gbadrain
08-12 03:46 AM
See Newbie,
I have read in many forums that in todays time every consulate is well connected with each other through database stored in their system as also we are supposed to lodge our case only at the Consulates near our Working place or bonafide state where we belong to.
Anyways thanks for ur opinion buddy:)
I have read in many forums that in todays time every consulate is well connected with each other through database stored in their system as also we are supposed to lodge our case only at the Consulates near our Working place or bonafide state where we belong to.
Anyways thanks for ur opinion buddy:)
amsgc
08-22 10:05 PM
You had some numbers there, are they not good anymore?
Msg deleted
Msg deleted
Almond
07-18 09:14 AM
What is her priority date? Has she filed in RIR or Non-RIR? For RIR, there were only 200 application left in the last release I saw in OH website.
I think, not sure, but I think she's filed in RIR. 200!? :( So, should she call? Her priority date is end of year 2001, even she doesn't remember well the exact month. Just from reading on here and other forums it seems 2002's and 2003's have been steadily getting approvals, and her case is so old she hasn't gotten a single letter from them, makes no sense.
I think, not sure, but I think she's filed in RIR. 200!? :( So, should she call? Her priority date is end of year 2001, even she doesn't remember well the exact month. Just from reading on here and other forums it seems 2002's and 2003's have been steadily getting approvals, and her case is so old she hasn't gotten a single letter from them, makes no sense.
Jaime
09-20 01:30 PM
In our next rally (hopefully soon) we should all carry placards, but they should read only ONE strong message, along the lines of:
"WE ARE ALREADY LEGAL AND HIGHLY-SKILLED IMMIGRANTS, STOP LUMPING US WITH ILLEGALS AND END THE 10-YEAR GREEN CARD WAITS"
but shorter and more catching
WE MUST EDUCATE PEOPLE AND CONGRESS!!!! ENOUGH WITH THEIR APATHY IN GETTING TO KNOW WHO WE REALLY ARE!
"WE ARE ALREADY LEGAL AND HIGHLY-SKILLED IMMIGRANTS, STOP LUMPING US WITH ILLEGALS AND END THE 10-YEAR GREEN CARD WAITS"
but shorter and more catching
WE MUST EDUCATE PEOPLE AND CONGRESS!!!! ENOUGH WITH THEIR APATHY IN GETTING TO KNOW WHO WE REALLY ARE!
more...
eb3India
09-25 10:19 AM
Here is the mail from AILA,
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
extofu
03-07 11:06 AM
You require a new H1B stamp in your passport. If you look at your existing H1B stamp - it will have the name of your company (it is not clear from your post if this is Company A or Comapny B). Once you quit the company and leave this country, you need to have new stamp. In your case, you must have H1B stamp from Company C when you enter after you leave the country (unless you are visiting Mexico or Canada - in which case you can use automatic revalidation rule - provided you are out of the country for less than 30 days).
I am not sure what will happen if you try to reenter on a H1B with old company. The POE will have some way to find out in which company u r working.
My current H1 stamp is for company A.
Based on what you wrote, would you advise me to get the stamp of company C if I have plans to change to C eventually? I know that when I will be reentering USA, I will be on the payroll for company C.
I am not sure what will happen if you try to reenter on a H1B with old company. The POE will have some way to find out in which company u r working.
My current H1 stamp is for company A.
Based on what you wrote, would you advise me to get the stamp of company C if I have plans to change to C eventually? I know that when I will be reentering USA, I will be on the payroll for company C.
more...
bluez25
08-23 03:48 PM
I really appreciate Pappu and this is why I like IV a lot... Staying focused.. I wish I could come to the rally but due to lot of personal reasons I will not be able to attend. ..... and coming back to the focus point of this thread....
Guys please stay on top of your case and make sure your's is not one of the case sitting in the dead box..... The actual message from the other thread just to avoid the jump....
From a user expected from other forum
---------------------------------------
Finally it's my turn - a Sunday phone call changed it all...
...yeah...yeah...yeah...
...etc...etc...etc...
...after hearing lots of crap for 6 years, finally I also got my approval on 8/21...no, no, no...it's not over for me...they wouldn't let that happen so easily... they approved mine...but they didn't approve my wife's....so, I am still waiting....just half way through....
here is some snapshots my long story....
EB3, India
Labor PD: 10/18/2001 [ my own labor, NOT A SUBSTITUTE ]
I140 / 485 ND: 11/13/2003
I140 AD: 04/2004
FP1: 12/2004
stuck in Namecheck till 6/2006
Xfer VSC to TSC: 3/2/07
FP2: 5/9/07
Status of case since then:
6/4/07: All ready for approval, waiting in queue
6/5/07: Assigned to an officer
6/27/07: Officer on leave, reassigned to another officer
8/6/07: Case waiting to be assigned to an officer ??? wtf ???
8/13 - 8/17: Contacted everyone mentioned in this board, this isn't my first time...just the n-th time....
8/19 - Sunday 5:56pm - actually this is the MOST important event. So, I shall never forget the time. I received a call in my home phone from extn. 1202. The gentleman with a 50sh voice, identified himself as an officer from USCIS. He mentioned that he is aware my case is stuck and wanted to know all details that I have been complaining about. After hearing everything from me and my wife, he looked into some stuff in his system. He particularly looked in details to whom my cases was assigned to....finally he apologised and told me, probably my case was assigned to AN OFFICER WHO IS NO MORE WITH USCIS FOR SOMETIME...phone call for around 48 minutes...
he apologized again and told me that he would inform Texas Center that there are cases assigned to this person who is not with USCIS anymore...
8/21 - 8:01 am - I got only one mail from CRIS "Approval Notice Sent for I485"
...don't know when I would get the "Card Production Ordered" and "Welcome" mails
Well guys, did you notice the flurry of approval today?...mostly old cases....does that have anything with my Sunday's phone call?.....I am guessing so...
My wife's cases didn't get approved since it is with another officer...hope to get that one soon...
All the best to everyone in this forum....I hope lot's of more approvals to come in September....
__________________
EB3 India
PD: 10/2001
I-140/485 - ND - 11/2003
I-140 AD - 6/2004
I-485 - Transferred VSC to TSC - 3/2/07
FP1 - 12/24/04
FP2 - 5/9/07
6/5/07 - Case assigned to an officer
6/27/07 - Officer on leave, case reassigned to Another officer
5th EAD AD - 7/26/07
SR raised on - 6/11/07
Reply on 7/26/07 - Complications lead to additional Reveiw - 6 months
I-485 - AD: Never
Guys please stay on top of your case and make sure your's is not one of the case sitting in the dead box..... The actual message from the other thread just to avoid the jump....
From a user expected from other forum
---------------------------------------
Finally it's my turn - a Sunday phone call changed it all...
...yeah...yeah...yeah...
...etc...etc...etc...
...after hearing lots of crap for 6 years, finally I also got my approval on 8/21...no, no, no...it's not over for me...they wouldn't let that happen so easily... they approved mine...but they didn't approve my wife's....so, I am still waiting....just half way through....
here is some snapshots my long story....
EB3, India
Labor PD: 10/18/2001 [ my own labor, NOT A SUBSTITUTE ]
I140 / 485 ND: 11/13/2003
I140 AD: 04/2004
FP1: 12/2004
stuck in Namecheck till 6/2006
Xfer VSC to TSC: 3/2/07
FP2: 5/9/07
Status of case since then:
6/4/07: All ready for approval, waiting in queue
6/5/07: Assigned to an officer
6/27/07: Officer on leave, reassigned to another officer
8/6/07: Case waiting to be assigned to an officer ??? wtf ???
8/13 - 8/17: Contacted everyone mentioned in this board, this isn't my first time...just the n-th time....
8/19 - Sunday 5:56pm - actually this is the MOST important event. So, I shall never forget the time. I received a call in my home phone from extn. 1202. The gentleman with a 50sh voice, identified himself as an officer from USCIS. He mentioned that he is aware my case is stuck and wanted to know all details that I have been complaining about. After hearing everything from me and my wife, he looked into some stuff in his system. He particularly looked in details to whom my cases was assigned to....finally he apologised and told me, probably my case was assigned to AN OFFICER WHO IS NO MORE WITH USCIS FOR SOMETIME...phone call for around 48 minutes...
he apologized again and told me that he would inform Texas Center that there are cases assigned to this person who is not with USCIS anymore...
8/21 - 8:01 am - I got only one mail from CRIS "Approval Notice Sent for I485"
...don't know when I would get the "Card Production Ordered" and "Welcome" mails
Well guys, did you notice the flurry of approval today?...mostly old cases....does that have anything with my Sunday's phone call?.....I am guessing so...
My wife's cases didn't get approved since it is with another officer...hope to get that one soon...
All the best to everyone in this forum....I hope lot's of more approvals to come in September....
__________________
EB3 India
PD: 10/2001
I-140/485 - ND - 11/2003
I-140 AD - 6/2004
I-485 - Transferred VSC to TSC - 3/2/07
FP1 - 12/24/04
FP2 - 5/9/07
6/5/07 - Case assigned to an officer
6/27/07 - Officer on leave, case reassigned to Another officer
5th EAD AD - 7/26/07
SR raised on - 6/11/07
Reply on 7/26/07 - Complications lead to additional Reveiw - 6 months
I-485 - AD: Never
desighee
02-25 02:28 PM
In some states (like NJ), you need a letter from Social Security Administration stating that you are not eligible for SSN.
Essex,MD has the MVA office.
http://www.mva.state.md.us/LOCATION/baltimorecounty.htm
Essex - Full Service
Middlesex Shopping Center
1338-A Eastern Boulevard
Essex, MD 21221
They don't need any letter from SSN administration.However they do check your visa status etc.So should be able to prove your legal status(passport.797 form etc),
i would suggest call them up or go to their office with all the documents.They will tell u if there is anything they need and if it is missing.
they are extremely courtious people and will tell u rightaway if there are problems with ur docs.
Offcourse my information may be outdate so call them up first to make sure info is correct.
Essex,MD has the MVA office.
http://www.mva.state.md.us/LOCATION/baltimorecounty.htm
Essex - Full Service
Middlesex Shopping Center
1338-A Eastern Boulevard
Essex, MD 21221
They don't need any letter from SSN administration.However they do check your visa status etc.So should be able to prove your legal status(passport.797 form etc),
i would suggest call them up or go to their office with all the documents.They will tell u if there is anything they need and if it is missing.
they are extremely courtious people and will tell u rightaway if there are problems with ur docs.
Offcourse my information may be outdate so call them up first to make sure info is correct.
more...
uslegals
08-20 03:39 PM
A consulting company that i had approached in early 2007 had filed my
H1B on April 1st '07 for which i only have a receipt # as yet. This H1 is obviosuly under the CAP. USCIS decision reg. H1 approval is still pending.
I was eligible to file for AOS / EAD thru my husbands GC petition and now do not want to take any job on the H1B with the consulting company. I have a offer from another company....i can join then when i get my EAD. They are willing to wait till i get my EAD.
Some concerns i need help with -
1)How does the contracting company withdraw or VOID my H1. ?
2) Do we have to wait for 797 approval to void it.? Or can they VOID it using only the RECEIPT # ?
3) If H1B is approved in the next few weeks then does the petitioner have to void it before the start of fiscal year - October 1st 2007.?
5) Does a attorney need to be involved to withdraw this case ? What is the exact process of nullifying this H1B.? Are there any specific forms to be filled out.???
6) What kind of documentation would i need from the petitioner who is withdrawing my H1B...Like what evidence do i need to get from petitioner that he / she has actually withdrawn this.??
Also are there any DOL or USCIS rules which state that - the employer has to provide me with copies of the LCA, I-129 petition, Letter that he writes for voiding the H1B. I should be entitled to recieve copies from the employer right..?? allthough i will not work for them..! Can somebody direct me to a link on DOL or USCIS which tells me that the employer should give me all these copies.
Thank you!
H1B on April 1st '07 for which i only have a receipt # as yet. This H1 is obviosuly under the CAP. USCIS decision reg. H1 approval is still pending.
I was eligible to file for AOS / EAD thru my husbands GC petition and now do not want to take any job on the H1B with the consulting company. I have a offer from another company....i can join then when i get my EAD. They are willing to wait till i get my EAD.
Some concerns i need help with -
1)How does the contracting company withdraw or VOID my H1. ?
2) Do we have to wait for 797 approval to void it.? Or can they VOID it using only the RECEIPT # ?
3) If H1B is approved in the next few weeks then does the petitioner have to void it before the start of fiscal year - October 1st 2007.?
5) Does a attorney need to be involved to withdraw this case ? What is the exact process of nullifying this H1B.? Are there any specific forms to be filled out.???
6) What kind of documentation would i need from the petitioner who is withdrawing my H1B...Like what evidence do i need to get from petitioner that he / she has actually withdrawn this.??
Also are there any DOL or USCIS rules which state that - the employer has to provide me with copies of the LCA, I-129 petition, Letter that he writes for voiding the H1B. I should be entitled to recieve copies from the employer right..?? allthough i will not work for them..! Can somebody direct me to a link on DOL or USCIS which tells me that the employer should give me all these copies.
Thank you!
kirupa
01-19 11:17 PM
Unfortunately, your entry doesn't qualify because you are using box2d :(
Really cool entry though!
Really cool entry though!
more...
Pagal
06-26 08:48 AM
Hello,
Great! Can work on content ... there is already a thread in Donor forum (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/398888-post13.html). Would be great, if your efforts are coordinated with IV core ...
Great! Can work on content ... there is already a thread in Donor forum (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/398888-post13.html). Would be great, if your efforts are coordinated with IV core ...
Aah_GC
08-16 11:35 AM
I had absolutely no problems, it's all smooth as long as you carry all the supporting docs. I did have a shitty experience at JFK -- there are few morons at the POE you can't do much about.
more...
matreen
08-27 09:43 AM
If university is not accredited with ABET, USCIS won't accept this masters for EB2?
I believe there are lots of other universties are not accredited with ABET and and who have done their masters from these universities they are getting EB2 approvals?
Thanks,
Matt
.....and none of the accredited universities give you admission to MS unless you have bachelor's degree, and most of the online MS degrees are not from ABET accredited universities, please get all the information about the degree before you pay any FEE:o
I believe there are lots of other universties are not accredited with ABET and and who have done their masters from these universities they are getting EB2 approvals?
Thanks,
Matt
.....and none of the accredited universities give you admission to MS unless you have bachelor's degree, and most of the online MS degrees are not from ABET accredited universities, please get all the information about the degree before you pay any FEE:o
randallemery
06-06 07:04 AM
My home city is holding a hearing tomorrow on immigration, and I'd like to offer up the opportunity to take your collective feedback to the hearing.
What are the issues that you face in everyday life? What are things you have to do now that infringe on your ability to be as productive as you could? What are things that you are prevented from doing?
How do you think local governments might act to improve the situation to the benefit of everyone?
Cities do have an interest. For example, divided families have well documented ill affects on children that lead to risky behaviour and increased local social issues. City tax revenues are lost by the inability of H1B visa holders to start a business or to move to higher paying jobs.
What are the issues that you face in everyday life? What are things you have to do now that infringe on your ability to be as productive as you could? What are things that you are prevented from doing?
How do you think local governments might act to improve the situation to the benefit of everyone?
Cities do have an interest. For example, divided families have well documented ill affects on children that lead to risky behaviour and increased local social issues. City tax revenues are lost by the inability of H1B visa holders to start a business or to move to higher paying jobs.
more...
smsthss
11-15 01:13 PM
I am working as a full time emp and not as a consultant. So i think i dont have to worry about client letters.
So according to you, i am eligible for another 3 year extension based on approved I-140 irrespective of whether my I-485 has been filed or not?
What i have been reading in some forum is that, if you have an approved I-140 and if your I-485 has not been filed due to retrogression, then you are eligible for 3 year extension. If you have an approved I-140 and if you have already filed your I-485, then you are eligible only for 1 year extension.
If anyone has been in such a situation, if you know please let me know which one is correct.. or please forward me to any article.
smsthss:
1. You are eligible to get 3 H1B year extension based on an approved I-140. However it is up to the Immigration officer to grant you the appropriate term. The appropriate term will depend on the employer paperwork that can suggest that there is atleast 3 years worth of work available for you to do.
2. Two of my friends got their H1B extensions on the basis of approved 140 (after their 6th year). One of them provided the client letter proving that there is a lot of work for another 3 years but got an extension for 1.5 years only. My other friend submitted client work order showing work for 6 months but that guy got an H1B extension for 3 years.
Your best bet is to provide all the paperwork and request extension for 3 years and leave it up to the IO to make the decision. (Certain things are beyond our control, but the things that are must be handled well)
So according to you, i am eligible for another 3 year extension based on approved I-140 irrespective of whether my I-485 has been filed or not?
What i have been reading in some forum is that, if you have an approved I-140 and if your I-485 has not been filed due to retrogression, then you are eligible for 3 year extension. If you have an approved I-140 and if you have already filed your I-485, then you are eligible only for 1 year extension.
If anyone has been in such a situation, if you know please let me know which one is correct.. or please forward me to any article.
smsthss:
1. You are eligible to get 3 H1B year extension based on an approved I-140. However it is up to the Immigration officer to grant you the appropriate term. The appropriate term will depend on the employer paperwork that can suggest that there is atleast 3 years worth of work available for you to do.
2. Two of my friends got their H1B extensions on the basis of approved 140 (after their 6th year). One of them provided the client letter proving that there is a lot of work for another 3 years but got an extension for 1.5 years only. My other friend submitted client work order showing work for 6 months but that guy got an H1B extension for 3 years.
Your best bet is to provide all the paperwork and request extension for 3 years and leave it up to the IO to make the decision. (Certain things are beyond our control, but the things that are must be handled well)
sukhyani
01-26 07:44 PM
Hey guys, I received this notice in the mail from USCIS asking me to appear for "Initial" interview for further processing of my I485. Can someone please throw some light on what that might involve?
My PD is 09/04, June 07 Filer and had an RFE back in Septmeber.
Please reply.
My PD is 09/04, June 07 Filer and had an RFE back in Septmeber.
Please reply.
more...
ashoka
09-26 02:27 PM
Texcan,
Thank you.
Thank you.
dontcareanymore
08-04 03:36 PM
Someone gave me red for this post...i dont understant why???
Two words :
Trigger happy ....
Two words :
Trigger happy ....
insbaby
01-11 12:39 PM
Hi
I am thinking my "living the american dream" will be a dream only.
True. Its just a dream. You work on something for 20 years and get a GC at 45. What are you getting after that. Just continue your dream for another 20 to 30 years and call it a day.
If you get it by 25, you have some years to go hit something for your life.
I stopped worrying on GC and started living on tasks that help my family. I have a job now. If lost, I will go for another job and another and another in India/Europe/Australia/so and so. But surely not going to die or go to hospital for depression.
I am thinking my "living the american dream" will be a dream only.
True. Its just a dream. You work on something for 20 years and get a GC at 45. What are you getting after that. Just continue your dream for another 20 to 30 years and call it a day.
If you get it by 25, you have some years to go hit something for your life.
I stopped worrying on GC and started living on tasks that help my family. I have a job now. If lost, I will go for another job and another and another in India/Europe/Australia/so and so. But surely not going to die or go to hospital for depression.
hopefulgc
12-30 12:55 AM
Even though we have a very honest agenda at heart which at its very core aims to help America be more competitive in the global scene, apparently, we need to have the financial clout to be able to turn heads and thus have our voices heard.
Here is an idea: say we have roughly 500 members out of this vast array of 35000+ members who have the heart and the will to contribute. we get $2000 from each and place it in an escrow trust account that does not release money for expenditure unless we reach $1 mln
why? because the first 10 or 50 contributers are the most elemental in getting such a campaign off the ground and we need to give them a guarantee that its an ALL or NOTHING DEAL. If for some reason we stop at $10k because only 5 members contributed and no more are ready to contribute (unlikely), those 5 members can get their money back.
now is $2000 a huge amount?.. absolutely... but maybe we could tweak this amount or do some payback if we have more people stepping forward in excess of 500. and the amount of payback depends on how early your contributed to the campaign. The first 50 guys could even get a substantial part of their contribution back.
People, we gotta swing for the fences, the next time we go to play.
It has taken us some time to understand how the lobbying game is played.. but this time "Lets play to win"
As evident from current campaigns (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=210276#post210276), we need to be a big fish.. a million $+ whale to be taken seriously.
Lastly, i'm just presenting an idea .. its not endorsed by IV core.. and I maybe overlooking some finer points of non-profit corporate taxation and finance.
Here is an idea: say we have roughly 500 members out of this vast array of 35000+ members who have the heart and the will to contribute. we get $2000 from each and place it in an escrow trust account that does not release money for expenditure unless we reach $1 mln
why? because the first 10 or 50 contributers are the most elemental in getting such a campaign off the ground and we need to give them a guarantee that its an ALL or NOTHING DEAL. If for some reason we stop at $10k because only 5 members contributed and no more are ready to contribute (unlikely), those 5 members can get their money back.
now is $2000 a huge amount?.. absolutely... but maybe we could tweak this amount or do some payback if we have more people stepping forward in excess of 500. and the amount of payback depends on how early your contributed to the campaign. The first 50 guys could even get a substantial part of their contribution back.
People, we gotta swing for the fences, the next time we go to play.
It has taken us some time to understand how the lobbying game is played.. but this time "Lets play to win"
As evident from current campaigns (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=210276#post210276), we need to be a big fish.. a million $+ whale to be taken seriously.
Lastly, i'm just presenting an idea .. its not endorsed by IV core.. and I maybe overlooking some finer points of non-profit corporate taxation and finance.
nozerd
02-25 03:55 PM
I am reasonably knowledgable about benefit plans like 401(k) but just wanted a second opinion in the situation I decide to move perm to India.
1) Assume I have $ 100,000 in a 401K plan.
2) I terminate and roll over the funds to an IRA.
3) If I were to withdraw the funds ASAP I would face tax at a high rate as well as the 10% withdrawl penalty as I would be under 59 yrs 6 months.
4) To minimize my taxation I withdrawl a little bit every yr under the tax bracket. Say I withdraw 10K a yr for 10 yrs. Since I have no other US income I am under the tax bracket for US and dont have to pay any taxes. I do still have to pay the 10% penalty since im under 59 1/2.
5) By doing this I eventually mange to get 90K out of the 100k I start (assuming i dont take into account market earnings)
So is this doable and good logic ? Am I right or off somewhere. Would I face any taxation in India if I bring in this money on the principal ?
Also does anyone know what kind of interest rate a risk free treasury bond or instrument would pay in India ? If I bring to India an investment of aprox Rs 50 lakhs what kind of monthly income can I earn on the money assuming a secure conservative investment.
Thanks
1) Assume I have $ 100,000 in a 401K plan.
2) I terminate and roll over the funds to an IRA.
3) If I were to withdraw the funds ASAP I would face tax at a high rate as well as the 10% withdrawl penalty as I would be under 59 yrs 6 months.
4) To minimize my taxation I withdrawl a little bit every yr under the tax bracket. Say I withdraw 10K a yr for 10 yrs. Since I have no other US income I am under the tax bracket for US and dont have to pay any taxes. I do still have to pay the 10% penalty since im under 59 1/2.
5) By doing this I eventually mange to get 90K out of the 100k I start (assuming i dont take into account market earnings)
So is this doable and good logic ? Am I right or off somewhere. Would I face any taxation in India if I bring in this money on the principal ?
Also does anyone know what kind of interest rate a risk free treasury bond or instrument would pay in India ? If I bring to India an investment of aprox Rs 50 lakhs what kind of monthly income can I earn on the money assuming a secure conservative investment.
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment