rb_248
09-05 03:37 PM
No. If you receive the CPO email, then approval is guaranteed, whether the online status changes or not. For some people, including my two dependants, there was neither the CPO email nor the status change, but the cases got approved.
That's exactly what happened to our AP cases last year. No online updates but, got the APs in the mail.
That's exactly what happened to our AP cases last year. No online updates but, got the APs in the mail.
desi3933
08-28 03:40 PM
internal for who do u work DOS/USCIS u jerk
You must be *so proud* of yourself.
You must be *so proud* of yourself.
h1techSlave
01-05 11:57 AM
Is Eb3 --> Eb2 porting a wide spread phenomina?
Tough to predict due to porting done from EB3 to EB2. All old EB3 PDs that ported to EB2 will have priority over newer EB2 PDs
Tough to predict due to porting done from EB3 to EB2. All old EB3 PDs that ported to EB2 will have priority over newer EB2 PDs
americandesi
03-13 05:34 PM
This is the danger with a "green card shop" company. They constantly have people joining and leaving them. Not a problem for H-1b but a major problem with GC processing.
Here is an example with company X which has ability pay for up to 50 employees at any point.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2005 [less than 50]
X applies 25 I-140s in 2006, and 20 of the 2005 count have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2007, and another 20 have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
One would think since they have less than 50 empoyees and ability to pay for 50 employees, they are safe. This will work for H-1b, but not for GCs.
Since GC is for future employment, the company is required to have the ability to pay all 85 employees after they become permanent residents. It does not matter if they have quit the company. The asumption is all 85 will be employed by X on GC approval and so X is expected to be able to pay all of them.
This is what has happened here. When such a problem comes up, then they can (and sometimes do) pull back previously approved 140s too.
Most employees who leave the GC sponsoring employer either invoke AC21 or port their PD�s with another employer. Hence the GC sponsoring employer could very well go ahead and withdraw their I-140�s so that they are no longer burdened to prove ATP for all ex-employees.
Here is an example with company X which has ability pay for up to 50 employees at any point.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2005 [less than 50]
X applies 25 I-140s in 2006, and 20 of the 2005 count have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
X applies 30 I-140s in 2007, and another 20 have quit. Total employees are less than 50.
One would think since they have less than 50 empoyees and ability to pay for 50 employees, they are safe. This will work for H-1b, but not for GCs.
Since GC is for future employment, the company is required to have the ability to pay all 85 employees after they become permanent residents. It does not matter if they have quit the company. The asumption is all 85 will be employed by X on GC approval and so X is expected to be able to pay all of them.
This is what has happened here. When such a problem comes up, then they can (and sometimes do) pull back previously approved 140s too.
Most employees who leave the GC sponsoring employer either invoke AC21 or port their PD�s with another employer. Hence the GC sponsoring employer could very well go ahead and withdraw their I-140�s so that they are no longer burdened to prove ATP for all ex-employees.
more...
ski_dude12
05-04 02:34 PM
Thanks for the reply.
manuseeksgc
06-16 05:40 PM
Hi Chi_Shark,
I didnt get your analysis on "so i could possibly face a 7 day gap in work authorization". I am also eagerly waiting for my EAD but I was curious what makes you think about a gap of 7 days. Is it 'coz you complete 60 days of filing on Aug 17th and urs expires on 10th. But why 60 days, I thought it has to be 90 days before a request can be made for interim EAD. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks!
I didnt get your analysis on "so i could possibly face a 7 day gap in work authorization". I am also eagerly waiting for my EAD but I was curious what makes you think about a gap of 7 days. Is it 'coz you complete 60 days of filing on Aug 17th and urs expires on 10th. But why 60 days, I thought it has to be 90 days before a request can be made for interim EAD. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Thanks!
more...
kmkk2006
04-09 12:07 AM
Hello,
This is my status.
I 140 � Approved in 2006 and have a copy.
I 485 � Filed in Jul 2007, Receipt date Jul 02, 2007. Have copy of I 485 receipt.
Perm Labor � Have perm labor approval copy.
Since it has been more than 180 days I 485 is pending and I 140 also approved, I joined my client. Now my old employer says he will withdraw my I 140.
I would like to send AC21 job change info to USCIS my self.
Please let me know if any one is in the same situation and filed (informed) AC21 by yourself.
And also advice if anyone used new attorney only for AC21.
Thanks.
This is my status.
I 140 � Approved in 2006 and have a copy.
I 485 � Filed in Jul 2007, Receipt date Jul 02, 2007. Have copy of I 485 receipt.
Perm Labor � Have perm labor approval copy.
Since it has been more than 180 days I 485 is pending and I 140 also approved, I joined my client. Now my old employer says he will withdraw my I 140.
I would like to send AC21 job change info to USCIS my self.
Please let me know if any one is in the same situation and filed (informed) AC21 by yourself.
And also advice if anyone used new attorney only for AC21.
Thanks.
chanduv23
02-15 09:26 AM
Hi,
My friend got GC when he was single. Later he got married . So spouse is still in India . She has not received GC. She has no visa to visit him.
That is the reason H1B option is being explored. She has the right qualifications and relevant experience. US Corporation is willing to sponser her H1B petition.
Since her husband is already in USA and green card holder, visa officer might reject her H1B petition stating that she is an intended immigrant.
or
he might issue the H1B visa because it is a dual intent visa.
So what's the chances of her getting the H1B visa.
Thanks
Check out some websites, there is something called hardship waiver, see if it applies to your case
My friend got GC when he was single. Later he got married . So spouse is still in India . She has not received GC. She has no visa to visit him.
That is the reason H1B option is being explored. She has the right qualifications and relevant experience. US Corporation is willing to sponser her H1B petition.
Since her husband is already in USA and green card holder, visa officer might reject her H1B petition stating that she is an intended immigrant.
or
he might issue the H1B visa because it is a dual intent visa.
So what's the chances of her getting the H1B visa.
Thanks
Check out some websites, there is something called hardship waiver, see if it applies to your case
more...
Antonio Trivelin
September 3rd, 2006, 07:41 PM
Nice job, Antonio. I like both but prefer the second. :)
Tks a lot. I will make anothers, i love this style HDR :)
Tks a lot. I will make anothers, i love this style HDR :)
chanduv23
04-18 10:46 PM
Nice talking to you, and thanks much for your guidance, help, and time Chandu. The short phone conversation with you was quite informative and helpful. Thanks to IV for your initiatives to help the members who are in trouble with immigration matters.
Thanks.
My pleasure. MOTIC will resolve your issue. Your lawyer will manage it. Good luck.
Thanks.
My pleasure. MOTIC will resolve your issue. Your lawyer will manage it. Good luck.
more...
nkavjs
09-25 11:47 AM
Hello.
I was reading one of the old postings mentioning someone's wife wanting to move from H1 to EAD and a new baby. I am in the same situation and donot know anything pertaining to legal requirement of working specific requirements working with sponsoring employer for specific numbers of hours to keep the EAD status on.
- Currently I (primary) am on H1B working 30 hrs per week as a full-timer. I want to step down to EAD status and just work may be 10 hrs per week or weeks as floater.
- What are the legal hassles am I looking for GC processing if I only work few miniumu hrs on EAD for the sponsor.
- Possibly can I work 2 part-time jobs at same position with diff. employer on EAD? Will USCIS have trouble with me at the time of EAD renewal.
EB3- India July 003
I-140 approved
485 pending
AP and EAD approved. till 2010
Please advise me
Thanks a lot
nkavjs
I was reading one of the old postings mentioning someone's wife wanting to move from H1 to EAD and a new baby. I am in the same situation and donot know anything pertaining to legal requirement of working specific requirements working with sponsoring employer for specific numbers of hours to keep the EAD status on.
- Currently I (primary) am on H1B working 30 hrs per week as a full-timer. I want to step down to EAD status and just work may be 10 hrs per week or weeks as floater.
- What are the legal hassles am I looking for GC processing if I only work few miniumu hrs on EAD for the sponsor.
- Possibly can I work 2 part-time jobs at same position with diff. employer on EAD? Will USCIS have trouble with me at the time of EAD renewal.
EB3- India July 003
I-140 approved
485 pending
AP and EAD approved. till 2010
Please advise me
Thanks a lot
nkavjs
vin13
01-09 06:49 PM
We had a very good conversation with IO. He was sympathetic by mentioning that Green Cards can be a long and expensive proceess
:)
:)
more...
unknown123
11-09 12:01 PM
What is your PD?
Good luck
Employer need to demonstrate 'Ability to Pay' from PD till I-140 is approved. Since you've used Nov 2004 labor, I assume that your PD is 'Nov 2004'. In this case your employer has to demonstrate ability to pay for year 2005 (even if you were not employed that time). If they have shown loss in 2005 tax return, chances are that your petition will be declined and only option is MTR and/or AAO.
Here is some good info... http://www.ilw.com/articles/2005,0118-guevara.shtm
You need a real good lawyer.
All the best
Good luck
Employer need to demonstrate 'Ability to Pay' from PD till I-140 is approved. Since you've used Nov 2004 labor, I assume that your PD is 'Nov 2004'. In this case your employer has to demonstrate ability to pay for year 2005 (even if you were not employed that time). If they have shown loss in 2005 tax return, chances are that your petition will be declined and only option is MTR and/or AAO.
Here is some good info... http://www.ilw.com/articles/2005,0118-guevara.shtm
You need a real good lawyer.
All the best
illinois_alum
03-06 11:15 AM
Then again I presume it would involve paying a fee of $80 for the biometrics too each time you apply online. Could be avoided if we go paper based.
That does raise a small question here, the $1010 fee that we pay does that also exempt us on the biometric fee, so in essence AP/EAD/FP is all exempt irrespecitve the number of times we apply under the new fee structure?
I think the Biometrics fee should be covered....when we applied online...the biometrics fee was part of the entire AP fee...we didn't pay a separate fee. It doesnt make sense that just because you apply online, you have to go for biometrics but if you send a paper application, they would not require biometrics! What does the application method have to do with biometrics? I suggest you call up USCIS and confirm about the biometrics fee...but as far as I know...everything should be covered with the fee your wife paid during the AOS application..
That does raise a small question here, the $1010 fee that we pay does that also exempt us on the biometric fee, so in essence AP/EAD/FP is all exempt irrespecitve the number of times we apply under the new fee structure?
I think the Biometrics fee should be covered....when we applied online...the biometrics fee was part of the entire AP fee...we didn't pay a separate fee. It doesnt make sense that just because you apply online, you have to go for biometrics but if you send a paper application, they would not require biometrics! What does the application method have to do with biometrics? I suggest you call up USCIS and confirm about the biometrics fee...but as far as I know...everything should be covered with the fee your wife paid during the AOS application..
more...
stucklabor
07-11 05:22 PM
Alabaman,
Legal is referring to me as the stuck moderator who may not like your making fun of a Representative on this forum.
I deleted a post of his that made fun of Rep. Sensenbrenner's name.
He doesn't realize that we, the IV core team, now have to go hat in hand to the same Rep. Sensenbrenner to have the SKIL bill passed through the House Judiciary committee.
Legal wants the rest of us to pay for his freedom of expression - and no value add - on this public forum.
Enough said from me on this issue.
Legal is referring to me as the stuck moderator who may not like your making fun of a Representative on this forum.
I deleted a post of his that made fun of Rep. Sensenbrenner's name.
He doesn't realize that we, the IV core team, now have to go hat in hand to the same Rep. Sensenbrenner to have the SKIL bill passed through the House Judiciary committee.
Legal wants the rest of us to pay for his freedom of expression - and no value add - on this public forum.
Enough said from me on this issue.
Mmak
07-13 04:56 PM
done
more...
vegasbaby
06-04 03:05 PM
The bill looks good on paper. My problem is that it also contains giving the same rights to 'gays'. I personally am not opposed to that but it should not happen that the conservatives in the house & senate take an objection & eventually defeat this bill.
sajimm
08-05 01:18 PM
It's too early to make a judgment on this since I haven't seen the actual text of this bill. With Sen.Sessions history, I highly doubt whether there is anything good to EB folks in this bill.
Most likely this is just election politics.
Most likely this is just election politics.
blacktongue
10-05 11:07 AM
How did they pull it off?
If you file a lawsuit you can ask for documents.
If you file a lawsuit you can ask for documents.
Ann Ruben
02-07 09:23 AM
Horscrop,
Yes, it is possible that USCIS would reject the extension because the PERM was not filed 365 days before the end of six years. However, a rejection on this basis is clearly contrary to both the language and intent of AC21, and I believe, could be successfully challenged on appeal.
Ann
PS-Am enjoying all the snow---so beautiful and peaceful.
Yes, it is possible that USCIS would reject the extension because the PERM was not filed 365 days before the end of six years. However, a rejection on this basis is clearly contrary to both the language and intent of AC21, and I believe, could be successfully challenged on appeal.
Ann
PS-Am enjoying all the snow---so beautiful and peaceful.
anai
07-09 07:06 AM
http://seeker.dice.com/jobsearch/servlet/JobSearch?op=302&dockey=xml/9/7/974f8dfa5aa7d67486264fef13a9dbbf@endecaindex&source=4&bb=1
Thought the least I could do was to name and shame such pimps. Though I seriously doubt if such folks are capable of feeling any shame.
Good that you are exposing such cases. But please change the title of the thread to be in English; this is an English language forum.
Thought the least I could do was to name and shame such pimps. Though I seriously doubt if such folks are capable of feeling any shame.
Good that you are exposing such cases. But please change the title of the thread to be in English; this is an English language forum.
No comments:
Post a Comment