swissgear
09-14 02:46 PM
Well, I have not received RFE mail yet. I have changed my employer because our division was sold to Canadian firm and they moved everything to Montreal.
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
As far as I know, most likely your RFE would be related to EVL, if you didn't receive it earlier. Also, if you changed state, and working on H1 or EAD, they are sending in a standard RFE like to describe location discrepancy and letter from Employer to state that they still support your GC as per the Labor and 140 application. Hope this helps!!! Good Luck!!!
After changing my employer (in June), I applied for EAD/AP and both got approved within 3-4 weeks w/o any issues/RFE.
I have not filed for AC21 and used EAD to switch job. I think my previous employer might have notified USCIS about H1B case (as I had valid H1B too). Again as per attorney, it takes months if not year for USCIS to work on such notifications.
I had travelled to India last year July and came on AP as I could not get H1B stamp in India. The US consulate took more than few months to approve the my application and by that time I had already come to US on AP as suggested by my employer's attoteny.
As far as I know, most likely your RFE would be related to EVL, if you didn't receive it earlier. Also, if you changed state, and working on H1 or EAD, they are sending in a standard RFE like to describe location discrepancy and letter from Employer to state that they still support your GC as per the Labor and 140 application. Hope this helps!!! Good Luck!!!
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
vkrishn
07-13 01:57 PM
I am current now (PD: Feb 16th,06) and last time when i was current in 2008 for a month i got an RFE. Even though the attorney replied to the RFE in 3 days, all my case status shows is RFE response received.
Ours is a big company and close 2000 people applied for 485 during the July 2007 fiasco and we were asked to send the G28 forms to the attorney by mail with no signature reqd. Apparently almost every got an RFE for that.
I wish i could get to know if RFE was all taken care of and my case is pending for a VISA number. Any way to know if thats the case gurus?
Ours is a big company and close 2000 people applied for 485 during the July 2007 fiasco and we were asked to send the G28 forms to the attorney by mail with no signature reqd. Apparently almost every got an RFE for that.
I wish i could get to know if RFE was all taken care of and my case is pending for a VISA number. Any way to know if thats the case gurus?
same_old_guy
07-09 04:38 PM
newbee7 is right.
Either the security clearance/FBI name check was COMPLETE or NOT. There is nothing as "would-be-done-shortly-for-sure" !
Bottom-line, if it can be proved in a court of law that USCIS approved cases without security clearance, there is a solid ground for the suit. It's against the law and it undermines the national security concerns.
Second, USCIS working in bad faith when they rushed to allocate all the quota just to avoid new I-485 applications. It clearly has "intentional" written all over it.
Third, I saw somewhere an excerpt from INA law that there is a limit on how many visa number can be allocated in a month. As per that clause, USCIS broke the law.
Fourth, there is a solid ground to sue USCIS for the expense to say the least. People has to pay a whole lot of things including lawyer, medical, photo etc. Time and effort spent on that is no less.
Either the security clearance/FBI name check was COMPLETE or NOT. There is nothing as "would-be-done-shortly-for-sure" !
Bottom-line, if it can be proved in a court of law that USCIS approved cases without security clearance, there is a solid ground for the suit. It's against the law and it undermines the national security concerns.
Second, USCIS working in bad faith when they rushed to allocate all the quota just to avoid new I-485 applications. It clearly has "intentional" written all over it.
Third, I saw somewhere an excerpt from INA law that there is a limit on how many visa number can be allocated in a month. As per that clause, USCIS broke the law.
Fourth, there is a solid ground to sue USCIS for the expense to say the least. People has to pay a whole lot of things including lawyer, medical, photo etc. Time and effort spent on that is no less.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
k94
11-22 02:41 PM
It is my understanding that when applying for a GC, until you have your LC approved (and possibly I-140), you cannot change your title or salary, beyond what was submitted in the LC application. Technically, the DOL is verifying a 'job' (and the salary related to that job), so in theory, that can't change, not because the employer doesn't want to, but because the law doesn't allow it.
Now, an employer may unofficially get around this (by increasing your bonus payout, or giving you stock, or changing the internal level of your job), but these are 'handouts' that you may get if your employer is fair.
With the backlogs that are in effect for pre-PERM LC approvals, employees can go from 1-3 years without a salary or promotion/job title change, and that is the law! Go figure.
Now, an employer may unofficially get around this (by increasing your bonus payout, or giving you stock, or changing the internal level of your job), but these are 'handouts' that you may get if your employer is fair.
With the backlogs that are in effect for pre-PERM LC approvals, employees can go from 1-3 years without a salary or promotion/job title change, and that is the law! Go figure.
more...
lahiribaba
02-05 11:35 PM
like minded folks, please post your ideas.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
anurakt
01-16 09:13 PM
If you remember that I had pledged $1000 in last 20$ campaign and you guys could only shell out $500 out of me...which means that I still have a block of $500 which was not spent for IV in the past. Here is my next pledge :
" I will donate a lumpsum amount of $500 when we have the following level of monthly contribution and verified by IV core members :
200 members for 20$ and 100 members for $50 and 20 members for $100 , there is no date restriction attached this time , but I hope that it's done in this month, I call upon the members who can take this challenge and take that $500 from my pocket this time"
Note : Kvrr has signed for $100 and I will sign up for another $100 , which means we have only 18 members to go for $100 monthly to finish one piece of my pledge.
Can anyone tomm morning give me an update on where we are at from my pledge point of view !!
Come on guys make me poorer by another $500 if you have *****.
" I will donate a lumpsum amount of $500 when we have the following level of monthly contribution and verified by IV core members :
200 members for 20$ and 100 members for $50 and 20 members for $100 , there is no date restriction attached this time , but I hope that it's done in this month, I call upon the members who can take this challenge and take that $500 from my pocket this time"
Note : Kvrr has signed for $100 and I will sign up for another $100 , which means we have only 18 members to go for $100 monthly to finish one piece of my pledge.
Can anyone tomm morning give me an update on where we are at from my pledge point of view !!
Come on guys make me poorer by another $500 if you have *****.
more...
cal_dood
07-05 03:01 PM
But I have been using murthy forums - which are free - for a long long time...even before IV came along....talking abt quality...same kinda ppl post there....dont see any diff....
I'm sure IV is doing a great job on something....but please do a little research before asserting that this is the only immigration forum in the world...
Dont mean to start a p***ing contest here.... those who want to and can pay shd pay....but thinking that ppl will pay for the forums is not really a solution.
Yeahaaaaaaaaa! Great!
20 USD per month + satisfaction of fighting for a cause
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (very very less than)
15 min Murthy session for 225 USD
Beautifcukingful
I'm sure IV is doing a great job on something....but please do a little research before asserting that this is the only immigration forum in the world...
Dont mean to start a p***ing contest here.... those who want to and can pay shd pay....but thinking that ppl will pay for the forums is not really a solution.
Yeahaaaaaaaaa! Great!
20 USD per month + satisfaction of fighting for a cause
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< (very very less than)
15 min Murthy session for 225 USD
Beautifcukingful
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
chanduv23
02-15 07:03 AM
I have heard that there are desi consultants who sponsor H-1 for people graduating with Masters in US, irrespective of which field they are in. Is this true? Sounds a bit fishy to me.
Thats a new trend. They go to colleges and meet a group of Indian students who are about to graduate and take them out of drinks and dinner and give a presentation about their company. Then when these students come into OPT status, they are all given food + guest house accomodation. Then they are put under intense training for 2 to 3 months and made to do some mockup projects. Then their resumes are massaged with 4 to 5 years of experience ie experience from date they graduated in the under graduation and their MS education is stripped off on their resumes.
This seems to be a trend, though the practice seems not too good. As most immigrant students are hard working and determined, they put additional hours and make up for experience and perform well at clients. They get a decent 65K to start with from the consulting company and their h1bs are filed well before the cap ends.
Thats a new trend. They go to colleges and meet a group of Indian students who are about to graduate and take them out of drinks and dinner and give a presentation about their company. Then when these students come into OPT status, they are all given food + guest house accomodation. Then they are put under intense training for 2 to 3 months and made to do some mockup projects. Then their resumes are massaged with 4 to 5 years of experience ie experience from date they graduated in the under graduation and their MS education is stripped off on their resumes.
This seems to be a trend, though the practice seems not too good. As most immigrant students are hard working and determined, they put additional hours and make up for experience and perform well at clients. They get a decent 65K to start with from the consulting company and their h1bs are filed well before the cap ends.
more...
jaggu bhai
08-10 02:15 PM
I am also in.... for anything:confused:
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
makemygc
07-16 08:27 PM
The only way to counter this is to fax the senators and reps stating the "real" facts!
Problem is senators or congressmen who support us know the facts and those who do not support us, do not want to know the facts.
Still I think it's a good idea and definitely should be implemented along with few other alternatives too..like educating common mass.
I guess we need to come out with a white paper about "Top 10 Myths about Employment Based Immigration". Any good writer here...?
We can fax these white papers to attorney, media and even number usa too.
Problem is senators or congressmen who support us know the facts and those who do not support us, do not want to know the facts.
Still I think it's a good idea and definitely should be implemented along with few other alternatives too..like educating common mass.
I guess we need to come out with a white paper about "Top 10 Myths about Employment Based Immigration". Any good writer here...?
We can fax these white papers to attorney, media and even number usa too.
more...
GC_ASP
03-18 05:45 PM
Please see the last sentece which says "Thus, the same cut-off date for each country since the extra numbers must be made available in priority date order without regard to country".
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:
When they use this spill over, only PD is imp not the country.
If that is the case, I am not sure why China didn't even move a single day. From the example, China should have gotten half of the unused visas. :confused:
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
Michael chertoff
07-12 09:06 PM
AUG BULLETIN is already out, it moved to March06 for EB2,
He is talking about next month (September). I think we have to wait for next year now.
He is talking about next month (September). I think we have to wait for next year now.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
feedfront
09-20 12:06 PM
Does anyone know, how much attorney gonna charge to reply RFE?
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
jungalee43
03-03 06:24 PM
I will buy my house in US as soon as BUT ONLY AFTER I get my green card as thousands of other applicants have done.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
amitjoey
11-07 05:18 PM
bump
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
pappu
06-10 12:28 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
jayleno
09-05 02:39 PM
I can understand why an individual fake resonably to get a job, though I do not support it. I dont understand these stupid companies hiring the desperate students and doing all these stuff in the name of business. I dont know how people who have those companies do all this stuff just for extra money and sleep peacefully at night.
I can put 100 arguments in support of MS students graduating and trying to get into a new job. Similarly you can come up with 100 other arguments that they are all non ethical and lies.
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
I can put 100 arguments in support of MS students graduating and trying to get into a new job. Similarly you can come up with 100 other arguments that they are all non ethical and lies.
It is more costly for companies big and small to hire a new grad, train and eventually have him work on the business and that process is carried only by a minute percentage of all the companies that do business and also they look at elite schools.
Every MS student has to undergo a vigorous financial crisis situation there by the time they graduate they are left with no choice other than accepting what ever comes there way, at the earliest.
They don't have the liberty financially as well as law wise to sit and try for 1 year to get into a full time job. Given those kind of situations it is nothing wrong in projecting themselves to certain years of experience.
At the same, contracting, consulting is all about this. When no party likes, they can always let go.
-the116
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
gcdreamer05
03-19 07:29 AM
This is the power of Immigration Voice. Not everyone has the knowledge of all these situations, so we need to gain knowledge from the past experience of others.
I am sure thread's like this will help a lot of people who have plans to join few Full Time Employees who promise but cannot keep it up.
Please continue to share...
I am sure thread's like this will help a lot of people who have plans to join few Full Time Employees who promise but cannot keep it up.
Please continue to share...
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
sk2006
05-26 11:39 PM
I am sure they will ask for passport if you only have the I-94. Now if I am required to carry my passport all the time that becomes a real pain particularly if we are on H1/L1 and present for quite a long time.
I 94 issued at POE must be attached to the passport all the times!
I 94 issued at POE must be attached to the passport all the times!
amar123
07-03 11:12 PM
Do you know even to come to site and get some info also need money..
Not to hurt you but just giving one small example of why we need money...
I agree hosting /maintaining a site does take quite a bit of resources, I am not referring to it in this thread. But, I was hoping that IV can make a distinction of what it plans to do for the lawsuit from what AILF does. As I had mentioned, this would make it only more meaningful for IV members to contribute :)
I am not hurt, like I said I appreciate the effort you guys are putting in.
Also, I added another dig on the USCIS scandal:
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal (http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal)
Guys, digging is free, and if we can get it to 1000 digs, I am sure people will begin to notice if it is sensational news.
Not to hurt you but just giving one small example of why we need money...
I agree hosting /maintaining a site does take quite a bit of resources, I am not referring to it in this thread. But, I was hoping that IV can make a distinction of what it plans to do for the lawsuit from what AILF does. As I had mentioned, this would make it only more meaningful for IV members to contribute :)
I am not hurt, like I said I appreciate the effort you guys are putting in.
Also, I added another dig on the USCIS scandal:
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal (http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal)
Guys, digging is free, and if we can get it to 1000 digs, I am sure people will begin to notice if it is sensational news.
bigboy007
06-30 06:54 AM
Good question are u talking about G325A i dont know whether this is the right way but what i did is filled up another form with rest of details in table col as you might need to do this 4 times as they need four copies of same form , dont copy it though as bottom left no.s differ , may be others can suggest a better approach?
