thomachan72
06-14 02:54 PM
Well just to get away a bit from the complications of immigration!
Either the victim (who lost jwelery) has some animosity to you/family/your sister or your sister by her actions has given him/her reason to suspect her for the lost jwelery. Maybe your sister might have been a frequent visitor to that house? Or the jwelery was lost immediately after your sisters visit? First identify what prompted this accusation and then tackle it. Ofcourse consult a good attorney.
Even if the person acuses your sister, she is inocent until proven guilty and unless there is sufficient evidence there is no way your sister will be convicted by any judge/jury.
Lesson to learn; Don't get tooooooooo close to anybody. Helping is good but even with your relatives you have keep a certain distance and respect their privacy and territory. Indians tend to overlook this and often asume that they can enter into other people's lives, think for them and act for them. Its ok in India but once you are here things change quite a bit.......:o:o
Either the victim (who lost jwelery) has some animosity to you/family/your sister or your sister by her actions has given him/her reason to suspect her for the lost jwelery. Maybe your sister might have been a frequent visitor to that house? Or the jwelery was lost immediately after your sisters visit? First identify what prompted this accusation and then tackle it. Ofcourse consult a good attorney.
Even if the person acuses your sister, she is inocent until proven guilty and unless there is sufficient evidence there is no way your sister will be convicted by any judge/jury.
Lesson to learn; Don't get tooooooooo close to anybody. Helping is good but even with your relatives you have keep a certain distance and respect their privacy and territory. Indians tend to overlook this and often asume that they can enter into other people's lives, think for them and act for them. Its ok in India but once you are here things change quite a bit.......:o:o
hemanth22
07-21 09:24 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
This is a very unfortunate happening.
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Among the senators with presidential ambitions only McCain voted in favor of the bill
I am for , contacting the local sentators who have voted nay for this bill
Are there any established methods of doing so
bkarnik
09-19 06:26 PM
Recently, I heard the same thing from someone else (was it stucklabor??). It appears that USCIS is being proactive and granting three year approvals once I-140 has been approved. So, there is a chance that this is what happened in your case too.
Either way, since, this appears to work in your favor, I would suggest sending this question for the lawyer call. If it is accepted and answered, it will be posted on the forum so that you and others in similar situation get a definite reply.
Bkarnik.
Either way, since, this appears to work in your favor, I would suggest sending this question for the lawyer call. If it is accepted and answered, it will be posted on the forum so that you and others in similar situation get a definite reply.
Bkarnik.
waitingnwaiting
01-25 09:51 PM
Can he add an amendment to divide spillover equally between EB2 and EB3 India. This will help a lot.
more...
Libra
10-23 01:43 PM
My I-140 pending over a year finally got approved. got an RFE a2p and replied on 4th of oct. approval date 22 oct.
good luck guys.
good luck guys.
GotGC??
05-15 12:03 PM
Thanks for your reply.
My understanding is there can be only one AOS at any time.
- So if the AOS is applied based on the EB3 140, can another AOS be filed based on EB2?
- If a AOS has been applied based on EB3, can it be "upgraded" to EB2 ??
Thanks.
Not an expert but my guess is this window of opportunity will exist till next Fiscal year's bulletin is out i.e around 10th sep 2007. If you haven't already filed 485 you are unlikely to be approved during the window. I would go with aggressive approach i.e file based on pending EB2 and upgrade to PP. If you want to be conservtive because you never know if the porting will be accepted or not, or if it may add more delay just file eb3 485 right away, take the beneifts like ead etc.. and later port if retrogressed.
My understanding is there can be only one AOS at any time.
- So if the AOS is applied based on the EB3 140, can another AOS be filed based on EB2?
- If a AOS has been applied based on EB3, can it be "upgraded" to EB2 ??
Thanks.
Not an expert but my guess is this window of opportunity will exist till next Fiscal year's bulletin is out i.e around 10th sep 2007. If you haven't already filed 485 you are unlikely to be approved during the window. I would go with aggressive approach i.e file based on pending EB2 and upgrade to PP. If you want to be conservtive because you never know if the porting will be accepted or not, or if it may add more delay just file eb3 485 right away, take the beneifts like ead etc.. and later port if retrogressed.
more...
gc28262
07-18 03:47 PM
On H1B it is illegal for employer to enforce bond:
Please read employees rights in DOL page:
Employment Law Guide - Workers in Professional and Specialty Occupations (H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Visas) (http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/h1b.htm)
Employee Rights
H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers are granted a number of rights. The employer must give the worker a copy of the LCA. The employer must pay the worker at least the same wage rate as paid to other employees with similar experience and qualifications or the local prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of employment, whichever is higher. The employer must pay for non-productive time caused by the employer or by the worker's lack of a license or permit. The employer must offer the worker fringe benefits on the same basis as its other employees. Also, the employer may not require the worker to pay a penalty for leaving employment prior to any agreed date. However, this restriction does not preclude the employer from seeking "liquidated damages" pursuant to relevant state law. Liquidated damages are generally estimates stated in a contract of the anticipated damages to the employer caused by the worker's breach of contract.
Please read employees rights in DOL page:
Employment Law Guide - Workers in Professional and Specialty Occupations (H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Visas) (http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/h1b.htm)
Employee Rights
H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers are granted a number of rights. The employer must give the worker a copy of the LCA. The employer must pay the worker at least the same wage rate as paid to other employees with similar experience and qualifications or the local prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of employment, whichever is higher. The employer must pay for non-productive time caused by the employer or by the worker's lack of a license or permit. The employer must offer the worker fringe benefits on the same basis as its other employees. Also, the employer may not require the worker to pay a penalty for leaving employment prior to any agreed date. However, this restriction does not preclude the employer from seeking "liquidated damages" pursuant to relevant state law. Liquidated damages are generally estimates stated in a contract of the anticipated damages to the employer caused by the worker's breach of contract.
snathan
05-07 12:06 AM
No they did not book any charges against me..How could they that? We did nothing illegal. It is just the whole episode took place ..It has shaken me and my family.
I donot know any lawyer.. Moreover, I am not sure whether it is advisable to go to a lawyer or not... not sure how major the issue is for them..
Moreover, will this affect my Green card process if I start suing these govt. people?
I am just confused...
If you feel you are offended and religiously hurt you can give a try. Some time back MCD was sued for cooking frys in the same oil where they cook chicken. In this country people will only understand law suite.
I donot know any lawyer.. Moreover, I am not sure whether it is advisable to go to a lawyer or not... not sure how major the issue is for them..
Moreover, will this affect my Green card process if I start suing these govt. people?
I am just confused...
If you feel you are offended and religiously hurt you can give a try. Some time back MCD was sued for cooking frys in the same oil where they cook chicken. In this country people will only understand law suite.
more...
BumbleBee
08-16 04:42 PM
Please be aware that experience gained at sponsoring employer can not be counted towards fulfilling minimum qualification requirement for labor certification. You must prove your qualification to the job prior to joining the sponsoring employer... minor details.
So if you are planning to file a new EB2 application with same employer, just count your experience till the point you joined the company, anything afterwards is not admissible.
BumbleBee
So if you are planning to file a new EB2 application with same employer, just count your experience till the point you joined the company, anything afterwards is not admissible.
BumbleBee
Ram_C
09-25 04:46 PM
I am a Master's student and had applied for H1B through a consultant under master quota 2007. I was devastated when the consultant told me today that my H1B was not approved. When i checked online with my WAC no, as expected it said that a decision was mailed to the employer which in most cases means H1B denied.
I have OPT left until dec 07. I haven't yet found a job while on OPT but have been applying for jobs rigorously. I was really banking on the H1B visa for getting a job and then transferring it over to whoever hires me.
With my H1B not approved, I am totally clueless now. Please advice if my H1B application can be reconsidered/re-appealed/ resubmitted. Any other options/suggestions welcome.
sorry to hear about your H1, but you are not at all in bad situation.
here is what I would do if I were you.
1. extend your F1 visa for Spring 08, so that you have a safety net.
2. appeal your H1 Denial (if there is a chance)
I have OPT left until dec 07. I haven't yet found a job while on OPT but have been applying for jobs rigorously. I was really banking on the H1B visa for getting a job and then transferring it over to whoever hires me.
With my H1B not approved, I am totally clueless now. Please advice if my H1B application can be reconsidered/re-appealed/ resubmitted. Any other options/suggestions welcome.
sorry to hear about your H1, but you are not at all in bad situation.
here is what I would do if I were you.
1. extend your F1 visa for Spring 08, so that you have a safety net.
2. appeal your H1 Denial (if there is a chance)
more...
ilikekilo
06-11 06:14 PM
again u r out of ur mind
raju123
07-08 05:06 PM
I don't know the thinking of some people. immigration-law has nicely covered flower campaign. What is the reason to criticize?
We have very fewwwwwww friends for our cause. Mathew Oh is one of them. Do you guys want to loose few friends???? Are we going to win any battle without others support???
Please delete your negative comments and I request not to do any negative comments for like minded organization or person.
We have very fewwwwwww friends for our cause. Mathew Oh is one of them. Do you guys want to loose few friends???? Are we going to win any battle without others support???
Please delete your negative comments and I request not to do any negative comments for like minded organization or person.
more...
needhelp!
09-16 02:48 PM
top priority to this one..
amitjoey
07-13 04:38 PM
Wow!. I did not realise that. I an unknown quantity. What does that mean?
more...
raj2007
06-17 02:32 AM
I am planning to apply for both Canadian Permanent Residency and US green card next month. Assuming that I get my Canadian Permanent Residency and US Greencard after two years, what options do I have to maintain the permanent resident status in both countries, so that I am eligible to apply for citizenship in both countries.
Some say that showing proof of residence in both countries, commuting between the countries for work (Windsor-Canada and Detroit-US) and paying taxes in both countries would suffice.
Please guide me on this.
How can you ride on 2 horses?:)
Canada needs 3yr PR for citizenship while US needs 5. I feel it wil be issue while border crossing. US is very strict and they may take GC away.Take canadian citizenship first and then apply here. Thay way you can have both.
Some say that showing proof of residence in both countries, commuting between the countries for work (Windsor-Canada and Detroit-US) and paying taxes in both countries would suffice.
Please guide me on this.
How can you ride on 2 horses?:)
Canada needs 3yr PR for citizenship while US needs 5. I feel it wil be issue while border crossing. US is very strict and they may take GC away.Take canadian citizenship first and then apply here. Thay way you can have both.
FUNTIMES
08-20 12:24 PM
Also one strange thing observed was that I have a receipt # SRC07264**** and my wife's case has a receipt # SRC07266****. Also we received the receipt notices 2 days apart.
IndiaNJ , GCWhru... Do see any thing like this on your receipt dates.
IndiaNJ , GCWhru... Do see any thing like this on your receipt dates.
more...
watzgc
09-18 04:45 PM
Hi, can I use EAD for my current employer.. my h1b exten under process and taking more than 1 yr .... thanks
NO. Once you start using your EAD, whether part-time of full-time, it take precedence and your H1 becomes invalid.
NO. Once you start using your EAD, whether part-time of full-time, it take precedence and your H1 becomes invalid.
Administrator2
09-07 01:25 PM
IV Core,
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
Could we just keep the focus of this thread to encourage more members to send the information required to setup the meetings on Sept 17th? Your comments may be important and you may have a valid concern, but mixing all the information and individual meeting view-points is going to create a chaos.
Walking_dude,
If you have any question, could you please simply send an email? Volunteers working on this effort are working day in and day out and they are not going to come to this thread to read your post and to answer your question. Your post is relevant, but somewhere else. It is not helping what we are trying to do on this thread. You apparently have the documents so that means you know which email to write your comments/concerns.
Hope you understand what we are trying to say.
I have chosen to participate in the Law makers meeting and received the Talking points ( no confirmed appointments yet)
I know IV has tailored it's agenda after much thought and deliberation. However, it's my personal opinion that some points may need to be tailored based on the party affiliation of the law maker we are speaking to, as one size doesn't fit all.
Pro-labor demands may find resonance with a Congressman of labor background, but may not sit well the pro-employer Republican. ( point 5 of IV agenda). Also Point 7 may not be liked by a Democrat as it places haves before the havenots.
My question is can we tailor it based on whom we are speaking to or keep it standard if some points are disliked by the lawmakers?
I haven't mentioned the actual points as I'm not sure if they can be discussed here. Is it okay to discuss it here? Or is it better discussed offline?
Could we just keep the focus of this thread to encourage more members to send the information required to setup the meetings on Sept 17th? Your comments may be important and you may have a valid concern, but mixing all the information and individual meeting view-points is going to create a chaos.
Walking_dude,
If you have any question, could you please simply send an email? Volunteers working on this effort are working day in and day out and they are not going to come to this thread to read your post and to answer your question. Your post is relevant, but somewhere else. It is not helping what we are trying to do on this thread. You apparently have the documents so that means you know which email to write your comments/concerns.
Hope you understand what we are trying to say.
FinalGC
05-01 10:02 AM
You may be able to reopen the old case, provided the old emploer has not sent a letter to USCIS stating the intent to not persue......if not talk to old employer and lawyer....they may ask you to pay some money for it.....eventually, you may need to work for them for at least 6 months, after getting GC, which will get you legally correct in front of USCIS.
The best thing you can do now is file a new GC with new employer and recapture the 2001 PD. This is possible since your 140 was approved the first time. Make sure the first LC application is similar to the new one. This is only possible, if you keep your calm, negotiate with the old lawyer and get all the LC and 140 approval papers or whatever is needed so that you can PORT the PD and use them for the new case.
I know I am asking you to jump ahead of my case which has a PD of 2005, but hey we are here to help....hope you are able to get this sorted. Just keep calm, remember there is no problem in this world that cannot be solved....your anger will only make you do things that you might regret later.
All the best.
The best thing you can do now is file a new GC with new employer and recapture the 2001 PD. This is possible since your 140 was approved the first time. Make sure the first LC application is similar to the new one. This is only possible, if you keep your calm, negotiate with the old lawyer and get all the LC and 140 approval papers or whatever is needed so that you can PORT the PD and use them for the new case.
I know I am asking you to jump ahead of my case which has a PD of 2005, but hey we are here to help....hope you are able to get this sorted. Just keep calm, remember there is no problem in this world that cannot be solved....your anger will only make you do things that you might regret later.
All the best.
ash27
04-02 09:55 PM
Thanks Ams. Do you see any issues using AC21 to move to companies like TekSystems? Also, do you have any information on some of the new provisions in the pipeline.
dvb
12-14 11:40 AM
- My port of entry was Minneapolis/St. Paul.
- Remember to please take ALL originals of the AP that you have (let the officer sort out what to do with them).
- I had I-485 application receipt (or take a copy if you do not have the original) just in case (I did not need it, but why not!).
- Remember to please take ALL originals of the AP that you have (let the officer sort out what to do with them).
- I had I-485 application receipt (or take a copy if you do not have the original) just in case (I did not need it, but why not!).
No comments:
Post a Comment