indianabacklog
04-16 02:00 PM
they entered on a green form and no, it is not attached to the L1A Petition approval. So, they can just leave and then get stamped coming back in?
They will have to apply at the consulate wherever they came from and undergo an interview to get the visa put in their passport. Then they can enter with that visa in place. If their entry is on record which it could well be a flag may be raised as to the reason for their recent entry on the visa waiver program.
They will have to apply at the consulate wherever they came from and undergo an interview to get the visa put in their passport. Then they can enter with that visa in place. If their entry is on record which it could well be a flag may be raised as to the reason for their recent entry on the visa waiver program.
wallpaper Leading the Faux Glass Paint
desi3933
06-22 07:54 AM
What if the I 94 is expired and an H1B extension is filed and still waiting for the Approval?
Will that one will also be rejected or by attaching the receipt copy will be good enough?
Expired I-94 is ok, if
it is expired less than 180 days ago. 245(k) covers this.
or
change of status to H1/H4/L1/L2 is pending. In this case, attach copy of the receipt.
Not a legal advice.
------------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
Will that one will also be rejected or by attaching the receipt copy will be good enough?
Expired I-94 is ok, if
it is expired less than 180 days ago. 245(k) covers this.
or
change of status to H1/H4/L1/L2 is pending. In this case, attach copy of the receipt.
Not a legal advice.
------------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
mangelschots
05-02 09:02 PM
Senator Obama has filed the "Citizenship Promotion Act 2007" which
tries to alleviate this process and mandate the FBI to perform this in
a reasonable timeframe without limiting US Security.
following is an exceprt of this.
"...Act to limit the timeframe of the FBI name check and background
check. We ask of the honorable members of the Congress and Senate to
approve Senator Obama's Act in its entirety and facilitate the
feasibility of it. As the security of this country is considered a
priority, it is important that the adequate budget and resources are
devoted to the security checks ..."
This sounds like a good initiative to help out all of us that finally end up making in I-485. Suggest we rally all IV members to sign this petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nc082505/petition.html
tries to alleviate this process and mandate the FBI to perform this in
a reasonable timeframe without limiting US Security.
following is an exceprt of this.
"...Act to limit the timeframe of the FBI name check and background
check. We ask of the honorable members of the Congress and Senate to
approve Senator Obama's Act in its entirety and facilitate the
feasibility of it. As the security of this country is considered a
priority, it is important that the adequate budget and resources are
devoted to the security checks ..."
This sounds like a good initiative to help out all of us that finally end up making in I-485. Suggest we rally all IV members to sign this petition:
http://www.petitiononline.com/nc082505/petition.html
2011 stained glass paint
alterego
09-15 01:32 PM
Clearly they felt putting EB2 india PD at Jan 2003 created too much of a flow. So they made it unavailable for a while then backed up 6 months with this new quota.
My view is with the coming deluge of Labours from the BECs and the promised pick up in the pace of 140 adjudications, those of us in EB2 will be very lucky if we see a month for month movement in priority dates. I suspect you could count yourself lucky if you get to file for 485 in this fiscal year.
EB india's situation is truly that bad. The bulge in applications in 2002-2005 is so huge that I feel that absent legislation the dates may move at best 4 months per year for the next few years.
Just think that 40K green cards went to India last year and this year it will not exceed 10K by much. That was before BECs.
It is a truly daunting situation.
I however do feel there will be some solution to this mess within the next year with some sort of legislation that corporate america will push.
My view is with the coming deluge of Labours from the BECs and the promised pick up in the pace of 140 adjudications, those of us in EB2 will be very lucky if we see a month for month movement in priority dates. I suspect you could count yourself lucky if you get to file for 485 in this fiscal year.
EB india's situation is truly that bad. The bulge in applications in 2002-2005 is so huge that I feel that absent legislation the dates may move at best 4 months per year for the next few years.
Just think that 40K green cards went to India last year and this year it will not exceed 10K by much. That was before BECs.
It is a truly daunting situation.
I however do feel there will be some solution to this mess within the next year with some sort of legislation that corporate america will push.
more...
saajed
11-15 10:43 PM
Hello Experts,
I am on H1 and have my labor approved. My spouse is on F1 and we are filing I-140. Would there be a problem?
Because of Retrogression for India we cannot file for I-485 yet.
Please advise
Thanks
S A
I am on H1 and have my labor approved. My spouse is on F1 and we are filing I-140. Would there be a problem?
Because of Retrogression for India we cannot file for I-485 yet.
Please advise
Thanks
S A
ashish3
10-30 04:33 PM
Update to my case. Submitted Originally on July 2nd for I-140/I-1485. USCIS Sent back everything on Aug�28 stating Original Labor missing. Attorney sent back the case on Sep 11th with a cover letter that the labor could be requested by USCIS to DOL. The copy of ETA9089 & certified online copy was attached with the original case. I was hoping that they will accept the case this time as I have seen similar cases where they accept the case and issue RFE at a later date. Attorney also mentioned that he got receipts for similar cases like this.
Today- USCIS returned back the application (both I-140 & I-1485) with the letter saying that the dates are not current even though the date stamped was July 2nd on the case. I talked to attorney and he is planning to send the case back to them giving examples on the similar cases and putting a strong cover letter. The final plan of action still needs to be finalized. Looks like I am the unlucky one presently from the batch of 400 K applications. I don�t know how to express my pain, agony frustration I have gone through the last 4 months. I don�t have words to express myself but just feel so terribly sad and disappointed from this whole process I have been going through... I am also planning to contact the local senators /congressman and sought their help & attention.
Today- USCIS returned back the application (both I-140 & I-1485) with the letter saying that the dates are not current even though the date stamped was July 2nd on the case. I talked to attorney and he is planning to send the case back to them giving examples on the similar cases and putting a strong cover letter. The final plan of action still needs to be finalized. Looks like I am the unlucky one presently from the batch of 400 K applications. I don�t know how to express my pain, agony frustration I have gone through the last 4 months. I don�t have words to express myself but just feel so terribly sad and disappointed from this whole process I have been going through... I am also planning to contact the local senators /congressman and sought their help & attention.
more...
InTheMoment
05-17 06:17 PM
Actually FP has nothing to do whatsoever with Name Check or when it is initiated. Name Check is a separate process that usually starts within a couple of weeks after you Notice Date. You can check when it is initiated with an Infopass or by talking to a service center IIO on the phone.
2010 stained glass paint
Life2Live
04-30 01:12 PM
perhaps this will help.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/immigration/H1BWillfulViolator.htm
Thanks for link. I do not see my friend's employer who is currently facing lawsuit by an employee. I ensured the same by verifying with her.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/immigration/H1BWillfulViolator.htm
Thanks for link. I do not see my friend's employer who is currently facing lawsuit by an employee. I ensured the same by verifying with her.
more...
Since1997
08-13 11:02 AM
Here is the update we were expecting to see on Aug 10th and now available (be first one to see): http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/ReceiptingTimes081007.pdf
I-140(8/3) I-485(8/3)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/30 6/26
I-140(8/10) I-485(8/10)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/31 6/28
NSC no progress at all
TSC 1day for I-140 & 2days fro I-485
PS: None of the centers entered in Jul 2nd....can't imagine the delays after they enter Jul 2nd....mass number of applications....
I-140(8/3) I-485(8/3)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/30 6/26
I-140(8/10) I-485(8/10)
NSC 7/1 7/1
TSC 7/31 6/28
NSC no progress at all
TSC 1day for I-140 & 2days fro I-485
PS: None of the centers entered in Jul 2nd....can't imagine the delays after they enter Jul 2nd....mass number of applications....
hair Stained Glass Finger Paint.
Berkeleybee
03-07 02:35 PM
Hi,
A while ago on one of the conference calls, if i remember correctly, it was mentioned that there wud be a team of ppl who would be aggressively calling up people and ask them to join.
First off am i correct? If i am correct, I was wondering if the same team could look at the contributions from the various members and call the "dormant" members up and ask them why they are apprehensive to contribute.
Eb3_nepa,
What volunteer team are you on?
How about helping or taking the lead on this?
Contact Jay jay@immigrationvoice.org who heads our membership drive team.
Everyone -- if you've got an idea, find out if it is already being implemented, and join in the effort. If it isn't take the lead and implement it!
best,
Berkeleybee
A while ago on one of the conference calls, if i remember correctly, it was mentioned that there wud be a team of ppl who would be aggressively calling up people and ask them to join.
First off am i correct? If i am correct, I was wondering if the same team could look at the contributions from the various members and call the "dormant" members up and ask them why they are apprehensive to contribute.
Eb3_nepa,
What volunteer team are you on?
How about helping or taking the lead on this?
Contact Jay jay@immigrationvoice.org who heads our membership drive team.
Everyone -- if you've got an idea, find out if it is already being implemented, and join in the effort. If it isn't take the lead and implement it!
best,
Berkeleybee
more...
Mr. Brown
09-30 05:53 PM
... there are always idiots in any group.
hot Have you used stained glass
jliechty
January 31st, 2005, 12:03 PM
Not sure I'd crop solitary much ... the more empty space there is around him, the more it reinforces the illusion that he is in fact alone.
Ok, true. But I guess I'm still hung up on the "suggestion" (not rule, I suppose) to have more space in the direction the subject is heading or looking than to the rear of him/her/it - especially also not to center the subject. So, I'd still crop it the same, but I should have indicated better what I was thinking (not a tight crop, which is probably what it sounded like I meant).
Ok, true. But I guess I'm still hung up on the "suggestion" (not rule, I suppose) to have more space in the direction the subject is heading or looking than to the rear of him/her/it - especially also not to center the subject. So, I'd still crop it the same, but I should have indicated better what I was thinking (not a tight crop, which is probably what it sounded like I meant).
more...
house of stained glass painting.
EB2_Jun03_dude
11-29 03:55 PM
I am assuming there should be a problem at the POE
tattoo my new stained glass vase!
go_getter007
12-20 12:23 PM
Given her passport is stamped, she can re-enter the US with her H4. No need for AP. It doesn't matter if her visa expires in early Jan.
GG_007
Yes. she has a valid H4 Visa stamping till Jan 10. and she is landing in Dec last week.
Thanks in advance
GG_007
Yes. she has a valid H4 Visa stamping till Jan 10. and she is landing in Dec last week.
Thanks in advance
more...
pictures Some lead-free stained glass
sk.aggarwal
03-19 01:50 PM
Still waiting for PWD. My 6th year on H1 including recapture time will end on May 1st 2011. I dont think I will be able to file perm before May.
dresses to look like stained glass
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.
more...
makeup I used yellow stained glass
masti_Gai
11-07 12:45 PM
Mail this letter to your parents...
when they are at POE they can hand over this letter to the immigration officer so that he can be sure that your parents won't be a liability in US
when they are at POE they can hand over this letter to the immigration officer so that he can be sure that your parents won't be a liability in US
girlfriend stained glass paint. how to
nvmurali
06-02 02:40 PM
Hi,
I've already completed my 6 yrs on H1, have my 140 approved, applied for extension and got it (before 6 yr expiry). The extension has been approved for 3 years.
Now -- I need to change employers as my employer is asking me to become full time from consulting.
2 questions:
1. Can I use this extension to change employers?
2. Can I start the GC process with the 140 priority date? (Feb '08)?
Thanks
PS: I apologize if this is in the wrong forum.
I've already completed my 6 yrs on H1, have my 140 approved, applied for extension and got it (before 6 yr expiry). The extension has been approved for 3 years.
Now -- I need to change employers as my employer is asking me to become full time from consulting.
2 questions:
1. Can I use this extension to change employers?
2. Can I start the GC process with the 140 priority date? (Feb '08)?
Thanks
PS: I apologize if this is in the wrong forum.
hairstyles Stained Glass Windows:
jetr
08-27 12:25 PM
Can you please Post the Dates of when you applied for I-140 & when you were APPROVED.
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
Thx
140 Applied - 10/18/2007
140 Approved - 08/02/2008
H1 6 yr expiry - 03/23/2009
belmontboy
10-02 03:30 PM
But what if the company doesnot have any more requirement when my GC gets approved. Its takes 4-5 years and conditions may change as per time...?
Any opinion?
if they don't have any requirement, they are expected to notify USCIS about this by revoking ur I-140
Any opinion?
if they don't have any requirement, they are expected to notify USCIS about this by revoking ur I-140
zvezdast
07-10 04:47 PM
There is a story that all flowers received will be forwarded to injured service members at a medical center.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=f4b3076eb0f93110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=1958b0aaa86fa010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=f4b3076eb0f93110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=1958b0aaa86fa010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
0 comments:
Post a Comment