nrakkati
08-15 12:32 PM
Great.. please contribute to DC rally in anyway you can.
Will do my very best to attend and will encourage others to attend too. I know this is important to me like you and everyone else here and Thanks for what you are doing to community.
Will do my very best to attend and will encourage others to attend too. I know this is important to me like you and everyone else here and Thanks for what you are doing to community.
wallpaper FREE Flower Clip Art Outline 1
varshadas
09-14 04:37 PM
I was really glad to hear the IV ad and also Jay's interview. Many people in New Jersey listen to this station so, lets hope that a lot of people got this message.
Thanks
Varsha
Thanks
Varsha
gsrknth
08-22 12:18 PM
e-filed EAD renewal on 5/27 TSC
FP:6/21
still waiting....
EB2 i
PD:10/05, I140 approved 2/06
Weird!! E-filing should be fast , instead it is slow !!!! I have some friends who e-filed before me and still pending .
FP:6/21
still waiting....
EB2 i
PD:10/05, I140 approved 2/06
Weird!! E-filing should be fast , instead it is slow !!!! I have some friends who e-filed before me and still pending .
2011 bird clipart flower with
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
more...
jonty_11
07-16 07:11 PM
Bluez,
How are you planning to get PCC from consulate. I live in colorado and going to SFO would be very expensive as well as time consuming. Do you know how much time consulate would take through mail? I am skeptical whether they would send my passport back by Aug 15 or not as I am planing to leave on Aug 15.
seee SFO website...they issue PCC is upto 45 days, I think...
cgisf.org - even better call them
How are you planning to get PCC from consulate. I live in colorado and going to SFO would be very expensive as well as time consuming. Do you know how much time consulate would take through mail? I am skeptical whether they would send my passport back by Aug 15 or not as I am planing to leave on Aug 15.
seee SFO website...they issue PCC is upto 45 days, I think...
cgisf.org - even better call them
kurtz_wolfgang
08-15 04:23 PM
First of all Thanks to GCGreen and WantGC. I really am grateful to both of you. Without any know-how I had to bite dust from others.
I have the copy of my labor and 140. So I am looking for a job that is similar to those responsibilities and have the same SOC code. Just that the tools would differ. But what I understood is that if the tools change it doesn't create any problem. I just need to take care of the SOC code and responsibilities.
Of course I will take help from a lawyer, but I just wanted that initial boost to start looking.
I have the copy of my labor and 140. So I am looking for a job that is similar to those responsibilities and have the same SOC code. Just that the tools would differ. But what I understood is that if the tools change it doesn't create any problem. I just need to take care of the SOC code and responsibilities.
Of course I will take help from a lawyer, but I just wanted that initial boost to start looking.
more...
txh1b
08-18 02:48 PM
now this is weird... aside from the poster's main question: why does uscis want proof of *continuous employment* since the poster filed for 485? all they should care about is the future job... isnt that right? why do they want employment history?
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
It is not. It is very much relevant to the case as he has not added the spouse to the I485. If the person has not been continuously maintaining the non immigrant visa status, the spouse is out of status as the 485 has not been filed and is not eligible to hold H4 status.
Also, if the person has travelled on as a parolee, USCIS may be interested in that as well. You never know what the IO is getting into when they issue the RFE. Do not judge or give the OP a feeling that the RFE is irrelevant. It is, in many ways.
willIWill, can you please post the exact wording on your RFE regarding that point?
It is not. It is very much relevant to the case as he has not added the spouse to the I485. If the person has not been continuously maintaining the non immigrant visa status, the spouse is out of status as the 485 has not been filed and is not eligible to hold H4 status.
Also, if the person has travelled on as a parolee, USCIS may be interested in that as well. You never know what the IO is getting into when they issue the RFE. Do not judge or give the OP a feeling that the RFE is irrelevant. It is, in many ways.
2010 Free Lily Clipart
pappu
01-29 06:50 PM
rumour say retrogression may lift on march 2009, is it true????
Is that your new year wish? :)
I do not see any possibility unless some miracle happens.
Is that your new year wish? :)
I do not see any possibility unless some miracle happens.
more...
Nil
07-21 09:50 AM
Very Potent topic.
During the downturn, company decided to dissolve local satellite office and have everyone in the region work from home.
DOL audited labor application asking 'why home and work addresses are the same: is the candidate related to employer?'
Go figure.
Lawyer mentioned there is no provision on the labor app form to indicate 'home office'. Also, in this case, where to do the labor for - the region where the professional is living or the main office (opposite coasts in my case) is unclear.
If the residing city is tested for labor, which is rational, how do you ensure 'the ad must be displayed at the workplace'?
What if DOL denies application due to lack of clarity on such issues?
IV leadership pls comment as possible.....
During the downturn, company decided to dissolve local satellite office and have everyone in the region work from home.
DOL audited labor application asking 'why home and work addresses are the same: is the candidate related to employer?'
Go figure.
Lawyer mentioned there is no provision on the labor app form to indicate 'home office'. Also, in this case, where to do the labor for - the region where the professional is living or the main office (opposite coasts in my case) is unclear.
If the residing city is tested for labor, which is rational, how do you ensure 'the ad must be displayed at the workplace'?
What if DOL denies application due to lack of clarity on such issues?
IV leadership pls comment as possible.....
hair flower clip art free. flower
mrajatish
04-17 03:41 PM
Agree with you - my wife's PERM approval got lost in mail and she had to apply for 140 with an electronic copy as DOL will not issue a new approval notice.
Mine, of course is languishing in BEC.
The inefficiency of DOL is really incomparable - they are much worse than USCIS.
Mine, of course is languishing in BEC.
The inefficiency of DOL is really incomparable - they are much worse than USCIS.
more...
tinamatthew
07-21 12:01 AM
To my knowledge, neither paystubs, W2s nor tax returns are required for filing.
However, some attorneys (mine included) requested my tax returns for the last few years. I think this is so they are prepared just in case of RFE on something?
To answer the original question with a quote from my grandmother whenever I whined, "but that's not fair" as a kid, "Life never is"
The law is the law. We abide by them. We can lobby for changes to said law if we believe they are incorrect, but we don't break them before they are changed.
The main reason why lawyers request W2 etc is to show you were in valid non-immigrant status, To prevent any RFEs/NOIDs
However, some attorneys (mine included) requested my tax returns for the last few years. I think this is so they are prepared just in case of RFE on something?
To answer the original question with a quote from my grandmother whenever I whined, "but that's not fair" as a kid, "Life never is"
The law is the law. We abide by them. We can lobby for changes to said law if we believe they are incorrect, but we don't break them before they are changed.
The main reason why lawyers request W2 etc is to show you were in valid non-immigrant status, To prevent any RFEs/NOIDs
hot free flower clip art borders.
spicy_guy
08-11 12:09 PM
Pappu: Can we do anything about it? It does seem to be a good bill.
If voting on the website really has any impact, why can't we do it?
If voting on the website really has any impact, why can't we do it?
more...
house flower clip art free.
ayazali17
12-18 01:56 PM
Thanks for answering all my questions.
tattoo flower clip art outline.
sunnymit
06-23 11:02 AM
In your first post you said you were not from europe which is why greyhair asked you for your country of birth.
Anyway, being from Europe will put you in the ROW (Rest of the World) category and based on the last visa bulletin (Visa Bulletin for July 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5019.html)) the priority date for EB3 is 15AUG03 where as EB2 is Current. If you can file in EB2 all is well for you, if not, then based on the priority date for EB3 it will take a long time for you to get the GC. Keep in mind though that ROW is not as bad as some other countries like India and China but the fact that it is currently in 03 indicates that there is certainly a backlog that needs to be cleared before the dates get current.
Hope that helps..
Anyway, being from Europe will put you in the ROW (Rest of the World) category and based on the last visa bulletin (Visa Bulletin for July 2010 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5019.html)) the priority date for EB3 is 15AUG03 where as EB2 is Current. If you can file in EB2 all is well for you, if not, then based on the priority date for EB3 it will take a long time for you to get the GC. Keep in mind though that ROW is not as bad as some other countries like India and China but the fact that it is currently in 03 indicates that there is certainly a backlog that needs to be cleared before the dates get current.
Hope that helps..
more...
pictures and white flowers clipart.
bsbawa10
04-11 06:09 AM
I always did paper filing. I have done it third time this time. Incidently, the first two times the EAD approval came in about 17 days but this time, it has already been 15 days and I have not received the receipt even. The check was withdrawn on the 13th day.
dresses Selected Clipart:
alisa
07-07 12:31 PM
I gave it highest ratings. I encourage others to do the same.
more...
makeup flower clip art black and
amdee
01-16 11:01 AM
Any update on this. I am also planning to go to the school with my I485 pending. Just wanted to make sure that I will not get ito any issues with my pending I485.
[QUOTE=mharik]Hi ,
Can you use portability(i.e, I-140 approved and I-485 pending more than 6 months) for studies in USA or outside US????
ANYONE????
[QUOTE=mharik]Hi ,
Can you use portability(i.e, I-140 approved and I-485 pending more than 6 months) for studies in USA or outside US????
ANYONE????
girlfriend rose clip art
PALLO
04-20 06:07 PM
thanks for your input. Is it possible to do labor at multiple locations simultaneously?
hairstyles spring flower clip art images.
Aah_GC
07-25 10:14 AM
Congratulations on you new job. Like others have suggested - make sure you do a good job of sending our AC21 docs - now that you know that your employer is going to revoke I140. Also be ready for any RFE / NOID and prepare your documentation before hand.
Good luck.
Good news is that I'm working again. While I was out of a job, I converted from H1 to EAD under my previous employer (consultancy).
Now, I've finally found a job although this is a full time opportunity. I'm going to be using my EAD / AC21 .
Question: Since I'm no longer working for my previous employer, they are going to be revoking my I140 next month. I believe this is not a problem since my case has been pending for more than 180 days so that's a good thing.. What I do want to know is whether my status is in any jeopardy since I haven't generated any income for about 3 months?
Thanks for any replies. I really need to find out the answer to this. A lot of forum info suggests that I'm ok but I'd very much like to hear any / all viewpoints on this issue.
Good luck.
Good news is that I'm working again. While I was out of a job, I converted from H1 to EAD under my previous employer (consultancy).
Now, I've finally found a job although this is a full time opportunity. I'm going to be using my EAD / AC21 .
Question: Since I'm no longer working for my previous employer, they are going to be revoking my I140 next month. I believe this is not a problem since my case has been pending for more than 180 days so that's a good thing.. What I do want to know is whether my status is in any jeopardy since I haven't generated any income for about 3 months?
Thanks for any replies. I really need to find out the answer to this. A lot of forum info suggests that I'm ok but I'd very much like to hear any / all viewpoints on this issue.
jkmc
02-15 05:03 PM
Hi everyone.
i entered usa on j-1 visa. it expired on october 1, 2007. i got married a little before that - in the first week of september.
in november i filed i-130, i-485 together with AP and EAD. a week ago i received my AP and EAD. as i planned a trip to Europe for 3 weeks to see my parents - my wife consulted a lawyer (a friend of a friend). the lawyer said that i should not leave the country since i have been out of status since october 1st and it is now dangerously close to 6 months and if i leave i can get a 3 year bar and will not be admitted back. my i-130 and i-485 are still pending. my j-1 does not have 2 year rule.
PS. i did use search and didn't find a similar situation. my wife is freaked and i just wanted to hear second opinion from others.
will be very grateful.
thank you.
HI Surge
As far as i have understood , if you have filed your I485 before expiry of your I-94 then you are legal in the country and you can use your AP to travel.
i entered usa on j-1 visa. it expired on october 1, 2007. i got married a little before that - in the first week of september.
in november i filed i-130, i-485 together with AP and EAD. a week ago i received my AP and EAD. as i planned a trip to Europe for 3 weeks to see my parents - my wife consulted a lawyer (a friend of a friend). the lawyer said that i should not leave the country since i have been out of status since october 1st and it is now dangerously close to 6 months and if i leave i can get a 3 year bar and will not be admitted back. my i-130 and i-485 are still pending. my j-1 does not have 2 year rule.
PS. i did use search and didn't find a similar situation. my wife is freaked and i just wanted to hear second opinion from others.
will be very grateful.
thank you.
HI Surge
As far as i have understood , if you have filed your I485 before expiry of your I-94 then you are legal in the country and you can use your AP to travel.
capriol
07-06 02:32 PM
you should be fine. do you have a valid transit visa? i think you need to have one if you are travelling through the European Union.
Dear friends,
I received all the three responses to my queries on AP travel. All three of you have confirmed the same. Thanks a lot, I feel a lot better now. Although, as one of you mentioned about a transit visa through the EU, I will be waiting within the Amsterdam airport for 3 hours to take the connecting U.S flight, and so I don't think I need a transit visa. Thanks a lot.
Dear friends,
I received all the three responses to my queries on AP travel. All three of you have confirmed the same. Thanks a lot, I feel a lot better now. Although, as one of you mentioned about a transit visa through the EU, I will be waiting within the Amsterdam airport for 3 hours to take the connecting U.S flight, and so I don't think I need a transit visa. Thanks a lot.
No comments:
Post a Comment