krustycat
10-31 03:03 PM
Still the same, they are telling me the same story.
Wait, wait and wait. That's all.
Wait, wait and wait. That's all.
wallpaper Canyon de Chelly valley near
perm2gc
12-25 02:31 PM
Hi Perm,
When I requested the company they sent me the "Wage report" form.
I am trying to understand if this is really the "unemployment wage report"?, Is there a specific form number that I need look for and request the company to send me the specific form. It would be helpful if there is specific information related to this form.
Thanks a lot for all your help and valuable information.
Merry Christmas!
Thanks & Regards,
Chak
The Consulate only asks wage report for your company.It will not ask for entire state of California.The Wage Report you company send is enough but one more time just cross check with your company attorney before sending them to consulate.
When I requested the company they sent me the "Wage report" form.
I am trying to understand if this is really the "unemployment wage report"?, Is there a specific form number that I need look for and request the company to send me the specific form. It would be helpful if there is specific information related to this form.
Thanks a lot for all your help and valuable information.
Merry Christmas!
Thanks & Regards,
Chak
The Consulate only asks wage report for your company.It will not ask for entire state of California.The Wage Report you company send is enough but one more time just cross check with your company attorney before sending them to consulate.
martinvisalaw
07-06 09:51 AM
See answers below, IN CAPS.
I'm a little confused about my options in starting my H1 extension process and applying for my wife's H4 application.
Here is my current status :
6 yr H1-B period is ending on Dec 22, 2009. I'm getting married in India in October and will apply for my wife's H4 immediately after. Here are my questions :
1. Will there be any problem with my wife's H4 application if there are just 2 months of validity left on my H1 visa?
NO, THERE SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM. HOWEVER, IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU HAD AN APPROVED EXTENSION OR AT LEAST AN EXTENSION RECEIPT NOTICE TO SHOW THE CONSULATE.
2. I could potentially start my H1 extension process now. I'm eligible for a 3 year extension since the Priority date of Jan 3, 2006, on my EB2 application is not current. If I was to start my extension process now, my approval may not happen before October and my lawyer says there may be some problems if I travel outside the country on a pending H1 application. Should I apply for my H1 extension now or after I come back to the US in November?
IT MAY BE EBST TO APPLY JUST BEFORE YOU LEAVE. HOWEVER, YOU CAN PROBABLY TRUST YOUR ATTORNEY'S SUGGESTION.
3. If I was to apply for H1 extension in Nov and don't get an approval by the time of my current H1 expiry in December, will I be out of status?
NO, YOU ARE OK TO STAY ONCE AN EXTENSION WAS FILED BEFORE THE CURRENT STATUS EXPIRES.
Thanks.
I'm a little confused about my options in starting my H1 extension process and applying for my wife's H4 application.
Here is my current status :
6 yr H1-B period is ending on Dec 22, 2009. I'm getting married in India in October and will apply for my wife's H4 immediately after. Here are my questions :
1. Will there be any problem with my wife's H4 application if there are just 2 months of validity left on my H1 visa?
NO, THERE SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM. HOWEVER, IT WOULD BE BETTER IF YOU HAD AN APPROVED EXTENSION OR AT LEAST AN EXTENSION RECEIPT NOTICE TO SHOW THE CONSULATE.
2. I could potentially start my H1 extension process now. I'm eligible for a 3 year extension since the Priority date of Jan 3, 2006, on my EB2 application is not current. If I was to start my extension process now, my approval may not happen before October and my lawyer says there may be some problems if I travel outside the country on a pending H1 application. Should I apply for my H1 extension now or after I come back to the US in November?
IT MAY BE EBST TO APPLY JUST BEFORE YOU LEAVE. HOWEVER, YOU CAN PROBABLY TRUST YOUR ATTORNEY'S SUGGESTION.
3. If I was to apply for H1 extension in Nov and don't get an approval by the time of my current H1 expiry in December, will I be out of status?
NO, YOU ARE OK TO STAY ONCE AN EXTENSION WAS FILED BEFORE THE CURRENT STATUS EXPIRES.
Thanks.
2011 Canyon de Chelly White House
kondur_007
09-15 11:17 AM
Hello,
My wife got her H1B approved last year and her start date was 10/01/07. She started working towards the end of Nov. She did not get any paychecks for 2007 before Dec 31st and started getting paid only in 2008. So she did not receive a W2 for 2007. I am about to file my tax for 2007 (had filed an extension) and would like to know the following.
1: I assume this should not impact me from filing a joint return. Am I right ?
2: Would I qualify for the stimulus check for $1200 since both of us were employed in 2007 ? Since she did not get a W2, I was not sure if I would get only $600.
3: Both of us have filed for I-485 and our applications are pending approval. Would there be any problem with her I-485 in the future (like any query) since in 2007, her status was converted to H1B (from H4) and she did not get a W2 ? I am being told USCIS does a complete background check on the applicant with respect to each status he/she has had.
Thanks in advance.
First of all, do not confuse tax filing and immigration! These two are totally different ball games.
As far as tax filing goes, here is what i can tell (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Yes, you can file joint return. But for the purpose of the tax return, your wife will be considered "not working"; as she did not get W2 for 2007. (unless you have any other forms to show the income; e.g. 1099MISC etc).
2. Stimulus payment: I am not sure exactly how much you will get; just check with the tax-preparer (or the software, most softwares will tell you). But even for this purpose, your wife will be considered "not working" as she does not have any income to show.
3. Now your third question is related to immigration. Here is what I have to say:
Your wife was "out of status" during the time period that she was on H1 status but not being paid. While you are on H1 status, you are supposed to work for the sponsoring employer and employer is supposed to pay you the salary mentioned on the LCA. If both these conditions are not met, you are "out of status" (but still legally present in US).
Under section 245(K) USCIS will "forgive" upto 180 days of being "out of status"; so those days during which your wife did not get paid will count towards those days. Make sure that she did get paid full salary as mentioned on LCA from January 1 onwards; otherwise she will accure those days towards 180 days limit.
What can be done for this? three ways to straigten this up:
1. go outside US and return back with a new H1 visa stamp (those 180 days count from the day of latest legal entry); this wipes off all the days accured towards 245(k); risk is: what if the visa stamp is denied- because she was out of status.
2. File a complaint against the employer; it is employer's responsibility to pay her. This will sort of work towards your advantage if something comes up in future. (showing that you did all you could to not have this happen).
3. if total days that she was not paid or paid less than LCA is 180 days or less; you may decide to do "nothing" as you will be protected by 245 (k) and make sure not to accure any more days.
Good Luck.
My wife got her H1B approved last year and her start date was 10/01/07. She started working towards the end of Nov. She did not get any paychecks for 2007 before Dec 31st and started getting paid only in 2008. So she did not receive a W2 for 2007. I am about to file my tax for 2007 (had filed an extension) and would like to know the following.
1: I assume this should not impact me from filing a joint return. Am I right ?
2: Would I qualify for the stimulus check for $1200 since both of us were employed in 2007 ? Since she did not get a W2, I was not sure if I would get only $600.
3: Both of us have filed for I-485 and our applications are pending approval. Would there be any problem with her I-485 in the future (like any query) since in 2007, her status was converted to H1B (from H4) and she did not get a W2 ? I am being told USCIS does a complete background check on the applicant with respect to each status he/she has had.
Thanks in advance.
First of all, do not confuse tax filing and immigration! These two are totally different ball games.
As far as tax filing goes, here is what i can tell (to the best of my knowledge):
1. Yes, you can file joint return. But for the purpose of the tax return, your wife will be considered "not working"; as she did not get W2 for 2007. (unless you have any other forms to show the income; e.g. 1099MISC etc).
2. Stimulus payment: I am not sure exactly how much you will get; just check with the tax-preparer (or the software, most softwares will tell you). But even for this purpose, your wife will be considered "not working" as she does not have any income to show.
3. Now your third question is related to immigration. Here is what I have to say:
Your wife was "out of status" during the time period that she was on H1 status but not being paid. While you are on H1 status, you are supposed to work for the sponsoring employer and employer is supposed to pay you the salary mentioned on the LCA. If both these conditions are not met, you are "out of status" (but still legally present in US).
Under section 245(K) USCIS will "forgive" upto 180 days of being "out of status"; so those days during which your wife did not get paid will count towards those days. Make sure that she did get paid full salary as mentioned on LCA from January 1 onwards; otherwise she will accure those days towards 180 days limit.
What can be done for this? three ways to straigten this up:
1. go outside US and return back with a new H1 visa stamp (those 180 days count from the day of latest legal entry); this wipes off all the days accured towards 245(k); risk is: what if the visa stamp is denied- because she was out of status.
2. File a complaint against the employer; it is employer's responsibility to pay her. This will sort of work towards your advantage if something comes up in future. (showing that you did all you could to not have this happen).
3. if total days that she was not paid or paid less than LCA is 180 days or less; you may decide to do "nothing" as you will be protected by 245 (k) and make sure not to accure any more days.
Good Luck.
more...
Sugar
07-10 11:53 AM
Why AILA not suing State Dept. or USCIS for other issues... read a letter posted by someone in a forum
To AILF/AILA,
I appreciate your effort in filing lawsuit on behalf of July I-485 filers.
There are several critics on your July I-485 lawsuit. They criticize that you are doing for the benefit of your members (AILA). Definitely, your members will be benefited by huge amount of legal fees. Also, the critic says it is waste of time.
Even one of your reputed member (Rajiv Khanna @ immigration.com) posted in his website that chance of winning the law suit is very minimum.
He posted in his website as follows: "Please note folks, I don�t think this class will be easily approved by courts. CIS could argue a lot of things against it, which I don�t wish to publish in an open forum."
Why you cannot sue for the people who struck at Consulate due to administrative process without probable cause.
Several of them working in U.S (they have proof of employment, pay stubs, worked in the U.S on H1B visa for many years) just went to their home country for short vacation and applied for visa; they have rented house in the U.S and unable to break the lease; unable to pay car dues; their U.S citizen children also held overseas; they are loosing their jobs. State department is holding these visa application for more than a year in several cases.
What steps AILA has taken in this issue. If not, why you are not aware of this issue or why you are not giving importance. Do you think this issue will not bring such a huge legal fee like I-485 lawsuit?
To AILF/AILA,
I appreciate your effort in filing lawsuit on behalf of July I-485 filers.
There are several critics on your July I-485 lawsuit. They criticize that you are doing for the benefit of your members (AILA). Definitely, your members will be benefited by huge amount of legal fees. Also, the critic says it is waste of time.
Even one of your reputed member (Rajiv Khanna @ immigration.com) posted in his website that chance of winning the law suit is very minimum.
He posted in his website as follows: "Please note folks, I don�t think this class will be easily approved by courts. CIS could argue a lot of things against it, which I don�t wish to publish in an open forum."
Why you cannot sue for the people who struck at Consulate due to administrative process without probable cause.
Several of them working in U.S (they have proof of employment, pay stubs, worked in the U.S on H1B visa for many years) just went to their home country for short vacation and applied for visa; they have rented house in the U.S and unable to break the lease; unable to pay car dues; their U.S citizen children also held overseas; they are loosing their jobs. State department is holding these visa application for more than a year in several cases.
What steps AILA has taken in this issue. If not, why you are not aware of this issue or why you are not giving importance. Do you think this issue will not bring such a huge legal fee like I-485 lawsuit?
mingan
12-19 12:07 PM
I got RFE stating that Submit the evidence that the alien obtained the required five years progressive experience in the job offered or the related occupation before, evidence of experience must be in the form of letters from current or former employer giving the name, address and title of the employer and a description of the experience of the alien including specific dates of the employement and specific duties.
I am curious to know did any body got such kind of RFE, what should i do the companies which i have worked for they no longer exist, what should i do, i have the experience letters with me but i donot have the job description mentioned on it.
Please advise. what are the chances of approval of my case.
Thanks in advance.
I am curious to know did any body got such kind of RFE, what should i do the companies which i have worked for they no longer exist, what should i do, i have the experience letters with me but i donot have the job description mentioned on it.
Please advise. what are the chances of approval of my case.
Thanks in advance.
more...
ivgclive
04-25 10:53 PM
Here is my situation: I was on my 6th year of the h1b visa (I had about 3 months left of valid visa) when I left the country in January 2010 to live abroad...In August 2010 I came back to the US on a tourist visa and I applied to get the 3 months I had left on my H1b in November.
After waiting for over 4 months, I received the approval notice from immigration for the h1b valid only for 1 day!! (4/20/11-4/21/11)...I received the approval notice on the mail on 4/23, 2 days after the visa was valid...so basically, by the time I received the notice in the mail, I was already out of status.
If I apply for an extension this week, do you think that they will approve my 7th year extension or they might deny it based on the fact that I applied after my H1b visa expired? If they deny it, what are my options to stay in the country?
What would the employer gain by applying H1B if only 3 months left?
After waiting for over 4 months, I received the approval notice from immigration for the h1b valid only for 1 day!! (4/20/11-4/21/11)...I received the approval notice on the mail on 4/23, 2 days after the visa was valid...so basically, by the time I received the notice in the mail, I was already out of status.
If I apply for an extension this week, do you think that they will approve my 7th year extension or they might deny it based on the fact that I applied after my H1b visa expired? If they deny it, what are my options to stay in the country?
What would the employer gain by applying H1B if only 3 months left?
2010 Canyon de Chelly Spirit
Ennada
01-29 11:05 PM
Legalizing unauthorized immigrants would help economy, study says - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/07/immigration.economy/index.html#cnnSTCText)
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
Washington (CNN) -- Legalization of the more than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States would raise wages, increase consumption, create jobs and generate more tax revenue, two policy institutes say in a joint report Thursday.
The report by the Center for American Progress and the American Immigration Council estimates that "comprehensive immigration reform that legalizes currently unauthorized immigrants and creates flexible legal limits on future immigration" would yield at least $1.5 trillion in added U.S. gross domestic product over a 10-year period.
"This is a compelling economic reason to move away from the current 'vicious cycle' where enforcement-only policies perpetuate unauthorized migration and exert downward pressure on already low wages, and toward a 'virtuous cycle' of worker empowerment in which legal status and labor rights exert upward pressure on wages," study author Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
The study looks at three scenarios: deportation of undocumented workers, temporary worker programs and legalization of the current undocumented population. Deportation would lead to a loss of $2.6 trillion in gross domestic product over 10 years, the report says, while a worker program would lead to a gain of $792 billion. Full legalization would lead to the best economic results, the study says.
Other groups, such as the Center for Immigration Studies and the Federation for American Immigration Reform, say that unfettered immigration harms the United States and that entry into the nation must remain limited.
When running for president in 2008, Barack Obama said that comprehensive immigration reform would be a priority in his administration, but the issue has been sidelined by health care reform efforts in Congress, the weak economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There are indications, however, that the Obama administration aims to revive immigration reform efforts in Congress this year.
The study bases many of its conclusions on an examination of what happened after passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which granted legal status to 3 million unauthorized immigrants.
A 2006 Pew Hispanic Center report found that 56 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States in 2005 were from Mexico, a total of about 6.2 million unauthorized immigrants.
About 2.5 million unauthorized migrants, or 22 percent of the total, came from the rest of Latin America, primarily from Central America, the Pew Hispanic Center study found.
Of the remaining illegal immigrants, about 13 percent were from Asia, and 3 percent were from Canada and Europe, the Pew study said.
The report released Thursday says U.S. enforcement efforts -- mainly along the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico -- are costly and ineffective.
"The number of unauthorized immigrants in the United States has increased dramatically since the early 1990s despite equally dramatic increases in the amount of money the federal government spends on immigration enforcement," study author Hinojosa-Ojeda writes.
According to the report, the U.S. Border Patrol says its annual budget has increased by 714 percent since 1992, from $326.2 million in fiscal year 1992 to $2.7 billion in fiscal 2009. And the cost ratio of Border Patrol expenditures to apprehensions has increased by 1,041 percent, from $272 per apprehension in 1992 to $3,102 in 2008.
Similarly, the Border Patrol says the number of agents along the border with Mexico has grown by 390 percent, from 3,555 in fiscal 1992 to 17,415 in 2009.
"Yet the unauthorized immigrant population of the United States has roughly tripled in size over the past two decades, from an estimated 3.5 million in 1990 to 11.9 million in 2008," the report says, noting that illegal immigration appears to have declined slightly since 2007 as a result of the global recession.
The report points out that a long-term study conducted by the University of California, San Diego, found that 92 to 98 percent of unauthorized immigrants keep trying to cross the border until they succeed.
Increased enforcement has several unintended consequences, such as making the Southwestern border more lethal by channeling migrants through remote and rugged mountain and desert areas, the study found. The number of border-crossing deaths doubled in the decade after increased border enforcement started, a 2006 Government Accountability Office report said.
An October 2009 report by the American Civil Liberties Union of San Diego & Imperial Counties and Mexico's National Commission of Human Rights estimates that 5,607 migrants died while crossing the border between 1994 and 2008.
Tightened borders also have created new opportunities for people smugglers, who charged an average $2,000 to $3,000 per person in 2006, the study said. Ninety percent of illegal immigrants now hire smugglers, according to the report.
An examination of trends after the 1986 immigration reform law shows that legalization of unauthorized immigrants has benefits, the report says. Legalized workers earned more, moved on to better jobs and invested more in their education so they could get higher pay and better jobs.
A previous study found that "the wages of unauthorized workers are generally unrelated to their actual skill level," Thursday's report said.
"Unauthorized workers tend to be concentrated in the lowest-wage occupations; they try to minimize the risk of deportation even if this means working for lower wages; and they are especially vulnerable to outright exploitation by unscrupulous employers. Once unauthorized workers are legalized, however, these artificial barriers to upward socioeconomic mobility disappear."
Study author Hinojosa-Ojeda is founding director of the North American Integration and Development Center at the University of California, Los Angeles.
The self-described progressive Center for American Progress is a nonpartisan research and educational think tank headed by John Podesta, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton.
The Immigration Policy Center, established in 2003, also is a nonpartisan institute.
The report, titled "Raising the Floor for American Workers, The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform," can be found on the Web.
more...
qisolu917o
03-22 10:05 PM
to be severe with oneself and lenient with others.As for me, all I knew was that he was good to me and had a big brown and black German shepherd, Susie, that he brought to play with me. Susie was a big part of my childhood, and started my lifelong love affair with dogs.Mother and Roger got married in Hot Springs, in June 1950, shortly after her twenty-seventh birthday. Only Gabe and Virginia Crawford were there. Then Mother and I left her parents home and moved with my new stepfather, Come and buy world of warcraft power leveling (http://www.u4game.com/Wow_Power_Leveling.html), cheap wow leveling (http://www.u4game.com/Wow_Power_Leveling.html), free wow power leveling web . warcraft gold (http://www.u4game.com) webpage! whom I soon began to call Daddy, into a little white wooden house on the south end of town at 321 Thirteenth Street at the corner of Walker Street. Not long afterward, I started calling myself Billy Clinton.My new world was exciting to me. Next door were Ned and Alice Williams. Mr. Ned was a retired railroad worker who built a workshop behind his house filled with a large sophisticated model electric-train setup. Back then every little kid wanted a Lionel train set. FFXI Gil (http://www.u4game.com/Final-Fantasy-XI-49.html) Daddy got me one and we used to play with it together, but nothing could compare to Mr. Neds large intricate tracks and beautiful fast trains. I spent hours there. It was like having my own Disneyland next door.
hair with Canyon de Chelly,
webm
08-27 02:42 PM
What was the cause for H1B rejection??
more...
chanduv23
01-09 05:20 PM
Try asking an Attorney and see if your wife can invalidate her h4 status by traveling and re-entering through AP at POE?
A quick trip to Canada can solve this problem?
This is not an advice, as I am not sure if this would work, but talk to a lawyer or as some suggested try another DMV.
A quick trip to Canada can solve this problem?
This is not an advice, as I am not sure if this would work, but talk to a lawyer or as some suggested try another DMV.
hot Canyon de Chelly National
payur
07-10 09:45 PM
My observation... based on i140 application
My case was sent to NSC and it remained in NSC, however applications of 5 colleagues of mine got transfered to TSC... and another 3 remained at NSC
There seems to be a pattern on how they transfer cases from NSC to TSC based on last name (this is totally based on a very small specimen)... posting it here to know if it holds any water
Last name starting with A, C, E, G, I, K..... transfered to TSC
Last name starting with B, D, F, H, J, L..... stayed at NSC
any comments? again this is only based on my observation on a very small # of cases
I DO NOT AGREE, MY COLLEGUE'S WAS RECEIPTED IN NSC, HIS LAST NAME STARTS WITH G.
My case was sent to NSC and it remained in NSC, however applications of 5 colleagues of mine got transfered to TSC... and another 3 remained at NSC
There seems to be a pattern on how they transfer cases from NSC to TSC based on last name (this is totally based on a very small specimen)... posting it here to know if it holds any water
Last name starting with A, C, E, G, I, K..... transfered to TSC
Last name starting with B, D, F, H, J, L..... stayed at NSC
any comments? again this is only based on my observation on a very small # of cases
I DO NOT AGREE, MY COLLEGUE'S WAS RECEIPTED IN NSC, HIS LAST NAME STARTS WITH G.
more...
house Canyon De Chelly National
dilbert_cal
02-09 11:08 AM
If you have a choice of LOA, you should go ahead and take it.
RFE is not a must - if you do get a RFE, it need not be necessarily for paystubs. You should take LOA, start your job search and try to get a similar position asap and if you do get RFE, you will have a choice of going with AC21 or not depending on your RFE.
Dont think that you will get your GC in a month or so - this process is very unpredictable and the more you be prepared for it, the better it is.
Best of luck and hope you get your GC soon.
RFE is not a must - if you do get a RFE, it need not be necessarily for paystubs. You should take LOA, start your job search and try to get a similar position asap and if you do get RFE, you will have a choice of going with AC21 or not depending on your RFE.
Dont think that you will get your GC in a month or so - this process is very unpredictable and the more you be prepared for it, the better it is.
Best of luck and hope you get your GC soon.
tattoo Canyon de Chelly Vacation
bbenhill
12-02 07:42 PM
I guess the story was not clear :-)
the answer is your wife's h4 will be fine since you have ur H1.
Thx
I am not sure why it's so hard to understand what I want :)
1- My wife's h4 visa will expire after 4 years
2- I already have my h1b extension
3- What I am saying that if I don't get the stamp in time, I am planning to enter with AP
Given all the points above, and the fact that I'll be working on H1b status, would this void my wife's h4 visa?
the answer is your wife's h4 will be fine since you have ur H1.
Thx
I am not sure why it's so hard to understand what I want :)
1- My wife's h4 visa will expire after 4 years
2- I already have my h1b extension
3- What I am saying that if I don't get the stamp in time, I am planning to enter with AP
Given all the points above, and the fact that I'll be working on H1b status, would this void my wife's h4 visa?
more...
pictures Luscious Landscapes
sac-r-ten
01-11 08:57 PM
If issue arises with I485 while i EAD, that would a big headache of replying RFE or opening MTR etc in timely fashion. EAD/AP stand cancelled if 485 is denied.
dresses City Map of Canyon de Chelly,
eb3_nepa
12-05 04:19 PM
BharatPremi,
No offense, but why have you opened 2 threads with very similar information and questions?
Your other thread about soft lud updates (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15916) is very similar to this one. It's one thing to not search for similar threads and quite another to open 2 similar threads on the same topic.
After about 28 threads about LUD updates during the July VB Fiasco, we know by now that the USCIS approves cases ad-hoc and not everything is FIFO. We also know that LUD updates mean ABSOLUTELY nothing. Suddenly we have seen older I-140s getting soft LUD updates. It means absolutely NOTHING. I know it is a bitter pill to swallow, coz ur heart is telling you that MAAAAYYBE there is something here, but unfortunately there is nothing there.
No offense, but why have you opened 2 threads with very similar information and questions?
Your other thread about soft lud updates (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=15916) is very similar to this one. It's one thing to not search for similar threads and quite another to open 2 similar threads on the same topic.
After about 28 threads about LUD updates during the July VB Fiasco, we know by now that the USCIS approves cases ad-hoc and not everything is FIFO. We also know that LUD updates mean ABSOLUTELY nothing. Suddenly we have seen older I-140s getting soft LUD updates. It means absolutely NOTHING. I know it is a bitter pill to swallow, coz ur heart is telling you that MAAAAYYBE there is something here, but unfortunately there is nothing there.
more...
makeup Canyon de Chelly is one
PlainSpeak
02-23 09:16 AM
Wow i bought a new toyota in Oct last year and no one asked me my immigration status. Of course i already had a loan with toyota financials for my older car so i guess that worked out to my benefit.
So i guess if some one gets deniend in one place it is not a dead end. They have other banks and credit unions as options and the best option would be a dealer provided finance as they want to sell you the car
So i guess if some one gets deniend in one place it is not a dead end. They have other banks and credit unions as options and the best option would be a dealer provided finance as they want to sell you the car
girlfriend Mummy Cave Canyon de Chelly
vjkypally
01-24 12:30 PM
I just checked with my Lawyer. I am a July 2 receipt guy and my 180 days got over. Currently my wife moved from her H1B(not stamped yet, she moved from H4 to H1) to EAD and I am still on H1B.
My lawyer says if I am on H1B and she is on EAD it will create issues when our EAD goes for renewal. She claims I also should change my status now to EAD. I thought staying on H1B was safe and now I get this response. I told her so many people I know have done the same thing and she is asking if I will jump into the well like others:))).
Please advise
My lawyer says if I am on H1B and she is on EAD it will create issues when our EAD goes for renewal. She claims I also should change my status now to EAD. I thought staying on H1B was safe and now I get this response. I told her so many people I know have done the same thing and she is asking if I will jump into the well like others:))).
Please advise
hairstyles More Canyon de Chelly More
glus
02-27 09:13 AM
Ok, since your GC has been approved, it is not true you need to wait 180 days. There is nothing in the law that says that. What is true is something different. When you received your GC through your employer, the presumption is that you will remain with this employer for a long time to come as it was a permanent job offer position. Of course, under some circumstances, it is possible you can't work for the same employer any longer; for instance, the company is closing etc. But, if you receive a GC and you voluntarily leave your employer immediately or after a few months, you MAY have issues during naturalization. At that time your application can be scrutinized whether or not you really was going to work for the employer who sponsored you. I've seen this happening several times. If you left voluntarily after a short period of time, the USCIS may say it was fraud and you never intended to work for your sponsor. So, in general, it is advisable to remain with the original sponsor for some time. Some attorneys say 1 year is enough, some say 2 years is enough and some say 6 months is enough. It is up to you. The law does not specify what the period is, but be logical and careful about this. You can hold 5 jobs, but I would suggest to stay with your current employer for as long as possible. Think forward, and not backward.
Hope this makes sense.
Hope this makes sense.
punjabi
04-13 03:41 PM
CONGRATS!!
Please donate to IV today.
Congrats again!
I also pedge to donate $500 to IV on the day I receive the GC.
Hello IV Freinds,
I checked my mail last Saturday, got Cards and welcome approval notices in mail. Status at USCIS website still shows all cases pending. I had called my Senators office for follow up week before as processing dates also had also passed.
.....
Thanks,
Please donate to IV today.
Congrats again!
I also pedge to donate $500 to IV on the day I receive the GC.
Hello IV Freinds,
I checked my mail last Saturday, got Cards and welcome approval notices in mail. Status at USCIS website still shows all cases pending. I had called my Senators office for follow up week before as processing dates also had also passed.
.....
Thanks,
alterego
06-21 10:27 PM
You would be best served with the services of an experienced attorney in this area. This is a rather difficult situation. Any answers on this board are likely to be speculative. Some money spent in this critical juncture would be money well spent.
From what I can see, you have 2 options, either to continue with your currently approved 140 and file for a 485 or get a new one and try to affix your PD from the old approved 140. Either way once you get to the 485 stage you should be more secure in things, and can then look to invoke AC 21 rules.
From what I can see, you have 2 options, either to continue with your currently approved 140 and file for a 485 or get a new one and try to affix your PD from the old approved 140. Either way once you get to the 485 stage you should be more secure in things, and can then look to invoke AC 21 rules.
