mrajatish
09-17 12:11 PM
Oh one more thing I want to add - I do not know of a anyone who have kept the same title and the same job description for more than 5 years(other than doctors :)), have you guys heard of any? This is more scary as you wait for 7 years and then get laid off and then start from scratch again. At least, with family based, you will get GC after 10-11 years.
wallpaper Amanda Seyfried Links:
joydiptac
06-23 02:56 PM
I take this as another posiitve.
Paves the way for the smaller bills like the family reunification (visa recapture) to be passed without the chirkuts putting stops citing a CIR is required then voting against the CIR.
Agree with u guys lets push for the family reunification bill.
Paves the way for the smaller bills like the family reunification (visa recapture) to be passed without the chirkuts putting stops citing a CIR is required then voting against the CIR.
Agree with u guys lets push for the family reunification bill.
MYGC2008
04-13 10:06 AM
Now a days RFE is very common. I got RFE on sept 2008 even though I am EB2 2006.
Thanks guys for all your responses, much appreciated. not sure whats the RFE about, still waiting for the document, little bit tensed ....
Thanks guys for all your responses, much appreciated. not sure whats the RFE about, still waiting for the document, little bit tensed ....
2011 Photo of Amanda Seyfried from
go_guy123
02-02 11:13 AM
dude, I believe the above proposed law is tailored beautifully for illegal immigrants. It mentions about continuous presence but no word on 'legal' continuous presence! Also seems like the 'criminal offense' in US doesnt take into account the very first one, the act of entering illegally!
No way this amnesty would pass. This will end up in the ash heap of unpassed bills.
No way this amnesty would pass. This will end up in the ash heap of unpassed bills.
more...
GCBALAK
03-18 12:57 AM
I am on an EAD (dependent), as my husband was the primary applicant. He has got his GC and mine got stuck after the July - Aug 2007 fiasco :(.
I want to start a IT company with my friend who is a US Citizen. I know my husband is a sure shot to have the company in his name however, he is in a full-time job.
My questions:
1) Can I start / partner with a friend who is a US Citizen?
2) I am thinking of an LLC. Is that ok? or should it be S-Corp? More reading of S-corp says to be US Citizen or US Permanent Resident so I am more leaning towards LLC. Also there is a provision that we could change LLC to S-corp at a later date (if needed).
3) What should I make sure if I go through the LLC route? - like Designation, Salary that I can take, work for the same company etc
4) Does state make any difference? If so how? I am a PA resident and my friend is from Texas. We are thinking of registering the company in Texas.
5) I got my 2 yr EAD valid till Sep 2010. Is there any special procedure that I need to do or just extend it before it expires.
Any tips / advice from the experts will be highly appreciated.
I want to start a IT company with my friend who is a US Citizen. I know my husband is a sure shot to have the company in his name however, he is in a full-time job.
My questions:
1) Can I start / partner with a friend who is a US Citizen?
2) I am thinking of an LLC. Is that ok? or should it be S-Corp? More reading of S-corp says to be US Citizen or US Permanent Resident so I am more leaning towards LLC. Also there is a provision that we could change LLC to S-corp at a later date (if needed).
3) What should I make sure if I go through the LLC route? - like Designation, Salary that I can take, work for the same company etc
4) Does state make any difference? If so how? I am a PA resident and my friend is from Texas. We are thinking of registering the company in Texas.
5) I got my 2 yr EAD valid till Sep 2010. Is there any special procedure that I need to do or just extend it before it expires.
Any tips / advice from the experts will be highly appreciated.
Sakthisagar
05-12 10:29 AM
sent the letter to Sen Leahy, what Mayorkas wnat to explain in pages a summary of how EB community is suffering. Thanks :)
more...
sathyaraj
11-15 05:04 PM
I meant the same, they will ask only for your current employer paystubs and RFEs not the future employer. but if there is substantial difference in wages then there could be some potential problems. This is to asses your intentions whether you will continue to work with the same job as mentioned in ur LC.
No way they will ask for pay-stubs from future employer. With EAD you can do any job. They may ask for pay stubs and W2 from Current employer.
No way they will ask for pay-stubs from future employer. With EAD you can do any job. They may ask for pay stubs and W2 from Current employer.
2010 Amanda Seyfried Hot middot; Amanda golden 134 jpgAmanda golden 134 jpg
Mohit_Malkani
10-08 11:13 AM
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer�s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physically location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensure. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
javadeveloper
07-18 10:04 PM
I FOUND THIS URL https://efiling.uscis.dhs.gov/efile/ , can someone pls confirm
hair girlfriend amanda seyfried hot
aj130346
03-15 08:29 PM
My comany is filing a second LC under PERM for a substantially different job position and job location.
My first LC ( PD Oct 2004) was filed in TR. My LC is "in Process" at PBEC. No I-140 yet. I am from India
The question is: Once the PERM LC gets approved, and I140 ( second LC) approved, can the first PD ( Oct 2004) PD be retained??
Thanks for your responses
My first LC ( PD Oct 2004) was filed in TR. My LC is "in Process" at PBEC. No I-140 yet. I am from India
The question is: Once the PERM LC gets approved, and I140 ( second LC) approved, can the first PD ( Oct 2004) PD be retained??
Thanks for your responses
more...
Project_A
05-16 08:17 AM
May I know if H1 transfer has any affect on parent�s arrival during the transfer? I sponsored their visa using company A's employment letters and they have a valid visa. Do I need to get a letter from my new employer to avoid issues at POE? At the time of parent�s arrival, I would be working for company A, but by the time they return, I will be switching to company B and moving to a different city. My H1 transfer is already in process.
hot celebrity/amanda-seyfried/
paskal
11-05 10:54 PM
The following are not counted against H1b caps as far as i know, the list may not be complete:
existing visa-transfer jobs
employees of not for profit entities
University employees
J-1 doctors starting an underserved area job
existing visa-transfer jobs
employees of not for profit entities
University employees
J-1 doctors starting an underserved area job
more...
house Hot Shot: Amanda Seyfried
njboy
05-08 10:33 AM
Pa** may be denigratory in England, but to me, its like saying "desi". Is "desi" denigratory too? I was just guiding our friend to forums that might be able to help him better. Im sorry if any offence was taken.
Kind regards
Kind regards
tattoo Amanda Seyfried has surprised
kart2007
05-21 09:02 PM
b. Do not make photocopies of official US Documents. Its a violation.
This is news to me.
This is news to me.
more...
pictures Amanda Seyfried Amanda
abhijitp
01-18 01:35 AM
> ***If you don't sign, that means no snacks
LOL:-) Thanks for making my day!
NORCAL, see you there on Sunday!
LOL:-) Thanks for making my day!
NORCAL, see you there on Sunday!
dresses Hot Shot: Amanda Seyfried
dilbert_cal
04-06 02:03 AM
Thanks for a very good analysis. I was hoping someone will do it and my heartfelt gratitude to you for stepping up.
more...
makeup Amanda Seyfired In Tribeca
waitnwatch
05-17 11:39 PM
The original language that was in CIR would exempt from the quota STEM graduates who have worked for 3 years, under the F 4 provision. More importantly, it allows for self petitioning and adjustment of status following a $2000 fee. If this amendment passes, all that would be gone, and simply replaced with the exemption that was already in the original bill. Again I'm puzzled: why are we supporting this amendment?
I think you are getting slightly confused here. The thing under discussion in this thread has always existed as a clause in the bill and is nothing new. The F4 is a separate provision which was struck down today. The 3 year for STEM provision still exists separate. Please have a look at the details of the bill. It should be available somewhere on this website.
I think you are getting slightly confused here. The thing under discussion in this thread has always existed as a clause in the bill and is nothing new. The F4 is a separate provision which was struck down today. The 3 year for STEM provision still exists separate. Please have a look at the details of the bill. It should be available somewhere on this website.
girlfriend Brittany Snow Amanda Seyfried
questforgc
08-26 02:36 PM
congrats bluez.
Did you apply for AOS at all?
If i filed for AOS, can i do a CP like what you have described here?
I chose CP in my I140 but filed for AOS.
I guess there is a procedure for switching from AOS to CP, but just wanted to know what you got to say.
Did you apply for AOS at all?
If i filed for AOS, can i do a CP like what you have described here?
I chose CP in my I140 but filed for AOS.
I guess there is a procedure for switching from AOS to CP, but just wanted to know what you got to say.
hairstyles Amanda Seyfried
skagitswimmer
November 14th, 2007, 11:15 AM
I have one of those overpriced twirly brushes sold by Arctic Butterfly but have used it exactly once. Blower bulbs work fine. If you don't have a photo store nearby you can buy exactly the same thing at a drug store - except that it is white and called an ear syringe. Make sure you follow the camera directions for sensor cleaning - you will have to lock the mirror up to be able to direct the air at the sensor.
As for formatting, I generally format the card every time I put it back into the camera rather than delete the images at the desktop. I don't believe it does anything special to prevent problems but it is a just convenient of deleting photos and folders.
I have had one card fail completely.
As for formatting, I generally format the card every time I put it back into the camera rather than delete the images at the desktop. I don't believe it does anything special to prevent problems but it is a just convenient of deleting photos and folders.
I have had one card fail completely.
pune_guy
02-19 05:20 PM
I would suggest that you follow the option of joining some other company, if that is possible. You would be joining with enough experience so as to qualify for a new EB2 application. You can retain your EB3 application and priority date if 180 days have passed since filing 485, which in your case has happened so you are OK.
Trying to file an EB2 application through the same employer might be tricky because you cannot count the experience that you have gained with the employer. Even though a case could be made that you have a masters degree in business but I suspect that that may not be enough as, if I understand you correctly, you have no "business development" experience from your previous employment. Thus you would be a candidate with a degree but no experience.
Just my two cents.
Trying to file an EB2 application through the same employer might be tricky because you cannot count the experience that you have gained with the employer. Even though a case could be made that you have a masters degree in business but I suspect that that may not be enough as, if I understand you correctly, you have no "business development" experience from your previous employment. Thus you would be a candidate with a degree but no experience.
Just my two cents.
kisana
04-10 12:44 PM
Please provide your input.