02:35 PM
This is just a recycle of WSJ article that came out today. Nothing new. IV posted this last Friday already and we were the first. Please use your judgment and not use such comments as inside information.
benbear
11-09 09:39 AM
Let me simplify the EB backlog equation:
EB backlog as of Oct31 = 655K�(average lead time for FB approval)x50K/month+50KEB in Oct
Do the simple math, we can get the following table:
Average time for FB approval EB backlog
5month 455K
6month 405K
7month 355K
8month 305K
9month 255K
10month 205K
It is safe to say notice date in Sept equal to receipting by USCIS in Sept, because at notice date, USCIS actually open your file then send receipt.
So,from , EB receipt in Sept vs. receipt in Oct = 2:1
150k in Sept. include both EB(100K) and FB (50K).
(Note: assume received FB every month 50K. 50K is a reasonable assumption,
otherwise it's no way for USCIS to approve 800K AOS a year.)
Since EB in Sept vs. Oct is 2:1, so total EB receipting in Oct. should be 50K.
Out of the 655k total, the key is lead time for FB approval, how many month?
This is the key! If we assume average FB approval takes 6 month,
then EB out of the 655k is 655K-50Kx6=355K.
Add the 50K EB in Oct. Total EB backlog is 405K.
Still the key is average FB approval time, any gurus has any idea.
I am sure the time is not 12 month. If it's 12 month,
then EB backlog= 655K-50Kx12+50K=105k. :D:D:D Which is impossible!!
EB backlog as of Oct31 = 655K�(average lead time for FB approval)x50K/month+50KEB in Oct
Do the simple math, we can get the following table:
Average time for FB approval EB backlog
5month 455K
6month 405K
7month 355K
8month 305K
9month 255K
10month 205K
It is safe to say notice date in Sept equal to receipting by USCIS in Sept, because at notice date, USCIS actually open your file then send receipt.
So,from , EB receipt in Sept vs. receipt in Oct = 2:1
150k in Sept. include both EB(100K) and FB (50K).
(Note: assume received FB every month 50K. 50K is a reasonable assumption,
otherwise it's no way for USCIS to approve 800K AOS a year.)
Since EB in Sept vs. Oct is 2:1, so total EB receipting in Oct. should be 50K.
Out of the 655k total, the key is lead time for FB approval, how many month?
This is the key! If we assume average FB approval takes 6 month,
then EB out of the 655k is 655K-50Kx6=355K.
Add the 50K EB in Oct. Total EB backlog is 405K.
Still the key is average FB approval time, any gurus has any idea.
I am sure the time is not 12 month. If it's 12 month,
then EB backlog= 655K-50Kx12+50K=105k. :D:D:D Which is impossible!!
more...
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 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)
viper673
06-08 01:27 PM
I did think about doing it this way, but it didn't feel the "right thing to do"...
I spoke to my lawyer on what to do , but I'm not getting a straight answer.
Do you guys recommend a lawyer that would be able to help?
I checked Murthy.com and she asks for $250/20min of consultation... Is she that good? Should I consider calling her?
I spoke to my lawyer on what to do , but I'm not getting a straight answer.
Do you guys recommend a lawyer that would be able to help?
I checked Murthy.com and she asks for $250/20min of consultation... Is she that good? Should I consider calling her?
more...
hopefulgc
09-02 11:57 AM
If this is not like a "third world" goverrnment/municipality office, then what is?
I think we all might just have to form groups of 10 people each and file group WOMs replete with reimbursement of attorney expenses.
Edit. Latest ..on my case.(with a little history) and this is hilarious.
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
I think we all might just have to form groups of 10 people each and file group WOMs replete with reimbursement of attorney expenses.
Edit. Latest ..on my case.(with a little history) and this is hilarious.
8/21/2008 : Talk with the California Service Center (hopefully)
Me: My case has been transferred all of a sudden to California with the PD became current (on july 21, 2008), why ?
Answer: Your case has been sent back to TSC on Aug. 15th. We do not have the case any more. You can call TSC to confirm.
8/22/2008: Talk with Customer Service
Customer Service: Your case is still in California.
9/2/2008 : Info pass appointment. Talk with IO
IO: Your case is still in TSC but will be transferred to CSC soon.
I cannot believe such an organization exists in the world.
************************************************** *********************************
Sunx_2004
05-14 04:42 PM
I was under impression that there is last quarter quota still remain...
Based on below they used it all...
:confused:
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
Based on below they used it all...
:confused:
I am sure this is noticed by many :
"E. EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
Demand for numbers, primarily by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices for adjustment of status cases, is expected to bring the Employment Third preference category very close to the annual numerical limit in June. As a result, this category is likely to experience retrogressions or visa unavailability beginning in July. Such action would only be temporary, however, and a complete recovery of the cut-off dates would occur for October, the first month of the new fiscal year. "
more...
akkakarla
08-06 07:56 AM
They can be stressful but one should relax before going to AOS Interview.If one feels the attorney will help them it is better to take the attorney. But certain times the over enthuisatic attorney may mess the smooth going interview and never comes to terms with what we want them to tell.
Some additional tips:
(1) Always wear professional clothing(do not wear jeans and need not be suit either:D ) etc.
(2) Always take 4 extra photos with you.
(3) Make copies of all the documents everything and place them in order. Order the Original documents so that you can give the Officer the moment they ask instead of searching. Searching irritates the officer sometimes.
(4) Never Ever joke when he talks about the country's problems, terrorism,infrastructure,faith of people,quality of people living in other regions. We are there strictly to complete the AOS interview and get out of there. No one is asking us, our opinion what we feel about issues nor one appreciates talking about their fellow citizens,faith.THey take these things seriously even though it "MAY" not have effect on the I485 approval but still then it is totally unnecessary digging out hole for our burial.
(5) NEVER EVER Open your mouth and say something the officer never asked. Always answer to the questions they asked and give the documents they asked. Not a word more or less and not a document more or less. The more enthu we go for the more we dig ourselves in quicksand. Thumb Rule: If you have all the documentation you can go yourself. Moreover the attorney does not have a role to play and they sit like statue there and the questions are directed to us and we need to answer the questions.
Future Employement Tips:
(1) Always take the employment letters: (a) The offer letter dated when the Labor Certification is filed. (b) Offer letter that states continuing offer letter(dated the day before the interview or during the week). (c) A letter addressing to the immigration officer stating your job, salary, responsibilities.
(2) Take the current job employment with your Status eg. EAD or H1, your salary, role and responsiblities etc. ( they should be more or less same as the role and responsibilities in Labor Certificaion filed).
Some additional tips:
(1) Always wear professional clothing(do not wear jeans and need not be suit either:D ) etc.
(2) Always take 4 extra photos with you.
(3) Make copies of all the documents everything and place them in order. Order the Original documents so that you can give the Officer the moment they ask instead of searching. Searching irritates the officer sometimes.
(4) Never Ever joke when he talks about the country's problems, terrorism,infrastructure,faith of people,quality of people living in other regions. We are there strictly to complete the AOS interview and get out of there. No one is asking us, our opinion what we feel about issues nor one appreciates talking about their fellow citizens,faith.THey take these things seriously even though it "MAY" not have effect on the I485 approval but still then it is totally unnecessary digging out hole for our burial.
(5) NEVER EVER Open your mouth and say something the officer never asked. Always answer to the questions they asked and give the documents they asked. Not a word more or less and not a document more or less. The more enthu we go for the more we dig ourselves in quicksand. Thumb Rule: If you have all the documentation you can go yourself. Moreover the attorney does not have a role to play and they sit like statue there and the questions are directed to us and we need to answer the questions.
Future Employement Tips:
(1) Always take the employment letters: (a) The offer letter dated when the Labor Certification is filed. (b) Offer letter that states continuing offer letter(dated the day before the interview or during the week). (c) A letter addressing to the immigration officer stating your job, salary, responsibilities.
(2) Take the current job employment with your Status eg. EAD or H1, your salary, role and responsiblities etc. ( they should be more or less same as the role and responsibilities in Labor Certificaion filed).
ksita48
07-23 09:30 PM
Brief Description of my Case Joined Vision Systems Group INC,(VSGInc), Southplains Field, NJ in the year March 2003. My H1B was transferred to VSG Inc from my previous company which got merged with another company. VSG Inc filed my Labor Certification in 2003 (EB3) on Dec 23,2003 which has gone to Back Log Center, Harrisburg, PA and got approved only in Dec, 2006. In July 2006 VSG Inc, filed PERM under EB2 and got approved and filed I140 under EB2. But when USCIS sent RFE, my company has withdrawn the I140 without responding to RFE. In July 2007, during 2007 visa fiasco, VSG Inc filed I140 electronically, and I485 and other papers concurrently in July 02, 2007. Got the receipt notices for I140 dated 07-02-2007 and for I485 and others on 06-05-2008. Received EAD and travel docs in July 2008. My I140 is still pending at Nebraska Service center as on date. When contacted trough the Local Congress Man, Dept. Of Home land Security replied on Feb 09, 2009 as follows: �The processing of I-140 has been delayed, not yet ready for decision as it has been selected for extended security review, independent of FBI name check and fingerprints. Until the review is completed, we cannot move forward on this case. We will make every effort to make a decision on this case as soon as the review is complete. However, we have contacted the security team POC to see if this case can be reviewed to see if it can be moved for adjudication.� VISION SYSTEMS GROUP, INC., a New Jersey Domestic Profit Corporation, with a branch office in Coon Rapids, Iowa, was also indicted in a ten count federal indictment that included one count of conspiracy, eight counts of mail fraud, and one count of �Notice of Forfeiture� in the amount of $7,400,000. The investigation is being conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in collaboration with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services - Fraud Detection and National Security Division (FDNS); U.S. Department of Labor - Office of Inspector General; U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS); U.S. Department of State; and is supported by the U.S. Attorney�s Office for the Southern District of Iowa. At the out set I am in a complete depressed state an seek your help and know the fate of my AOS applications like I-140, I485 and others and the best possible course of action I may have to take immediately. My concerns and questions: 1. Should I transfer my H1b to another company? 2. What will happen to my pending I-140 and I-485 petitions? 3. Or should I continue with the present company wait for the outcome? 4. How much time it may take to finally conclude this process normally? 5. If the company is proved guilty and be closed by the Govt. or blacklisted what will happen to the Employees like me who are absolutely not concern, nor involved and go by Rules and in the project working If you can throw some light on these matters, It would be of great relief to me who has spent in this country for 11 years legally paying all the taxes.:confused:
more...
rolrblade
03-18 08:14 AM
Hi,
My wife, who is the primary green card applicant is planning to change job from desi consulting company to a fortune 500 company. The fortune 500 company wants to invoke AC21 as 180 days have passed from received date and I140 is approved.
Please let me know if someone has similar experience with the following:
1. Is there any salary restriction on increase from current salary percentage wise?
2. Has anyone used sucessfully AC21 in the past and had no issues with EAD renewals and Green card?
Thanks
Answers below:
1. Technically there is no Salary restriction. As stated above it is a grey area. But, if the job duties are the same and the salary difference is too big (no one knows how much is acceptable without raising questions), then it brings into question if you are still performing the same duties. But basically, you have to make equal to or more than the LC.
2. I have used AC21 before. Have not done EAD renewal yet.
My wife, who is the primary green card applicant is planning to change job from desi consulting company to a fortune 500 company. The fortune 500 company wants to invoke AC21 as 180 days have passed from received date and I140 is approved.
Please let me know if someone has similar experience with the following:
1. Is there any salary restriction on increase from current salary percentage wise?
2. Has anyone used sucessfully AC21 in the past and had no issues with EAD renewals and Green card?
Thanks
Answers below:
1. Technically there is no Salary restriction. As stated above it is a grey area. But, if the job duties are the same and the salary difference is too big (no one knows how much is acceptable without raising questions), then it brings into question if you are still performing the same duties. But basically, you have to make equal to or more than the LC.
2. I have used AC21 before. Have not done EAD renewal yet.
morchu
05-21 12:45 AM
H1 doesn't get invalidated on a 485 rejection, even if it was approved beyond 6 year based on the pending 485. You just may not be eligible for another extension.
if your I485 is denied, all applications/extensions based on your Adjustment of Status also expire.
if your I485 is denied, all applications/extensions based on your Adjustment of Status also expire.
more...
pt326bc
09-23 09:19 AM
Man why you need reciepts?
For most purposes of contact with USCIS you don't need the original receipts.
The only exception is the time when you travel if your AP is pending. You would need to have a valid visa stamp (H1/H4/L1 or whatever) and the ORIGINAL receipt notice.
As far as the lawyer saying that the original receipt notice being property of the employer; that would only happen if the lawyer is on the payroll of your employer and the employer is paying for the whole process.
If you have an independent lawyer and you are paying him, the AOS/EAD/AP notices are your property (if you can use that term).
I think legally the employer might refuse to give you the original notice for H1B or LCA or maybe I 140 but you can always get them using FIFO.
Of course you would have to insist on the original H1B notice if you are going for visa stamping though.
Again this is not legal advice, just my 2 cents as I am not a lawyer.
Regards.
For most purposes of contact with USCIS you don't need the original receipts.
The only exception is the time when you travel if your AP is pending. You would need to have a valid visa stamp (H1/H4/L1 or whatever) and the ORIGINAL receipt notice.
As far as the lawyer saying that the original receipt notice being property of the employer; that would only happen if the lawyer is on the payroll of your employer and the employer is paying for the whole process.
If you have an independent lawyer and you are paying him, the AOS/EAD/AP notices are your property (if you can use that term).
I think legally the employer might refuse to give you the original notice for H1B or LCA or maybe I 140 but you can always get them using FIFO.
Of course you would have to insist on the original H1B notice if you are going for visa stamping though.
Again this is not legal advice, just my 2 cents as I am not a lawyer.
Regards.
a_yaja
02-17 09:32 AM
I have a couple of questions:
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
I mentioned the following:
"Need to visit family in home country from time to time given the long adjudication process for I-485"
For date of travel, I put down a date approximately one month from the date of application (my thinking was that if travel date was sufficiently near, then the AP would be approved sooner - and I did get my AP approved in 22 days - not sure if it was because of the travel date - but it might have helped).
1. In the AP application form, there is a question on when you intend to travel. What should I enter there when I am only applying for some future travel and am not sure about the dates?
2. I had worked on OPT after my graduation before switching to H1 visa. So when I apply for EAD now, should I apply as a renewal applicant or a new applicant? Is OPT the same as EAD?
thanks.
I mentioned the following:
"Need to visit family in home country from time to time given the long adjudication process for I-485"
For date of travel, I put down a date approximately one month from the date of application (my thinking was that if travel date was sufficiently near, then the AP would be approved sooner - and I did get my AP approved in 22 days - not sure if it was because of the travel date - but it might have helped).
more...
vallabhu
01-31 04:57 PM
Will accept any suitable combination of Education , training or expeirence in lieu of stated requirements.
If you have more than three years of experience before applying for Labor you are fine else you might get a query and if you answer with education evaluation proving that your study and exp is equivalent to 4 year bachelor you will b fine.
If you have more than three years of experience before applying for Labor you are fine else you might get a query and if you answer with education evaluation proving that your study and exp is equivalent to 4 year bachelor you will b fine.
gc28262
07-12 12:31 AM
Are all these paper based filings or e-filings?
I e-filed EAD/AP renewals on May 25th, 2009. Applications are at TSC. My AP got approved on June 19th and I received the AP documents on June 20th. However, my EAD application is still pending since May 25th. I think most, if not all, EAD e-files receive a FP notice and they take a picture as well as FP when we go to the ASC. I haven't received FP notice either so far. From what I am seeing, EAD paper based filing is being processed much faster (2-3 weeks) than e-filings. Anyone who e-filed EAD could pls let us know how long it took for FP notice and EAD approval.
Mine was an e-filing. However my FP scheduling was quite weird.
I had my FP scheduled for 11/13
but my Card Production was Ordered on 11/12
I still went ahead and gave my FP on 11/13.
I e-filed EAD/AP renewals on May 25th, 2009. Applications are at TSC. My AP got approved on June 19th and I received the AP documents on June 20th. However, my EAD application is still pending since May 25th. I think most, if not all, EAD e-files receive a FP notice and they take a picture as well as FP when we go to the ASC. I haven't received FP notice either so far. From what I am seeing, EAD paper based filing is being processed much faster (2-3 weeks) than e-filings. Anyone who e-filed EAD could pls let us know how long it took for FP notice and EAD approval.
Mine was an e-filing. However my FP scheduling was quite weird.
I had my FP scheduled for 11/13
but my Card Production was Ordered on 11/12
I still went ahead and gave my FP on 11/13.
funny
09-16 02:27 PM
Don't forget to CALL guys..
India_USA
01-21 01:40 PM
My mom, after watching "Shankara Baranam" extended a technique to my memorizing the multiplication tables. She would wake me up early in the morning, and I had to memorize my tables sitting under the back light of my house. I did not like doing it, but it sure helped me memorize my tables faster! My mom believes that I remember my tables to this day because of her.
My younger brother (who was around 4) would wake up a little while later, and check on me to see whether I was studying or sleeping. He definitely would run to tell my mom if i was dozing off!! I probably was more angry with him (then) than with my mom. My brother does not remember much of this, but we do talk about the whole incidence as a joke!
My younger brother (who was around 4) would wake up a little while later, and check on me to see whether I was studying or sleeping. He definitely would run to tell my mom if i was dozing off!! I probably was more angry with him (then) than with my mom. My brother does not remember much of this, but we do talk about the whole incidence as a joke!
ItIsNotFunny
06-11 12:45 PM
You idiot, this is your third post in last 10 minutes about your deleted post. Big deal! if your question was deleted, or, if you are not able to find your post???
It seems you want others to spoon feed you everything. Stop this bickering and stop complaining. Stop taking offense from nonsensical things, grow-up and look at the bigger picture.
Over reaction by "reno" without checking the thread shifting was not good. But under any circumstances we should avoid using wrong words. This creates a wrong impression and indirectly hurts the organization. We have some examples in past.
I appreciate Pappu's maturity to tackle the issue and his explanation.
It seems you want others to spoon feed you everything. Stop this bickering and stop complaining. Stop taking offense from nonsensical things, grow-up and look at the bigger picture.
Over reaction by "reno" without checking the thread shifting was not good. But under any circumstances we should avoid using wrong words. This creates a wrong impression and indirectly hurts the organization. We have some examples in past.
I appreciate Pappu's maturity to tackle the issue and his explanation.
Bruh
ReplyDelete