praveenuppaluri
02-21 10:41 AM
Hello all
starting Jan 19th 2010, all the previous forms for non-immigrant visa (DS 156, 157 and 158) are removed and one single form DS 160 is introduced. I am trying to fill that for my parents and this form is an online form and one of the questions in page 1 is "your full name in native alphabet". I remember filling that for my H1 previously where I take the printouts and write my name in that box in my native language. the new form however doesn't let you save or move forward with an empty box. the only other option there is "do not apply" and not sure if that is the right way of doing it (right now its the only way I can fill this form)
anyone who filled this form recently - can you please share what you did?
Thanks
Praveen
starting Jan 19th 2010, all the previous forms for non-immigrant visa (DS 156, 157 and 158) are removed and one single form DS 160 is introduced. I am trying to fill that for my parents and this form is an online form and one of the questions in page 1 is "your full name in native alphabet". I remember filling that for my H1 previously where I take the printouts and write my name in that box in my native language. the new form however doesn't let you save or move forward with an empty box. the only other option there is "do not apply" and not sure if that is the right way of doing it (right now its the only way I can fill this form)
anyone who filled this form recently - can you please share what you did?
Thanks
Praveen
wallpaper girly wallpaper desktop. too
saileshdude
10-07 11:46 PM
Jungalee,
I sent you a PM. Can you reply to that? Thanks a lot
I sent you a PM. Can you reply to that? Thanks a lot
man-woman-and-gc
04-01 06:13 PM
I would be appreciated, if people returning at NJ Airports can post their experiences of Successful re-entry . That would definitely be helpful to all other people, who will have to travel, in case of Emergency.
I and my wife entered successfully at EWR, end of Feb this year. I'm on my 7 year on H1-B that was stamped just a month ago in Ottawa Consulate in Canada. Also, I had new passport renewed from India. My Visa was stamped on my old passport that was expiring in Dec 2009.
My wife is in her 4th year (2nd extension) of H1-B and her Visa was stamped as well, a month ago at Ottawa Consulate.
There were no issues at all at POE. We were asked what we did at our respective companies, but were not asked for any letter etc. Both of us are permanent employees in our companies.
Feel free to PM me if you have any specific question regarding our POE experience at Newark Airport.
I and my wife entered successfully at EWR, end of Feb this year. I'm on my 7 year on H1-B that was stamped just a month ago in Ottawa Consulate in Canada. Also, I had new passport renewed from India. My Visa was stamped on my old passport that was expiring in Dec 2009.
My wife is in her 4th year (2nd extension) of H1-B and her Visa was stamped as well, a month ago at Ottawa Consulate.
There were no issues at all at POE. We were asked what we did at our respective companies, but were not asked for any letter etc. Both of us are permanent employees in our companies.
Feel free to PM me if you have any specific question regarding our POE experience at Newark Airport.
2011 girly wallpaper desktop.
jjava100
08-27 04:51 PM
MurthyDotCom : Moving to the Faster Lane - Changing EB3 to EB2 (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_eb3to2.html)
EbImmigrationReference: EB2 Porting (http://ebimmigrationreference.blogspot.com/search/label/EB2%20Porting)
EbImmigrationReference: EB2 Porting (http://ebimmigrationreference.blogspot.com/search/label/EB2%20Porting)
more...
pitha
07-11 12:42 PM
all non indian members who sort of complained about Indian coverage in flower campaig should stand up and talk with ndtv, here is your chance to say it is a diverse nations effort and not just indian effort. Either take this chance or please dont complain that this feels like an indian site.
jonty_11
07-05 03:34 PM
"Mike Aytes, head of domestic operations for the USCIS, said all 147,141 employment-based green cards have now been issued for the year. "We are very sympathetic to the fact that people really had expectations … Folks spent a lot of time and effort, but it turned out they couldn't file, after all," he said."
source/link always.....please
source/link always.....please
more...
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKA9XzTCU2_bhQwWMiQkUPO8syRRUx-oMTSumasruMg3mVYPtOwA4d0xWh15UuVQo259eKV3TMhEomUCh80VzYjPTVuv85fjCpx61n-jNr6wyNCdOme4On19b5x_G6hsCl5ftLUQ5-C9J0/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKA9XzTCU2_bhQwWMiQkUPO8syRRUx-oMTSumasruMg3mVYPtOwA4d0xWh15UuVQo259eKV3TMhEomUCh80VzYjPTVuv85fjCpx61n-jNr6wyNCdOme4On19b5x_G6hsCl5ftLUQ5-C9J0/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
2010 101 Girly Wallpapers
unknown123
03-13 11:34 PM
Looks like this is comming for most of us after recent spate of RFEs on I-485 regarding re-submission of medical examination, birth certificate, etc...
Thanks gc_check for the link
Thanks gc_check for the link
more...
greencard_fever
09-19 10:27 PM
Guys..i have noticed that so many other members has already been complained about the getting Red dots for no reason...i got the red for this post for just a spell mistake. This is too much and IV has to do some thing about this. Otherwise people will afraid or not be willing to post their opinions here...
hair 13283 Girly 013 Cell Phone
vinzak
06-16 12:10 PM
I have often heard about visa recapture in these forums, and always that there were lost visa numbers. I came across a DHS site yesterday with statstics on GCs issued, and must admit I am a bit confused about what visa recapture means. The site is DHS | Yearbook of Immigration Statistics: 2009 (http://www.dhs.gov/files/statistics/publications/LPR09.shtm) . Looking at table 6 (Persons Obtaining Legal Permanent Resident Status by Type and Major Class of Admission: Fiscal Years 2000 to 2009), we get the following data on EB and FB issuances.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 235,092 231,699 186,880 158,796 214,355 212,970 222,229 194,900 227,761 211,859 2,096,541
EB 106,642 178,702 173,814 81,727 155,330 246,877 159,081 162,176 166,511 144,034 1,574,894
Total 341,734 410,401 360,694 240,523 369,685 459,847 381,310 357,076 394,272 355,893 3,671,435
if we we were to take deltas from the fb cap of 226k and eb cap of 140k, the scenario looks as follows, where a -ive number indicates over allocation.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB -9,092 -5,699 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 -1,761 14,141 163,459
EB 33,358 -38,702 -33,814 58,273 -15,330 -106,877 -19,081 -22,176 -26,511 -4,034 -174,894
Total 24,266 -44,401 5,306 125,477 -3,685 -93,847 -15,310 8,924 -28,272 10,107 -11,435
As we can see, cumulatively from 2000-09, 11,435 more visas have been given than actually permitted. Particularly in EB 174k excess visas were given.
I'm curious to know, what recapture means, when it seems visas have not been lost.
The only case for recapture is if we only count the years visas were under allocated, and ignore the years it was overallocated. The scenario would look as follows
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 0 0 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 180,011
EB 33,358 0 0 58,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,631
Total 33,358 0 39,120 125,477 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 271,642
So are we trying to recapture 271k visas from this calculation?
If the experts could shed some light on this, that would be great.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 235,092 231,699 186,880 158,796 214,355 212,970 222,229 194,900 227,761 211,859 2,096,541
EB 106,642 178,702 173,814 81,727 155,330 246,877 159,081 162,176 166,511 144,034 1,574,894
Total 341,734 410,401 360,694 240,523 369,685 459,847 381,310 357,076 394,272 355,893 3,671,435
if we we were to take deltas from the fb cap of 226k and eb cap of 140k, the scenario looks as follows, where a -ive number indicates over allocation.
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB -9,092 -5,699 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 -1,761 14,141 163,459
EB 33,358 -38,702 -33,814 58,273 -15,330 -106,877 -19,081 -22,176 -26,511 -4,034 -174,894
Total 24,266 -44,401 5,306 125,477 -3,685 -93,847 -15,310 8,924 -28,272 10,107 -11,435
As we can see, cumulatively from 2000-09, 11,435 more visas have been given than actually permitted. Particularly in EB 174k excess visas were given.
I'm curious to know, what recapture means, when it seems visas have not been lost.
The only case for recapture is if we only count the years visas were under allocated, and ignore the years it was overallocated. The scenario would look as follows
Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Total
FB 0 0 39,120 67,204 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 180,011
EB 33,358 0 0 58,273 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,631
Total 33,358 0 39,120 125,477 11,645 13,030 3,771 31,100 0 14,141 271,642
So are we trying to recapture 271k visas from this calculation?
If the experts could shed some light on this, that would be great.
more...
shreekhand
09-13 11:39 PM
gc_peshwa,
You like to make extraneous comparisons ? Comparing yourself to Nazi treatment of jews in the 1930's and 40's. :confused: Had a bad day or lost your mental balance like Raghunathrao peshwa ?? :rolleyes:
You like to make extraneous comparisons ? Comparing yourself to Nazi treatment of jews in the 1930's and 40's. :confused: Had a bad day or lost your mental balance like Raghunathrao peshwa ?? :rolleyes:
hot Girly Pink Kamichama Karin
ds37
10-19 12:29 PM
Hi
I was also tested possitive due to vaccination in India. did the skin test and X-ray. I talked to my family Dr.(and couple of my Dr. Freinds.) and they all told me that my body will allways react to this test due to vaccination and if X-ray is fine we do not need any medication. In US all the Dr. has to get the test once a year and those vaccinated in their native country has to get an X-ray to confirm it as the test is allways possitive for them.
I would say Consult another Dr. just to be sure.
Thanks
DS
I was also tested possitive due to vaccination in India. did the skin test and X-ray. I talked to my family Dr.(and couple of my Dr. Freinds.) and they all told me that my body will allways react to this test due to vaccination and if X-ray is fine we do not need any medication. In US all the Dr. has to get the test once a year and those vaccinated in their native country has to get an X-ray to confirm it as the test is allways possitive for them.
I would say Consult another Dr. just to be sure.
Thanks
DS
more...
house 100 Girly Wallpapers
raj2007
04-07 07:11 PM
Hi,
I submitted my 485 in julyEven i applied for my wife too.....we both got EAD, AP...She left to India...we have problems and we may seperate each other...So not sure when we get divorce because of outdated Indian marriage laws...Are there going to be any problems when they are adjudicating my 485 application? Her FP done and she got AP until Sep 2008...Now what will happen if USCIS sends out an FP notice for my wife...She won't be doing finger printing...Is it going effect my GC in anyway?
Your case is not simple as it seems.You need to inform USCIS as you have filed I-134 to support her and you will leagally responsible for next 10 years, but in that case you will be away from daughter.
Best to reconcile if that's possible.
I submitted my 485 in julyEven i applied for my wife too.....we both got EAD, AP...She left to India...we have problems and we may seperate each other...So not sure when we get divorce because of outdated Indian marriage laws...Are there going to be any problems when they are adjudicating my 485 application? Her FP done and she got AP until Sep 2008...Now what will happen if USCIS sends out an FP notice for my wife...She won't be doing finger printing...Is it going effect my GC in anyway?
Your case is not simple as it seems.You need to inform USCIS as you have filed I-134 to support her and you will leagally responsible for next 10 years, but in that case you will be away from daughter.
Best to reconcile if that's possible.
tattoo Girly Backgrounds For Youtube.
shana04
07-31 03:17 AM
Dear Friends, Gurus,
I have applied for EAD for the second time for my self and my wife (received the receipts only - renewal)
No FP till now. Opened two SR, it is of no use.
Called twice, first time IO was not that help full. Second time atleast he wanted to do some help.
No other go, so called my attorney for help. He has put a letter along with all the receipts explaining that no FP for my client. He has also send the same documentation and advised me to take an infopass, which I took. And it is in Dallas TX (early morning 8 AM)
So, please suggest if you have experience with infopass in Dallas TX
1. When to be there
2. What documentation to carry
3. How about parking
4. Any questions (so that I can compile and ask)
Any suggestions, help is highly appreciated.
Thanking in advance.
Shana
I have applied for EAD for the second time for my self and my wife (received the receipts only - renewal)
No FP till now. Opened two SR, it is of no use.
Called twice, first time IO was not that help full. Second time atleast he wanted to do some help.
No other go, so called my attorney for help. He has put a letter along with all the receipts explaining that no FP for my client. He has also send the same documentation and advised me to take an infopass, which I took. And it is in Dallas TX (early morning 8 AM)
So, please suggest if you have experience with infopass in Dallas TX
1. When to be there
2. What documentation to carry
3. How about parking
4. Any questions (so that I can compile and ask)
Any suggestions, help is highly appreciated.
Thanking in advance.
Shana
more...
pictures Crystal Pink Girly Wallpapers
Drifter
09-01 04:50 PM
I recently had an interview in July end at the San Francisco Office. I am hoping that there is positive movement on my case. I wonder what the process is in local offices.
1. Would it be that all the interviewed cases sent to a common pool where some one picks them up.. not sure what order they will pick up and then approves them till the numbers run out and then the cases are dumped back into the pile.
OR
2. The IO who interviewed you retains the case file in his/her office and based on the VB every month approves the cases that have completed the interview. Now if this is the case then we are at the mercy of individual IO and how organized or unorganized they personally are... wonder if they have a set procedure to follow....
lots of questions .... no answers... only silence....
1. Would it be that all the interviewed cases sent to a common pool where some one picks them up.. not sure what order they will pick up and then approves them till the numbers run out and then the cases are dumped back into the pile.
OR
2. The IO who interviewed you retains the case file in his/her office and based on the VB every month approves the cases that have completed the interview. Now if this is the case then we are at the mercy of individual IO and how organized or unorganized they personally are... wonder if they have a set procedure to follow....
lots of questions .... no answers... only silence....
dresses Girly Wallpaper in Flower
gsumk
08-25 07:17 PM
@ Meet
You will not get new H1. Your remaining time on H1 will be extended once you decide to do COS from H4 to H1. If you were out of country for one full year ony then you will get NEW H1 and then the new fee hike applies to you.
But if you were not out of country for one year then you will get the same H1 extended for the remainder period (6 years minus what ever you have used so far). The new fee hike applies to new H1 applications only.
Hope that helps.
Do we need to apply H4 to H1 thru the same original company to reinstate the old H1.
Please let me know.
You will not get new H1. Your remaining time on H1 will be extended once you decide to do COS from H4 to H1. If you were out of country for one full year ony then you will get NEW H1 and then the new fee hike applies to you.
But if you were not out of country for one year then you will get the same H1 extended for the remainder period (6 years minus what ever you have used so far). The new fee hike applies to new H1 applications only.
Hope that helps.
Do we need to apply H4 to H1 thru the same original company to reinstate the old H1.
Please let me know.
more...
makeup This image called girly-random
indian111
07-28 07:47 PM
It takes roughly 20 business days. We just got ours.
Hi Sumkam,
Can you let me know if you e-filed or paper filed?
Thanks
Hi Sumkam,
Can you let me know if you e-filed or paper filed?
Thanks
girlfriend girly wallpaper. girly backgrounds for twitter.
dreamworld
05-05 12:24 PM
Hi
I was under the impression that there would be some talks about the discussed bills on floor this week.I see no signs of any debate or any discussion.I have some read some posts saying that nothing would happen this year. This really confuses me as I had & I think many of us had hopes that coming weeks would decide something.
I would appreciate if someone could give everyone very clear picture of what going on ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
If you think out-off-box.... guess what? If US-govt wants to give employment-based-green card based on priority date. Then there won�t be any new immigration law in place without clearing Backlog center cases/queue and I140.
So what... As per the labor department web site, the DOL needs another 17/18 months to clear all pending labors.
I guess any new bill to become law will take another 19 to 24 months. Keep your spirit going to support the best immigration-bill.
My 2 cents.
I was under the impression that there would be some talks about the discussed bills on floor this week.I see no signs of any debate or any discussion.I have some read some posts saying that nothing would happen this year. This really confuses me as I had & I think many of us had hopes that coming weeks would decide something.
I would appreciate if someone could give everyone very clear picture of what going on ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
If you think out-off-box.... guess what? If US-govt wants to give employment-based-green card based on priority date. Then there won�t be any new immigration law in place without clearing Backlog center cases/queue and I140.
So what... As per the labor department web site, the DOL needs another 17/18 months to clear all pending labors.
I guess any new bill to become law will take another 19 to 24 months. Keep your spirit going to support the best immigration-bill.
My 2 cents.
hairstyles For Full Version Of Wallpaper
yagw
12-07 08:06 AM
My wife's EAD expires later this month. She doesn't intend to work; so does she need to renew her EAD? She doesn't have another status like h1 or h4. Will she be out of status when the EAD expires?
The bigger question is that I got my GC a few months ago; but she hasn't got hers. We had an interview at the local office; the officer said he's recommended approval of the 485 and we should get it soon. This happened 2 months ago and still we don't see the 485 approval. The officer also mentioned we could go to the local office any time and get a GC stamp in the passport. Is this true? Can we just take an infopass and get the stamp right away? Do they do that? I called the call center but they just say it's pending and they won't give me any information.
really appreciate your advice...
srini
For the status question, your wife doesn't need EAD. Pending I-485 or AOS is a valid status to stay in the US. That said, some states like CA doesn't take I-485 receipt notice as a valid document for issuing license. They asked for EAD. So if your wife needs to drive she may have to get EAD.
For your second question, I assume the PD is still current. If thats the case, I would suggest taking infopass and find out the status. If you didn't get any satisfactory info, contact your senator/congressperson , ombudsman, open an SR etc. Don't sit idle waiting for USCIS to act.
The bigger question is that I got my GC a few months ago; but she hasn't got hers. We had an interview at the local office; the officer said he's recommended approval of the 485 and we should get it soon. This happened 2 months ago and still we don't see the 485 approval. The officer also mentioned we could go to the local office any time and get a GC stamp in the passport. Is this true? Can we just take an infopass and get the stamp right away? Do they do that? I called the call center but they just say it's pending and they won't give me any information.
really appreciate your advice...
srini
For the status question, your wife doesn't need EAD. Pending I-485 or AOS is a valid status to stay in the US. That said, some states like CA doesn't take I-485 receipt notice as a valid document for issuing license. They asked for EAD. So if your wife needs to drive she may have to get EAD.
For your second question, I assume the PD is still current. If thats the case, I would suggest taking infopass and find out the status. If you didn't get any satisfactory info, contact your senator/congressperson , ombudsman, open an SR etc. Don't sit idle waiting for USCIS to act.
venky08
06-24 12:01 AM
even if in july bulletin the dates move back, think anyone can file till jul31st.
The applications will be valid as long as it is post marked before 31st july.
thanks dallasblue...these things were freaking me out...my family is in india and plan to come back on july first week...i just didnt want to apply on july 15th and then realize that the dates were retrogressed mid month...that would be a big deal...
these lawyer websites are posting that they can stop accepting applications mid month without even putting out any notices...i just wanted to ask someone if anybody have any known record of this thing happening in the past...i am still worried because of this what appears to be baseless fact...but since it comes from a lawyers website my doubt still remains...can someone please help me with some conclusive facts???:confused:
The applications will be valid as long as it is post marked before 31st july.
thanks dallasblue...these things were freaking me out...my family is in india and plan to come back on july first week...i just didnt want to apply on july 15th and then realize that the dates were retrogressed mid month...that would be a big deal...
these lawyer websites are posting that they can stop accepting applications mid month without even putting out any notices...i just wanted to ask someone if anybody have any known record of this thing happening in the past...i am still worried because of this what appears to be baseless fact...but since it comes from a lawyers website my doubt still remains...can someone please help me with some conclusive facts???:confused:
krishnam70
03-23 07:51 PM
Hi,
We talked to the DOL people. They said that since my wife didnt start working with them on H1 and never really worked with them we dont have a basis for claiming the 1500 dollars in filing fees. Do you think this is correct? If so what else do you think we can do on this case? Thanks for your reply.
Amar
Per law employer states that he/she has a project on hand and its their responsibility to pay for the filing fee of the applicant. So you have every right to sue the employer for the same. Was there a gap between the time your wife got H1 and she subsequently got an EAD? If yes you can claim salary from the day her H1 was approved and you got the 797 in hand.
BTW your lawsuit might end up costing more than the $1500 you paid but if you want to do the right thing go sue the employers a$$
- cheers
kris
We talked to the DOL people. They said that since my wife didnt start working with them on H1 and never really worked with them we dont have a basis for claiming the 1500 dollars in filing fees. Do you think this is correct? If so what else do you think we can do on this case? Thanks for your reply.
Amar
Per law employer states that he/she has a project on hand and its their responsibility to pay for the filing fee of the applicant. So you have every right to sue the employer for the same. Was there a gap between the time your wife got H1 and she subsequently got an EAD? If yes you can claim salary from the day her H1 was approved and you got the 797 in hand.
BTW your lawsuit might end up costing more than the $1500 you paid but if you want to do the right thing go sue the employers a$$
- cheers
kris
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий