alex99
11-02 04:44 PM
Bumping..
wallpaper imagens de amor eterno
mbawa2574
02-15 02:06 PM
http://www.workpermit.com/news/2007-05-16/us/h-1b-visa-outsourcing-abuse-investigation.htm
This demand came from Communist Senators like Durban who are anti-immigrant and their opinions don't matter on this website. Durban is all for illegals but they hate progessive immigrants. If it is upto them then someone who is here illegally should get a GC before you. What you say about that ?
This demand came from Communist Senators like Durban who are anti-immigrant and their opinions don't matter on this website. Durban is all for illegals but they hate progessive immigrants. If it is upto them then someone who is here illegally should get a GC before you. What you say about that ?
psaxena
06-08 07:10 PM
10 yrs???? what are you talking about, the pace at which we are going right now.. minimum 200 yrs+- 6 months:confused:
My labour cleared in 2009, i guess i need to wait for 10 yrs more !!!, not good , not good at all :eek:
My labour cleared in 2009, i guess i need to wait for 10 yrs more !!!, not good , not good at all :eek:
2011 de amor
vin13
11-11 09:23 AM
The conference call was not organized by core. It was just 2 of us who discussed on the donor forum and came up with a draft letter to get clarrification from DOS. I suggest the first step is to get clarrification of the quarterly spillover with DOS regarding their process. Can any of you get an appointment with Charles Oppenheim (Chief of Immigrant Visa Control and Reporting Division at DOS)?
After working several hours and we come up with the draft which was posted earlier on this thread. And for that, someone gives me a Red.....
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
After working several hours and we come up with the draft which was posted earlier on this thread. And for that, someone gives me a Red.....
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
more...
axp817
01-30 01:31 PM
Sorry to hear about your plight, what do you plan to do if the RFE is for employment verification?
Please do keep us updated, it will help other members in similar situations out, and you might find some useful advice as well.
Good luck.
Please do keep us updated, it will help other members in similar situations out, and you might find some useful advice as well.
Good luck.
northstar
05-23 05:38 PM
Here is the issue: If you are thinking of doing MBA to get a management job in a US company and are an Indian, please forget it. You might get a low level management position paying at most 80K. MBA is not for everyone - you have to have it in you to get something out of an MBA. It's not about landing that good job. You hear about the 1 crore offers that IIM students get from top American companies? Well, they are kicked out of the job in 1 year and then join Infosys or Wipro. Not because they are not brilliant but because their conversational skills are terrible and so is their language. Unless you are planning to settle in India OR REALLY THINKING OF PUTTING A LOT OF EFFORT in mastering the English language and your outlook, an MBA is not going to serve you in the US.
Like, someone said, an MBA is more than just a degree. You can get a better, much higher paying job (300K+) without an MBA but with excellent logic, hard work, conversational skills and outgoing personality. No GC required :)
GCVivek, I wanted to write that post, but you did already :)
Like, someone said, an MBA is more than just a degree. You can get a better, much higher paying job (300K+) without an MBA but with excellent logic, hard work, conversational skills and outgoing personality. No GC required :)
GCVivek, I wanted to write that post, but you did already :)
more...
indianindian2006
07-14 05:52 PM
PD: Jan 2006
Category: EB2
As suggested by many you should talk to a attorney.You are covered by AC21,also on your point of not working with your ex-employer for 180 days again a smart attorney could guide you thru this as sometimes green card can be filed for future employment after the green card is approved.
Best of luck.
Category: EB2
As suggested by many you should talk to a attorney.You are covered by AC21,also on your point of not working with your ex-employer for 180 days again a smart attorney could guide you thru this as sometimes green card can be filed for future employment after the green card is approved.
Best of luck.
2010 Poesia De Amor. poemas de amor
tejonidhi
09-10 01:51 PM
:)After they have their stomach full, and after finishing about animals, other humans then comes lousy aliens like me and you.
Please prey God that they don't get used to ALIENS's Flesh.:)
Please prey God that they don't get used to ALIENS's Flesh.:)
more...
Googler
02-20 02:54 PM
I'd posted elsewhere about my Feb 13, 2008 conversation with the DOS official who sets cutoff dates:
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
hair fotos de amor triste
kumar1
11-10 11:40 PM
PCS - What you are suffering from is known as PVBS (Post Visa Bulletin Syndrome). It is very common in Indian and Chinese community living in the US.
This condition stays with the patient/sufferer for 15 days or so and then disappears like a f*a*r*t in the wind. It is more likely to happen to those who fall under EB-2 category and especially those who are 6 months or so from priority date to be current. This condition keeps re-appearing till the patient gets green card and then it gives birth to another condition call PGCS (Post Green Card Syndrome). Typically, that condition lasts for 5 years till the patient gets US citizenship. There are some documented evidences that Amway and QuickStar have tried to fix this condition but medical community is yet to approve that.
Laughter is the only known cure of this condition. Returning back to home country can also cure this condition.
This condition stays with the patient/sufferer for 15 days or so and then disappears like a f*a*r*t in the wind. It is more likely to happen to those who fall under EB-2 category and especially those who are 6 months or so from priority date to be current. This condition keeps re-appearing till the patient gets green card and then it gives birth to another condition call PGCS (Post Green Card Syndrome). Typically, that condition lasts for 5 years till the patient gets US citizenship. There are some documented evidences that Amway and QuickStar have tried to fix this condition but medical community is yet to approve that.
Laughter is the only known cure of this condition. Returning back to home country can also cure this condition.
more...
calgirl
07-12 05:53 PM
sammas..
Ahh.. Thought I missed something in the loong document..
Thanks..
Ahh.. Thought I missed something in the loong document..
Thanks..
hot hot poemas de amistad y amor.
srkamath
07-20 01:26 PM
Here you go - conversion should not impact this as the number of LC approvals remains the same:
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
Here are all the LC approvals for India in the last seven years.
Year, Total LC Approved, Total India
2007 85112 24573
2006 79782 22298
2005 6133 1350
2004 43582 No Info
2003 62912 No Info
2002 79784 No Info
2001 77921 No Info
2000 70204 No Info
Lets assume about 25% of pre-PERM LCs are India based on post-PERM data. Thus for fiscal 2004 (Oct 2003 thru Sep 2004) the total LC number is 43,852. Assume 25% of that to be India based on PERM data. That gives about 11,000 India LCs in 2004 alone (All EB categories combined). If you assume an average of 2.5 dependents then the number of visas required for all India EB categories for 2004 is 27,500 (11,000*2.5). The regular quota for EB2 and EB3 combined is only about 9,800. That means 17,700 visas have to come from somewhere. I dont think those many visas are remaining for this year. Be prepared to see FIFO thrown under the bus and approvals with PDs that are all over the place. Please critique this analysis without piling on. Thoughts?
delax,
There is a mistake in your numbers, thousands of cases applied for in 2005 were approved in 2006.
If you look at the 2006 PERM Data Sheet, there are 7290 Approved, India cases with receipt dates in the year 2005.
I'm assuming PD = PERM Receipt Date (correct me if i'm wrong)
Similarly for 2006 in the 2007 tables.
Therefore there are ~ 8700 - EB1, EB2, EB3 cases in 2005 and not 1350.
more...
house de amor de emos.
anilnag
10-31 03:37 PM
It is EB3 India vote, is it right? I can't place my vote if I am from another country...
India EB3 is most retrogessed so pls don't vote if not from EB3 India. You can start a new thread if you are interested in tracking the applicants status for your country.
India EB3 is most retrogessed so pls don't vote if not from EB3 India. You can start a new thread if you are interested in tracking the applicants status for your country.
tattoo de amor y amistad. amor
eeezzz
02-15 02:57 PM
Why are you in favour of per country quotas, having been born in an oversubscribed country? Are you a glutton for punishment? Do you enjoy waiting 6 years more than an equally qualified counterpart from another country who moves onto bigger and better jobs while you rot in the same position and pay grade for years?
Per country rationing is discriminatory for EB migration. The best jobs should go to the best people, regardless of national origin, race, or religion - this basic principle is enshrined in employment law, but when it comes to EB migration, it is disregarded! It is not about "giving everyone an equal chance" - this is not a charity, this is a business, and in business, only the best and the brightest get those jobs.
I believe HV000 is either favor of per country quotas, nor is he a glutton for punishment. He sees the concept and current rule of this country, not just himself.
Your the other post said you just want GC in a shorter time. Can I ask you who want GC in a longer time or who doesn't want it in a shorter time?
Who determine the best jobs are? and who determine the best people are?
The "Equal Opportunity" word is really for Americans to read. Until you get your GC, that is not really for you.
Think about this, if the annual limit is 100, the country limit is 7%. Because it has processed 7 people so it closes the door and you think that is not fair. Do you take a look at the others who have to wait in line because 100 limit is hit even thought there's not one single case is approved for his country? USCIS is not processing one for each country at a time. Do you know your line is actually might already taken advanatge on other lines?
State this is not for fight something, but want to remind you the fair you think might not be fair to others. If you want to play the game, you have to follow the rules. If the rules are not clear, we fight for making clear rule. If you fight for rules to benefit you, that is taking advantage on others.
Increase the annual limit and recapture unused Visa from the past years are what we should push right now. But it is just a solution for only resolve problem for people who are currently stuck in I-485. After run out of recaptured Visa, the pipe will get stuck again.
I personally think the country limit will not change and if country limit is the policy, it should start at PERM, not just at I-485.
Per country rationing is discriminatory for EB migration. The best jobs should go to the best people, regardless of national origin, race, or religion - this basic principle is enshrined in employment law, but when it comes to EB migration, it is disregarded! It is not about "giving everyone an equal chance" - this is not a charity, this is a business, and in business, only the best and the brightest get those jobs.
I believe HV000 is either favor of per country quotas, nor is he a glutton for punishment. He sees the concept and current rule of this country, not just himself.
Your the other post said you just want GC in a shorter time. Can I ask you who want GC in a longer time or who doesn't want it in a shorter time?
Who determine the best jobs are? and who determine the best people are?
The "Equal Opportunity" word is really for Americans to read. Until you get your GC, that is not really for you.
Think about this, if the annual limit is 100, the country limit is 7%. Because it has processed 7 people so it closes the door and you think that is not fair. Do you take a look at the others who have to wait in line because 100 limit is hit even thought there's not one single case is approved for his country? USCIS is not processing one for each country at a time. Do you know your line is actually might already taken advanatge on other lines?
State this is not for fight something, but want to remind you the fair you think might not be fair to others. If you want to play the game, you have to follow the rules. If the rules are not clear, we fight for making clear rule. If you fight for rules to benefit you, that is taking advantage on others.
Increase the annual limit and recapture unused Visa from the past years are what we should push right now. But it is just a solution for only resolve problem for people who are currently stuck in I-485. After run out of recaptured Visa, the pipe will get stuck again.
I personally think the country limit will not change and if country limit is the policy, it should start at PERM, not just at I-485.
more...
pictures Cartas de Amor.
sri1309
09-10 06:01 PM
Its time to ask for our share.
Our strong points must be anyone legally in US for 8+ years must be granted Citizenship. We have suffered the pain, now they do something to help forget that. 5 years, should be eligible for a GC.
We must push for this. Unless you ask, why will they even bother. Doenst mean we didnt ask in the past, but we must ask what we deserve.
8 years+, worked like a dog, behaved responsibily everywhere, have good qualifications. etc etc.. what else do you need to do. We shouldnt be paying for their lapses. We must push them and also push our employers again and again and again till we get this. US is very good in many aspects, but lagging here. Unless you highlight it, unless you say ALOUD that we are not respected here, they will not hear.. We need a campaign that none is seeing or taking any initiative in the last 3 months. I see 10s of threads talking same things..
Core guys.. we need your help
Sri
$100 one time.
Our strong points must be anyone legally in US for 8+ years must be granted Citizenship. We have suffered the pain, now they do something to help forget that. 5 years, should be eligible for a GC.
We must push for this. Unless you ask, why will they even bother. Doenst mean we didnt ask in the past, but we must ask what we deserve.
8 years+, worked like a dog, behaved responsibily everywhere, have good qualifications. etc etc.. what else do you need to do. We shouldnt be paying for their lapses. We must push them and also push our employers again and again and again till we get this. US is very good in many aspects, but lagging here. Unless you highlight it, unless you say ALOUD that we are not respected here, they will not hear.. We need a campaign that none is seeing or taking any initiative in the last 3 months. I see 10s of threads talking same things..
Core guys.. we need your help
Sri
$100 one time.
dresses textos de amor
TeddyKoochu
09-10 01:45 PM
If USCIS wants to do another JULY 2007 they never learnt their lession. With the Quarterly/annual quota I dont think USCIS legally can make EB2 current. I hate another JULY 2007 for sure.
I would welcome another Jul 07 atleast it gives all EB2 / EB3 to be able to file for their 485's. This may not be very likely I agree with you. I can feel your pain with your PD but as Sumggymba has also said that it is extremely beneficial to be able to file for 485 and have EAD / AP.
I believe that what may happen when EB2-I/C preadjudicated numbers get exhausted is Option # 2) Keep accepting applications in a controlled manner so as to approve in quarter or year because this is what happened for EB2 ROW; again this is my personal guess / assumption, Iam not an expert on the INA or the law. Also those who have not been able to file for I485 cannot be kept in a endless denial with the preadjudicated numbers exhausted I think the chance will come for EB2 I/C either by Sep 2011 or latest by Jul 2012.
I would welcome another Jul 07 atleast it gives all EB2 / EB3 to be able to file for their 485's. This may not be very likely I agree with you. I can feel your pain with your PD but as Sumggymba has also said that it is extremely beneficial to be able to file for 485 and have EAD / AP.
I believe that what may happen when EB2-I/C preadjudicated numbers get exhausted is Option # 2) Keep accepting applications in a controlled manner so as to approve in quarter or year because this is what happened for EB2 ROW; again this is my personal guess / assumption, Iam not an expert on the INA or the law. Also those who have not been able to file for I485 cannot be kept in a endless denial with the preadjudicated numbers exhausted I think the chance will come for EB2 I/C either by Sep 2011 or latest by Jul 2012.
more...
makeup textos de amor
stucklabor
07-24 10:29 AM
USCIS cannot allow people to file for I-485 at its own discretion without visa number availability.
By law, an immigrant visa number has to be available to the alien at the time the application for adjustment of status is filed. See Sec. 245 (a)(3) below.
As someone already mentioned, everyone has full time jobs and can't respond to suggestions immediately. Thanks for the patience and the bright ideas.
http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20/slb-7169?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act245
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
By law, an immigrant visa number has to be available to the alien at the time the application for adjustment of status is filed. See Sec. 245 (a)(3) below.
As someone already mentioned, everyone has full time jobs and can't respond to suggestions immediately. Thanks for the patience and the bright ideas.
http://www.uscis.gov/lpBin/lpext.dll/inserts/slb/slb-1/slb-20/slb-7169?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm#slb-act245
INA: ACT 245 - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF NONIMMIGRANT TO THAT OF PERSON ADMITTED FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Sec. 245. [8 U.S.C. 1255]
(a) The status of an alien who was inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States 1/ or the status of any other alien having an approved petition for classification under subparagraph (A)(iii), (A)(iv), (B)(ii), or (B)(iii) of section 204(a)(1) or may be adjusted by the Attorney General, in his discretion and under such regulations as he may prescribe, to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if
(1) the alien makes an application for such adjustment,
(2) the alien is eligible to receive an immigrant visa and is admissible to the United States for permanent residence, and
(3) an immigrant visa is immediately available to him at the time his application is filed.
girlfriend frases de amor romanticas
Macaca
07-01 11:28 AM
http://judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Oppenheim070606.pdf
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Are you aware of a similar document that explains
country caps.
conditions that lead to initial retrogression. That is, from current to settingcurrent dates. This is what happened in Oct 2005 and will happen now when all dates are current. This is different from VB's that reset existing current dates.
Spencer HSU, Washington Post likes to rape USCIS. We can send him our issues if July VB is reset in the middle.
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim, Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division, Visa Services Office, U.S. Department of State, June 6, 2007.
Are you aware of a similar document that explains
country caps.
conditions that lead to initial retrogression. That is, from current to settingcurrent dates. This is what happened in Oct 2005 and will happen now when all dates are current. This is different from VB's that reset existing current dates.
Spencer HSU, Washington Post likes to rape USCIS. We can send him our issues if July VB is reset in the middle.
hairstyles versos d amor. versos de amor
prioritydate
12-22 12:51 AM
You should've thought about this that whole year that you were goofin' off! Why are you bringing this up at this late juncture, anyway? Your PD is Dec, 2004. What makes you your petition will trigger an RFE for not working during 2001? You raise a very perplexing and contradicting query...
I wasn't goofin off, by choice. I had no option but wait and pray that my employer would find a job for me. I had every reason to bother at his stage, because I invested so much time and money to file my GC. Natually, I am bothered because you never know what USCIS would ask; they are always ready to pull the carpet underneath you. What if IO ask me to prove that I am not out of status ? would I be able to show the proof? No! I can't...
I wasn't goofin off, by choice. I had no option but wait and pray that my employer would find a job for me. I had every reason to bother at his stage, because I invested so much time and money to file my GC. Natually, I am bothered because you never know what USCIS would ask; they are always ready to pull the carpet underneath you. What if IO ask me to prove that I am not out of status ? would I be able to show the proof? No! I can't...
sprash
01-30 02:35 PM
Wow! Thanks a lot for posting such detailed RFE information. This really helps a lot in understanding what I may be asked.
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....
My GC sponsoring employer revoked my H1 last year itself. I could see the change in status back then itself within a month of having left them. Nothing happenned after that. I got a new H1 from my (then) new employer and things continued as before. This employer has not yet revoked my H1 (from what I can see) and its probably because they are almost going under. There are less than 25 people left in the company so I doubt that they will have spent the money to go and revoke all the H1s of the folks they laid off.
Maybe its like someone suggested - USCIS is pre-processing my 485 based on received date since I mailed my app very early on in July 2007.
Yes, I believe thats what they might be doing - preprocessing. There was no obvious 'trigger' event that caused RFE on my case either. They raised these RFEs even though I had not changed my sponsoring employer or transferred my h1b. I have a feeling they preprocessed mine too.
I don't mean to scare you (just prepare you for the worst) --- you might want to talk to some desi consultants and make an arrangement that in case the RFE is employment verification, they give you pay stubs from the time you were laid off. As you can see from my RFE, you might need to show your recent paystubs and employment verification. Yes, it will be a financial loss for you, but without these I believe your case can get rejected (gurus correct me if I'm wrong!).
Again I am is just hypothesizing your situation, your case might be entirely different. This is 'just in case'.....
ramus
07-05 02:02 PM
Can we please stop this discussion and follow some action items...
Lets stop this now...
Thanks...
Lets stop this now...
Thanks...
0 comments:
Post a Comment