superdude
07-31 07:18 PM
Hi All,
We are planning to goto canada for our H1 visa extension (actually i changed my job to new employer also). My H1 visa expires on Sept 31st 2007.
We are planning to go in August 2007 itself.
Lets say if our h1 extension is rejected or some issue what will be our status?
Can we come back to US and plan for our india travel or we have to leave to india from there itself?
I heard that mexico has different rules?
Thanks for your help.
Got stamped twice in Canada. I have MS from USA. When I went for the second time my friend came along with me who did not have a degree from US. He also got the VISA.
There was couple came for H1 renewal and for H4-H1. His wife could not get H4-H1 as she was having a degree in Commerce and working for a small consulting comp. VO gave her H4. I did not know the actual details of her case though.
We are planning to goto canada for our H1 visa extension (actually i changed my job to new employer also). My H1 visa expires on Sept 31st 2007.
We are planning to go in August 2007 itself.
Lets say if our h1 extension is rejected or some issue what will be our status?
Can we come back to US and plan for our india travel or we have to leave to india from there itself?
I heard that mexico has different rules?
Thanks for your help.
Got stamped twice in Canada. I have MS from USA. When I went for the second time my friend came along with me who did not have a degree from US. He also got the VISA.
There was couple came for H1 renewal and for H4-H1. His wife could not get H4-H1 as she was having a degree in Commerce and working for a small consulting comp. VO gave her H4. I did not know the actual details of her case though.
wallpaper wallpaper Amigos por siempre
GCMD0203
09-17 01:18 PM
Gurus please help
Hi,
I'm in the same boat as you (I140/I485/I131/I765 - filed concurrently). I'm trying to self file for my H1 extension. I was not sure about one question on form I-129 part 4.7 the question is
Have you ever filed an immigrant petition for any person in this petition?
Last year when I filed for H1 extension I had checked 'NO'
But now that I-140 is pending, I'm not sure if I should check 'YES' or 'NO'
I will appreciate if you can help me with this.
Thanks,
Hi,
I'm in the same boat as you (I140/I485/I131/I765 - filed concurrently). I'm trying to self file for my H1 extension. I was not sure about one question on form I-129 part 4.7 the question is
Have you ever filed an immigrant petition for any person in this petition?
Last year when I filed for H1 extension I had checked 'NO'
But now that I-140 is pending, I'm not sure if I should check 'YES' or 'NO'
I will appreciate if you can help me with this.
Thanks,
xlr8r
09-15 02:58 PM
This is bizarre stuff.
It says that NSC I-140 processing date for EB2 is March 13, 2008. Since when did they become so efficient to jump from July 6th, 2007 to March 2008? I guess they mistakenly typed 2008 instead of 2007?
Those lazy bums had better get ready for an onslaught of Service Requests.
It says that NSC I-140 processing date for EB2 is March 13, 2008. Since when did they become so efficient to jump from July 6th, 2007 to March 2008? I guess they mistakenly typed 2008 instead of 2007?
Those lazy bums had better get ready for an onslaught of Service Requests.
2011 amigos por siempre.
shantanup
05-28 01:12 PM
Go and talk to your local congressman about your situation. Ask him / her to do something to solve this problem. You have a genuine case. He / she has to respond.
snathan
05-12 07:05 PM
My PD is Sep-03, EB3-India. I left the employer who sponsored me one year after I filled 485 (thanks to July-07 fiasco). I have over 12 years of experience and was wondering if it was possible to port to EB-2 without having to file for new labor by just refilling I-140.
hetuweb
08-31 08:17 PM
Dear friends
I'm very excited to say that I got my green card approved. Thank you for all of your support.
My status change will not change a bit of my support to IV. I will continue to contribute what I contribute now, until we are sucessful. I'm not successful, until everyone of you is not successful in pursuing your green card. I hope and pray that my stand will motivate non contributing friends to contribute.
Friends and folks, we did not have any organization to support ourselves. So far we had to take anything shoved upon us. But the emergence of IV changed all that. Contribute and support IV. Because IV is our voice!!!
thanks
babu
CONGRATS BABU
I'm very excited to say that I got my green card approved. Thank you for all of your support.
My status change will not change a bit of my support to IV. I will continue to contribute what I contribute now, until we are sucessful. I'm not successful, until everyone of you is not successful in pursuing your green card. I hope and pray that my stand will motivate non contributing friends to contribute.
Friends and folks, we did not have any organization to support ourselves. So far we had to take anything shoved upon us. But the emergence of IV changed all that. Contribute and support IV. Because IV is our voice!!!
thanks
babu
CONGRATS BABU
rvr_jcop
02-18 11:15 AM
Incorrect.
As per Yates memo (link (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf))
It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Thanks desi3933 for correcting me and posting the link. But, I know a couple of instances where they got the RFE/NOID for the same reason. But, I am sure they will eventually get approved if they go for MTR as this was addressed in Yates Memo.
I have a question, is 'memo' same as law? Can the IO come back and say its not in the law? Just out of my curiosity ...
As per Yates memo (link (http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf))
It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
Thanks desi3933 for correcting me and posting the link. But, I know a couple of instances where they got the RFE/NOID for the same reason. But, I am sure they will eventually get approved if they go for MTR as this was addressed in Yates Memo.
I have a question, is 'memo' same as law? Can the IO come back and say its not in the law? Just out of my curiosity ...
2010 AMIGOS POR SIEMPRE¡¡
cram
08-16 08:16 PM
Did you receive the FP notice or your attorney or both??
In my case, both my attorney and I received the FP notices.
In my case, both my attorney and I received the FP notices.
iqube00
06-30 03:44 PM
My Wife and I were scheduled to have our fingerprints taken on July 7th and July 9th respectively. Today, we received a letter for my wife and the letter says "Appointment Canceled" "No need to appear at ASC".
The letter does not say if they are going to reschedule OR the reason for cancelling.
I am a July 2007 applicant and this is the first FP appts we have got.
Does anybody have this kind of experience before?
Do you think I should show up at the ASC on the previously scheduled date OR just wait for a new letter and date.
My case is in TSC.
Any comment is appreciated.
Thanks.
Bipin :mad:
Same boat. Glad to hear that I am not the only one. I had my app. on July 7th at Cincinnati ASC and I got this letter saying 'APPOINTMENT CANCELED - No need to appear at ASC'
The letter does not say if they are going to reschedule OR the reason for cancelling.
I am a July 2007 applicant and this is the first FP appts we have got.
Does anybody have this kind of experience before?
Do you think I should show up at the ASC on the previously scheduled date OR just wait for a new letter and date.
My case is in TSC.
Any comment is appreciated.
Thanks.
Bipin :mad:
Same boat. Glad to hear that I am not the only one. I had my app. on July 7th at Cincinnati ASC and I got this letter saying 'APPOINTMENT CANCELED - No need to appear at ASC'
hair amigas por siempre
sk8er
04-16 09:04 PM
I cannot read the above post
rvr_jcop
02-17 11:33 AM
Ok ..
Now I dont want to change my employer .
But my employer doent pay when I am on bench . So I may not having paystubs after March .
Will it cause any problem to H1 extention ?
Ofcourse, if H1-extension requires the last couple of pay checks, there is a possibility they would ask for the 'latest', as opposed to March pay stubs, if you apply for extension say in August. Again, if you apply for extension in April with March paystubs (within 6 months of expiry), then there is a less possibility. But you cant rule that out if they ask for latest stubs in the potential RFE in the future. So its up to you.
Now I dont want to change my employer .
But my employer doent pay when I am on bench . So I may not having paystubs after March .
Will it cause any problem to H1 extention ?
Ofcourse, if H1-extension requires the last couple of pay checks, there is a possibility they would ask for the 'latest', as opposed to March pay stubs, if you apply for extension say in August. Again, if you apply for extension in April with March paystubs (within 6 months of expiry), then there is a less possibility. But you cant rule that out if they ask for latest stubs in the potential RFE in the future. So its up to you.
hot amigas_por_siempre_jpg.jpg
MYGCBY2010
07-27 03:03 PM
The job order will contain the job description. This will be in the Labor Application. Usually when a 140 is being applied, the employer will provide you the job order and tell you to ensure your experience letters are in line with the Job order.
You will need the 140 number. See if you can get it somehow. Since it belongs to the employer, I doubt you can get the number by calling USCIS.
The 485 is yours and you should get a receipt. With this receipt, you can invoke AC21 without any problems. You will not need copies of Labor or 140.
But to Invoke AC21 and for subsequent adjudication of 485 without issues, nature of the Job should be same or similiar. What are the options by which I could find my Job nature.. Since I don't have a labour copy or i-140 info.. Any inputs ?
You will need the 140 number. See if you can get it somehow. Since it belongs to the employer, I doubt you can get the number by calling USCIS.
The 485 is yours and you should get a receipt. With this receipt, you can invoke AC21 without any problems. You will not need copies of Labor or 140.
But to Invoke AC21 and for subsequent adjudication of 485 without issues, nature of the Job should be same or similiar. What are the options by which I could find my Job nature.. Since I don't have a labour copy or i-140 info.. Any inputs ?
house Biblia Amigos Por
I received my 140 and 485 denial letters on Mar 19th. The reason cited for the 140 denial letter was "effect of failure to respond to a RFE". I received the RFE on my 140 dated Feb 8th on Feb 15th and my law firm sent out the response to the RFE that reached TSC on Mar 11th as per the Fedex receipt.
What are my options going forth:
(1) File a MTR? should I file this myself or work with my law firm on this? What is the effort involved in filing the MTR as I understand from the denial letter that I have until Apr 14th to file the MTR?
(2)Is there any other means to communicate with TSC that my RFE response was received at TSC within the 33 day time limit and hence there is no basis for this denial?
(3) Re-file a new 140 petition?
Any inputs and other suggestions are appreciated
What are my options going forth:
(1) File a MTR? should I file this myself or work with my law firm on this? What is the effort involved in filing the MTR as I understand from the denial letter that I have until Apr 14th to file the MTR?
(2)Is there any other means to communicate with TSC that my RFE response was received at TSC within the 33 day time limit and hence there is no basis for this denial?
(3) Re-file a new 140 petition?
Any inputs and other suggestions are appreciated
tattoo 2010 amigos por siempre.
perm2gc
08-14 03:34 PM
Mr.Bush when you will think of US other than cubans and mexicans..:confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused: :confused:
pictures amigas por siempre.
don't worry.
The age determination for the purpose of aging out is done at the time of I-485 filing and not adjudication. You guys are safe!
They can't age out children just because they sit on an application for 5 years...
dresses amigas por siempre. para
I know it is a loss in priority date. But my point is: "does fighting with the lawyer, give him his time back?" In fact by that he is loosing his valuable time and energy further.
If there is "ANY" method to get his "LC" approved with the same priority date, I totally agree he should do that.
That is what I mean by "focus on your goal". If your goal is to fight with lawyer for a cause, just do it. You will at least feel happy that you did the right thing, whatever you felt right.
Also "you pay the lawyer to represent you and to do things for you". The "payment" is not for a 100% error-free service. It is always back on your shoulder to make sure the lawyer is doing the right thing. Many of you may not agree, but that is my view. It is just a service. Not an "error-free-guaranteed" service.
You must be a lawyer, the ambulance chasing kind. Try the same line of argument with your boss when the system (assuming you are a IT guy) that you built and deployed into production fails and you want more money to fix your errors.
The reason we engage a lawyer and not do the stuff ourselves is because we don't know enough of the (unnecessarily complex) US immigration law. The least thing the lawyer can do is review the form before submitting it to DOL.
No wonder with guys like you, like teli said, we are stuck in an absurdly long immigration queue.
To the original poster, file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) soon with the help of another lawyer if possible with an explanation of the error. If the mistake is genuine, DOL will reopen your case.
If there is "ANY" method to get his "LC" approved with the same priority date, I totally agree he should do that.
That is what I mean by "focus on your goal". If your goal is to fight with lawyer for a cause, just do it. You will at least feel happy that you did the right thing, whatever you felt right.
Also "you pay the lawyer to represent you and to do things for you". The "payment" is not for a 100% error-free service. It is always back on your shoulder to make sure the lawyer is doing the right thing. Many of you may not agree, but that is my view. It is just a service. Not an "error-free-guaranteed" service.
You must be a lawyer, the ambulance chasing kind. Try the same line of argument with your boss when the system (assuming you are a IT guy) that you built and deployed into production fails and you want more money to fix your errors.
The reason we engage a lawyer and not do the stuff ourselves is because we don't know enough of the (unnecessarily complex) US immigration law. The least thing the lawyer can do is review the form before submitting it to DOL.
No wonder with guys like you, like teli said, we are stuck in an absurdly long immigration queue.
To the original poster, file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) soon with the help of another lawyer if possible with an explanation of the error. If the mistake is genuine, DOL will reopen your case.
I will be happy with the following requirement (that is lower then the carpet).
Don't have to mantain status. That is, absence of pay checks is not required.
Don't have to mantain status. That is, absence of pay checks is not required.
Subscription Payment Sent (Unique Transaction ID #82G15598SR169690U)
In reference to: S-4UL2252729966384J
-cheers
kris
hairstyles amigas por siempre.
No comments:
Post a Comment