karan2004m
07-29 01:38 AM
Did Anyone got 2 year EAD when I-140 pending? There is some stupid assumption posted on some immigration website that USCIS is issuing 2 yr EAD to approved 140 petitions only..
Just want to confirm that.
Just want to confirm that.
hoosier07
07-18 02:59 PM
Hello guys,
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
snvlgopal
06-26 05:49 AM
I am in the same boat, yesterday talked to the Attorney Murthy, she said there is no need of H4 approval document/extension if they go out of country. If Stamping is needed your extension of H1 Should be approved
ksrk
08-14 08:08 PM
Hi Omved,
You need one of the two documents (H1B stamp in passport or valid AP) to return to the US - that is simple. I agree with you that planning travel in anticipation of AP renewal is very dicey.
Your best bet would be to get your H1B stamp at a US Consulate (in India or Canada). My personal experience has been great at the US Consulate in Vancouver (but as you must know by now, there are no guarantees when it comes to immigration matters). The first step, of course, is to look for appointments in these consulates. No matter where, the process is lengthy but not impossible.
Not to scare you, but a colleague's application for H1B stamp got "picked" for extensive security check the last time he was in India (applied at the US Consulate in Delhi).
BTW, the law requires you to be in the US only when the AP (renewal or otherwise) is filed; not till you receive it in hand. So if you make all necessary arrangements for your H1B stamp, you can leave after the I-131 is filed.
-K
DISCLAIMER: Not legal advice - based on personal anecdotes, opinions and preferences.
You need one of the two documents (H1B stamp in passport or valid AP) to return to the US - that is simple. I agree with you that planning travel in anticipation of AP renewal is very dicey.
Your best bet would be to get your H1B stamp at a US Consulate (in India or Canada). My personal experience has been great at the US Consulate in Vancouver (but as you must know by now, there are no guarantees when it comes to immigration matters). The first step, of course, is to look for appointments in these consulates. No matter where, the process is lengthy but not impossible.
Not to scare you, but a colleague's application for H1B stamp got "picked" for extensive security check the last time he was in India (applied at the US Consulate in Delhi).
BTW, the law requires you to be in the US only when the AP (renewal or otherwise) is filed; not till you receive it in hand. So if you make all necessary arrangements for your H1B stamp, you can leave after the I-131 is filed.
-K
DISCLAIMER: Not legal advice - based on personal anecdotes, opinions and preferences.
more...
perm2gc
12-18 10:12 PM
yes...one area where we wholeheartedly support them :)
will they join hands with us ..:rolleyes:
will they join hands with us ..:rolleyes:
yagw
10-31 06:43 PM
I am planning to shift employers and I have a question:
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
To answer your questions (assuming you filed I-1485 with A - since you mention using EAD).
1. Is employer A going to withdraw the approved I-140? If yes, then you will run into some issues with the way things are going now. But you should be able to fight back (MTR etc) in the worst case. If A is not withdrawing I-140, then less problem.
2. Is Company B, that promises to employ you after GC, can they give any written statement? Here in US it is _at-will_ employment. So, you might have tough time proving it.
3. Another problem is, before they adjudicate your I-485, they might issue an RFE to check if you're still employed in same or similar position. And employment with Company C will not satisfy this requirement.
Now, I am not sure if any documents from company B will establish the fact that you will be working in same/similar occupation. You should better consult with an Immigration Attorney and better yet retain them for future.
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
To answer your questions (assuming you filed I-1485 with A - since you mention using EAD).
1. Is employer A going to withdraw the approved I-140? If yes, then you will run into some issues with the way things are going now. But you should be able to fight back (MTR etc) in the worst case. If A is not withdrawing I-140, then less problem.
2. Is Company B, that promises to employ you after GC, can they give any written statement? Here in US it is _at-will_ employment. So, you might have tough time proving it.
3. Another problem is, before they adjudicate your I-485, they might issue an RFE to check if you're still employed in same or similar position. And employment with Company C will not satisfy this requirement.
Now, I am not sure if any documents from company B will establish the fact that you will be working in same/similar occupation. You should better consult with an Immigration Attorney and better yet retain them for future.
more...
Macaca
04-22 09:07 AM
Passing On H-1b Costs to the Employee? (http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/FeesArticle07.18.2006.pdf) -- Smart Business Practice or DOL Violation?, by Michael F. Hammond and Damaris Del Valle
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
After all the costs associated with an H-1B petition are totaled, the sum can be alarming. In order to offset this cost, some employers ask that the beneficiary, the employee who is being hired, reimburse the company in whole or in part. Which costs may and may not be paid by the beneficiary can be a tricky matter. What follows is an analysis of H-1B costs and who may pay what.
All deductions from an H-1B worker’s pay fall into three categories: authorized, unauthorized, or prohibited. Authorized deductions can be taken without worry of whether or not such a deduction will lower the employee’s rate of pay below the required wage rate. Unauthorized deductions, counter to what the term may connote, can be taken from an employee’s wage but are considered non-payment and are only allowed if the beneficiary’s wage rate, after the deduction(s), is greater than the required amount listed on the Labor Condition Application (LCA). Unauthorized deductions cannot push the employee’s wage below either the prevailing wage rate or the actual wage rate, i.e. salaries of those similarly employed and qualified at the work site. Prohibited deductions may not be taken from the employee’s pay regardless of the effect they would have on the required wage rate.
The most straightforward of the deductions is the prohibited deduction. The Training Fee associated with the H-1B petition is the only prohibited deduction associated with the cost of filing an H-1B petition. Rajan v. International Business Solutions, Ltd. and the language in the relevant regulation make it very clear that the Training Fee is to be paid by the employer or a third party; it is not to be reimbursed in part or whole by the employee. This fee must be completely shouldered by the employer or a party who is not the employee.
Deductions are considered by the Department of Labor (DOL) to be authorized if:
The deduction is reported as such on the employer’s payroll records,
The employee has voluntarily agreed to the deduction and such agreement is documented in writing (a job offer which carries a deduction as a condition of employment does not meet this requirement),
The deduction is for a matter that is principally for the benefit of the employee,
The deduction is not a recoupment of the employer’s business expenses,
The amount deducted does not exceed the fair market value or the actual cost (whichever is lower) of the matter covered, and
The amount deducted is not more than 25% of the employee’s disposable earning.
An Education Evaluation arguably qualifies as an authorized deduction. Similar to a translation fee, which is payable by the employee, the employee is benefiting from the evaluation and will be able to use it in the future in his/her private capacity if s/he so wishes. Of course, if the employee is paying for the evaluation, then s/he must be able to acquire a copy of the evaluation so that the future benefit upon which his/her payment is presumed is a real possibility.
Attorney’s fees associated with obtaining H-4 status for family members accompanying the Beneficiary may qualify as authorized deductions since the Beneficiary is the party who primarily benefits from such fees. In addition, attorney fees associated with visa issuance, assuming that international travel is not a requirement for the position, could be properly considered as authorized deductions. In order to properly deduct the attorney fees associated with these processes, it is important that the attorney break down the specifics of how much is being charged for each element of the H-1B process- this will allow the employer to deduct those fees associated with the retention of the visas for the accompanying family members without concerning itself with the deduction requirements necessary for unauthorized deductions.
The circumstances surrounding the Premium Processing Fee determine if deduction of the fee is to qualify as authorized or unauthorized. While the speedy decision that the Premium Processing Fee guarantees often benefits both the employer and the employee, it is important to take notice of which party requests and benefits most from premium processing. If the employee has decided to utilize premium processing for his/her own personal benefit, then the employer may be reimbursed by the employee in accordance with the requirements established by the DOL for authorized deductions. If the employer is the party desiring premium process and who will benefit from such processing, then any deductions from the employee’s pay are unauthorized and, as such Deduction of attorney’s fees associated with the filing of the LCA or H-1B and the Base Fee (or I-129 Fee) are considered to be unauthorized. These fees are considered to be the employer’s business expenses and, for this reason, are not authorized deductions. These fees may be deducted from the employee’s pay so long as they do not drop the rate of pay below the required wage rate.
It is not clear whether or not the Fraud Fee which was implemented in March 2005 is unauthorized or prohibited. The language of the act regarding the Fraud Fee states that “the Secretary of Homeland Security shall impose a fraud prevention and detection fee on an employer filing a petition.”10 Almost identical language is used in the Act to refer to the Training Fee.11 Such similarity could be read to mean that the restrictions of the Training Fee also apply to the Fraud Fee. However, 20 C.F.R. 655 is explicit in saying that the employee cannot pay the Training Fee; no such statement is made regarding the Fraud Fee. The regulation regarding the Training Fee, 20 C.F.R. 655, predates the creation of the Fraud Fee, which may explain this discrepancy. Nonetheless, the language referring to the Fraud Fee is not explicitly prohibitive and an employer may decide to be reimbursed by the employee. If an employer chooses to do so, any deductions from the employee’s salary to pay for this fee must meet the DOL requirements for unauthorized deductions. 12
Before any payments are made by the employee or deductions are taken from his/her pay to reimburse the employer, it must be determined if such deduction is permitted and if so, whether or not it is authorized or unauthorized. Once these preliminary determinations are made, appropriate steps must be taken to ensure that the DOL’s requirements are met. As a practical matter, there are very few circumstances in which the prospective employee could legally be made to pay for the costs associated with the H-1b process without an employer risking non-compliance and causing significant record keeping.
swamy
12-08 08:53 PM
Mark Krikorian's entry on Huckabee's plan. Naturally he's not happy with Any increase on immigration even.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzI5MjhhNmQwZjhjMTNlOTgyNGQxN2NkNjQ3ZmIzNzM=
Its not just any Mark Krikorian, its our beloved 'bigot/racist Mark' - please make sure you always use that prefix or he will be very upset. He's already pissed that anytime the CIS' news releases are picked up by the newspapers/TV, they apparently describe CIS as merely an organization that wants 'stricter immigration' and deliberately leave out their illustrious founding by a courageous racist John Tanton. So - in confusion, ladys, jellyspoons , julia preston, nytimes et all - don't piss off our CIS ppl or they will deport your ass to wherever it came from! And don't think just because you were born here that you are safe cos there's a bill in the works that strips birthright citizenship retroactively!
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YzI5MjhhNmQwZjhjMTNlOTgyNGQxN2NkNjQ3ZmIzNzM=
Its not just any Mark Krikorian, its our beloved 'bigot/racist Mark' - please make sure you always use that prefix or he will be very upset. He's already pissed that anytime the CIS' news releases are picked up by the newspapers/TV, they apparently describe CIS as merely an organization that wants 'stricter immigration' and deliberately leave out their illustrious founding by a courageous racist John Tanton. So - in confusion, ladys, jellyspoons , julia preston, nytimes et all - don't piss off our CIS ppl or they will deport your ass to wherever it came from! And don't think just because you were born here that you are safe cos there's a bill in the works that strips birthright citizenship retroactively!
more...
sunny26
08-02 04:40 PM
Hi
I dont understand what is the good news in this.EB3 may 2001? what is good in that?
Am i missing something?
EB-1s for Indians and Chinese are also expected to be current. For EB-2, India is expected to have a cut off date of January 8, 2003 and for China the cut off date will be April 22, 2005.
For EB-3, according to Jan, the worldwide cut off date will be August 1, 2002, India will be May 8, 2001 and China will be April 22, 2005.
Jan also reports that 18,000 EB-3 for Indians have been processed in this fiscal year with 8,000 of those cases approved in June and 7,000 in July. By the way, the annual EB-3 limit for Indians is 2,800 so go figure.
Also, approximately 40,000 cases were received at the Texas Service Center on July 2nd and 35,000 were received in Nebraska.
One final amazing fact that Jan has learned - USCIS requested 66,600 (666!) visa numbers from the beginning of the fiscal year through the end of May and 66,800 numbers in June and July.
I dont understand what is the good news in this.EB3 may 2001? what is good in that?
Am i missing something?
EB-1s for Indians and Chinese are also expected to be current. For EB-2, India is expected to have a cut off date of January 8, 2003 and for China the cut off date will be April 22, 2005.
For EB-3, according to Jan, the worldwide cut off date will be August 1, 2002, India will be May 8, 2001 and China will be April 22, 2005.
Jan also reports that 18,000 EB-3 for Indians have been processed in this fiscal year with 8,000 of those cases approved in June and 7,000 in July. By the way, the annual EB-3 limit for Indians is 2,800 so go figure.
Also, approximately 40,000 cases were received at the Texas Service Center on July 2nd and 35,000 were received in Nebraska.
One final amazing fact that Jan has learned - USCIS requested 66,600 (666!) visa numbers from the beginning of the fiscal year through the end of May and 66,800 numbers in June and July.
payur
03-10 07:37 AM
I guess I should agree with Jerrome because I am going to India 2 weeks from now and My friend who recently had been to India mentioned the same. I have asked the same question to my immigration lawyer, I will post it when I get a reply.
In mean time I have another question, My flight is from Chicago to Delhi, but I have to take a loacl flight from Miami to Chicago, all my international baggage check in's are at the Miami. My question here is should I surrender the I-94 at Miami since I am doing all my International baggage check in's or should it be in Chicago.
Please let me know if anybody had this situation.
-Success.
In mean time I have another question, My flight is from Chicago to Delhi, but I have to take a loacl flight from Miami to Chicago, all my international baggage check in's are at the Miami. My question here is should I surrender the I-94 at Miami since I am doing all my International baggage check in's or should it be in Chicago.
Please let me know if anybody had this situation.
-Success.
more...
MatsP
May 12th, 2006, 08:27 AM
Of course Nikon can't help support third party lenses. They have a specification (that isn't available to others) that specify how the interface between the camera and the lens should work - but the can't change that specification (or change what the camera does) in order to support other manufacturers lenses. If they really wanted other manufacturers to make lenses to work on Nikon, they would perhaps publish (or license) the specification. But I don't think Nikon is particularly interested in doing so.
Sigma, however, has made it their business to reverse engineer the interface between the camera and the lens, without the access to the specification. They therefore are responsible (even if they plead not so) for any malfunction between the two. However, one of the problems with reverse engineering is that you can only see what's being used at any particular time - the spec may well have some variations that aren't used in a particular setup, but allows for future expansion. This is where Sigma will have a problem when Nikon brings out a new/different camera model.
The firmware for the lens should be possible to upgrade, assuming it's a case of just not understanding some command or such.
--
Mats
Sigma, however, has made it their business to reverse engineer the interface between the camera and the lens, without the access to the specification. They therefore are responsible (even if they plead not so) for any malfunction between the two. However, one of the problems with reverse engineering is that you can only see what's being used at any particular time - the spec may well have some variations that aren't used in a particular setup, but allows for future expansion. This is where Sigma will have a problem when Nikon brings out a new/different camera model.
The firmware for the lens should be possible to upgrade, assuming it's a case of just not understanding some command or such.
--
Mats
gc_peshwa
11-17 11:18 AM
I think its a wise move on IV's part to keep all lobbying and campaigning efforts private. That way the NumbsersUSA and other anti's can not sniff what IVians are upto. Keep up the good work. Someone at the top (God!!) is watching your hard work and you will be rewarded soon.
more...
innervoice
01-10 05:57 PM
My son I-485 application got rejected in Sept 07 and the I resubmitted the application in Oct 07 with correct fees, Check got cleared in Dec 07 and received FP notice with appointment due date in Jan 08, but haven't got my I-485 receipt yet, I talked to customer service and she said it showing the application is rejected on Sep 07, and she will made further inquiry and let me know through email. This thing really scared me, Can someone please shed on light on this.
ubetman
08-08 10:28 AM
My application has not been sent yet. They are planning to send it to TSC. My confusion is:
According to USCIS website, in I-140 addresses to sent information, for concurrent application of 140/485, it says if the permanent employment is based in this state, it goes to this center.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=c31c5cdc2c463110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fe529c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
In 485 addresses to sent information under employment based category, it says if you live in this state, sent it to this center. This does not say about concurrent filing applications..
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=eb7b5cdc2c463110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fe529c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
I live in Texas but in labor employment, permanent job offer address is in diff state which comes under NSC.
Since mine is concurrent filing, I don't know to which center I have to sent the application....Lawyer is saying he will send it to TSC, since I live and work in Texas. But I want to make clear things as I don't want to end up sending to wrong service center. If process delayed, thats fine..but if the application is rejected...then thats a big problem..which is why I am mostly concerned....lawyers r busy..they don't consider all our concerns...in the faqs:pdf released by USCIS, it says if the application is sent by mistake to VSC or CSC, then they will route it to either TSC or NSC but it does not say about if application is sent to TSC but has to go to NSC, it will route it to approriate service center...
tension ...confused....lawyer don't reply...he doesn't care much...
anybody has hotline number to call and confirm with USCIS...thanks in advance..
According to USCIS website, in I-140 addresses to sent information, for concurrent application of 140/485, it says if the permanent employment is based in this state, it goes to this center.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=c31c5cdc2c463110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fe529c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
In 485 addresses to sent information under employment based category, it says if you live in this state, sent it to this center. This does not say about concurrent filing applications..
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=eb7b5cdc2c463110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=fe529c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
I live in Texas but in labor employment, permanent job offer address is in diff state which comes under NSC.
Since mine is concurrent filing, I don't know to which center I have to sent the application....Lawyer is saying he will send it to TSC, since I live and work in Texas. But I want to make clear things as I don't want to end up sending to wrong service center. If process delayed, thats fine..but if the application is rejected...then thats a big problem..which is why I am mostly concerned....lawyers r busy..they don't consider all our concerns...in the faqs:pdf released by USCIS, it says if the application is sent by mistake to VSC or CSC, then they will route it to either TSC or NSC but it does not say about if application is sent to TSC but has to go to NSC, it will route it to approriate service center...
tension ...confused....lawyer don't reply...he doesn't care much...
anybody has hotline number to call and confirm with USCIS...thanks in advance..
more...
djsnug
06-10 09:28 PM
I think I'll secretly keep Phat7's image as wallpaper on my computer. The woman in there is absolutely beautiful! :D
Ann Ruben
01-08 11:26 PM
There are really two questions here. First, are you eligible for unemployment compensation? And second, will applying for unemployment compensation adversely impact your application for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident?
The answer to the first question is controlled by the law of the particular state in which you worked and/or reside. In theory, to be eligible one must have worked long enough that an adequate amount of UC insurance was paid into the UC system, AND one must be willing and ABLE to accept new employment. The law varies from state to state with respect to whether someone in your situation qualifies as "ABLE" to accept new employment. If you let me know where you reside and work, I can try to provide further guidance as to eligibility for UC benefits.
As to the second question, (assuming your I-140 has been approved and your I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days) under the INA, when your PD is reached and your I-485 is adjudicated, you are required to have the intention to take up an offer of permanent full time employment in the same or similar occupation for which your LC was granted. This is a prospective requirement, and your employment status prior to the actual grant of AOS is relevant only to the extent that it supports or undercuts your ability to prove that you have an appropriate offer of full time employment which you intend to take up. There is no requirement that you be employed while you are waiting for your priority date to become current and your I-485 to be adjudicated. However, being unemployed or employed in an entirely unrelated occupation could trigger USCIS to perform a more searching inquiry into the bona fides of the prospective AC21 qualifying job offer and your intention to accept it.
To the best of my knowledge, USCIS is not notified when an AOS applicant applies for UC. Similarly, I am not aware of any cases where an UC claim triggered an RFE. Nevertheless, it would be prudent to act on the assumption that USCIS is aware of UC claims and be well prepared to prove one's intention to take up a bona fide offer of AC 21 qualifying employment once your PD is reached.
The answer to the first question is controlled by the law of the particular state in which you worked and/or reside. In theory, to be eligible one must have worked long enough that an adequate amount of UC insurance was paid into the UC system, AND one must be willing and ABLE to accept new employment. The law varies from state to state with respect to whether someone in your situation qualifies as "ABLE" to accept new employment. If you let me know where you reside and work, I can try to provide further guidance as to eligibility for UC benefits.
As to the second question, (assuming your I-140 has been approved and your I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days) under the INA, when your PD is reached and your I-485 is adjudicated, you are required to have the intention to take up an offer of permanent full time employment in the same or similar occupation for which your LC was granted. This is a prospective requirement, and your employment status prior to the actual grant of AOS is relevant only to the extent that it supports or undercuts your ability to prove that you have an appropriate offer of full time employment which you intend to take up. There is no requirement that you be employed while you are waiting for your priority date to become current and your I-485 to be adjudicated. However, being unemployed or employed in an entirely unrelated occupation could trigger USCIS to perform a more searching inquiry into the bona fides of the prospective AC21 qualifying job offer and your intention to accept it.
To the best of my knowledge, USCIS is not notified when an AOS applicant applies for UC. Similarly, I am not aware of any cases where an UC claim triggered an RFE. Nevertheless, it would be prudent to act on the assumption that USCIS is aware of UC claims and be well prepared to prove one's intention to take up a bona fide offer of AC 21 qualifying employment once your PD is reached.
more...
prioritydate
07-14 10:46 AM
To elaborate on that, S.Korea happens to be on the forefront of technological innovations. Highest per capita broadband use, highest per capita cellphone use...land of samsung and Hyundai
not to mention great food...korean bbq anyone
Why there is no retrogression for this country? Sounds like something fishy going on...
Only in America. Injustice!!
not to mention great food...korean bbq anyone
Why there is no retrogression for this country? Sounds like something fishy going on...
Only in America. Injustice!!
samcam
05-19 12:03 PM
we have 99 guests.. please register and contribute.. help yourself by helping IV...
mgakhar
03-06 10:21 AM
Well I managed to reschedule my travel so now will be able to get my FP done.
Other than AP, EAD, Passport, I-797 and ofcourse the FP notice, is any other document that I need to take?
Manish.
Other than AP, EAD, Passport, I-797 and ofcourse the FP notice, is any other document that I need to take?
Manish.
lost_in_gc_land
02-02 03:43 AM
Yes you can fedex the AP to india and yes she can use it while coming back if needed. I got this from USCIS level 2 immigration officer.:D
Hello,
I would like to check with you if you know of someone who has used an AP that was approved while that person had left the US and received it by mail/fedex/etc. to get back in the US. I am in a situation where my H1 stamping is in security/background check and it been that way for over 75 days. I have an AP that was approved and mailed to me but I have been told by my lawyer that it is not ok to use AP or atleast without risk of not being allowed entry
Hello,
I would like to check with you if you know of someone who has used an AP that was approved while that person had left the US and received it by mail/fedex/etc. to get back in the US. I am in a situation where my H1 stamping is in security/background check and it been that way for over 75 days. I have an AP that was approved and mailed to me but I have been told by my lawyer that it is not ok to use AP or atleast without risk of not being allowed entry
bkam
05-18 10:34 PM
:) Welcome to our news member Selvaela..
You guys are cunning :) :) :)
You guys are cunning :) :) :)
No comments:
Post a Comment