The7zen
03-24 12:30 PM
wanaparthy,
It will be easier for someone to help you if you fill your profile with right details.
-7zen
It will be easier for someone to help you if you fill your profile with right details.
-7zen
fromnaija
11-18 05:29 PM
Great job folks. Not only Ac21 issue, but if there is any other issue, please lodge a complaint with the Ombudsman's office.
I would also suggest that those who have had their I-485 denied due to changing employers should submit DHS Form 7001 to the Ombudsman's office.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_dhsform7001.pdf
I would also suggest that those who have had their I-485 denied due to changing employers should submit DHS Form 7001 to the Ombudsman's office.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/cisomb_dhsform7001.pdf
roseball
08-26 04:54 PM
Hi,
I looking for porting my approved EB3 labor and 140 to EB2. Here are my details:
My qualification: Diploma in electronics and communication Engg in India
(3 years diploma after 10th)
Years of experience: Since 1991 in IT (About 20 YRs)
Green card process: EB3 Approved labor and 140.
Situation: When I contacted one of the university in USA they informed me that I can
do the Masters instead of BS online degree.
My question1: Will I be eligible to file my EB2 if I do Masters without doing BS?
My question 2: Is MS from International Technological University (http://www.ITU.EDU) is accepted bu USCIS for Immigration purpose?
Thanks in advance
AFAIK, if the MS degree is from an US accredited institution and your new EB-2 job requires a MS degree, then yes, your new employer can start the EB-2 process for you. Once you have a US Masters, it doesn't matter what your earlier educational qualifications are. Key thing here is that your EB-2 job MUST require a Masters degree.
I looking for porting my approved EB3 labor and 140 to EB2. Here are my details:
My qualification: Diploma in electronics and communication Engg in India
(3 years diploma after 10th)
Years of experience: Since 1991 in IT (About 20 YRs)
Green card process: EB3 Approved labor and 140.
Situation: When I contacted one of the university in USA they informed me that I can
do the Masters instead of BS online degree.
My question1: Will I be eligible to file my EB2 if I do Masters without doing BS?
My question 2: Is MS from International Technological University (http://www.ITU.EDU) is accepted bu USCIS for Immigration purpose?
Thanks in advance
AFAIK, if the MS degree is from an US accredited institution and your new EB-2 job requires a MS degree, then yes, your new employer can start the EB-2 process for you. Once you have a US Masters, it doesn't matter what your earlier educational qualifications are. Key thing here is that your EB-2 job MUST require a Masters degree.
sriharirag
07-16 10:47 AM
Here is the full article.
>>>>>>>>>>>
U.S. to Reverse
Some Denials
Of Work Visas
By MIRIAM JORDAN
July 16, 2007; Page A2
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
Tens of thousands of skilled workers, many of them in the U.S. on temporary H1B visas, responded to an official invitation, in a June 12 "visa bulletin" issued by the State Department, to take the final step in July toward attaining U.S. permanent residency. That sent workers, their families and their employers scrambling to compile paperwork and meet other requirements such as medical exams. Normally, eligible employment-sponsored workers wait years for their numbers to be called.
Then, July 2, as applications poured into processing centers, the State Department announced in a bulletin "update" that no employment-based immigrant visas were left for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 because of "sudden backlog reduction" by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. USCIS announced it would reject applications that it received.
People familiar with the situation say that officials are working out the final details of a plan that would at least partially rectify the problem.
It isn't clear, however, whether the immigration agency will now accept all applications and process them later, accept only those that have arrived, or come up with some other approach.
The July 2 decision provoked outrage among immigration lawyers, foreign workers and their employers. July 5, Microsoft Corp. announced that it plans soon to open a software-development center in Vancouver, Canada, with a view to "recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S." The announcement sent a clear signal to the government of the high-tech industry's dissatisfaction with the visa situation.
July 6, a large Chicago immigration law firm filed a lawsuit seeking class-action status against the government. Separately, the American Immigration Law Foundation, a nonprofit group, said it will file this week its own suit seeking class-action status.
Meanwhile, disgruntled green-card applicants cried foul, saying they had been unfairly treated by the government despite playing by the rules.
July 10, they registered their disappointment at the immigration system by dispatching hundreds of flower bouquets to the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services chief Emilio Gonzalez.
The next day, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), whose district includes Silicon Valley, sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, emails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation" leading to the immigration system's about-face July 2.
The problem may have resulted from a communications breakdown between the State Department, which issues a monthly bulletin detailing who is eligible to file a green-card application, and USCIS, which processes the visa applications. The State Department has said that its role is to ensure that every visa slot available is used. In the past, however, the immigration agency has failed to use all of the slots.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
U.S. to Reverse
Some Denials
Of Work Visas
By MIRIAM JORDAN
July 16, 2007; Page A2
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
Tens of thousands of skilled workers, many of them in the U.S. on temporary H1B visas, responded to an official invitation, in a June 12 "visa bulletin" issued by the State Department, to take the final step in July toward attaining U.S. permanent residency. That sent workers, their families and their employers scrambling to compile paperwork and meet other requirements such as medical exams. Normally, eligible employment-sponsored workers wait years for their numbers to be called.
Then, July 2, as applications poured into processing centers, the State Department announced in a bulletin "update" that no employment-based immigrant visas were left for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 because of "sudden backlog reduction" by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. USCIS announced it would reject applications that it received.
People familiar with the situation say that officials are working out the final details of a plan that would at least partially rectify the problem.
It isn't clear, however, whether the immigration agency will now accept all applications and process them later, accept only those that have arrived, or come up with some other approach.
The July 2 decision provoked outrage among immigration lawyers, foreign workers and their employers. July 5, Microsoft Corp. announced that it plans soon to open a software-development center in Vancouver, Canada, with a view to "recruit and retain highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S." The announcement sent a clear signal to the government of the high-tech industry's dissatisfaction with the visa situation.
July 6, a large Chicago immigration law firm filed a lawsuit seeking class-action status against the government. Separately, the American Immigration Law Foundation, a nonprofit group, said it will file this week its own suit seeking class-action status.
Meanwhile, disgruntled green-card applicants cried foul, saying they had been unfairly treated by the government despite playing by the rules.
July 10, they registered their disappointment at the immigration system by dispatching hundreds of flower bouquets to the office of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services chief Emilio Gonzalez.
The next day, Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), whose district includes Silicon Valley, sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, emails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation" leading to the immigration system's about-face July 2.
The problem may have resulted from a communications breakdown between the State Department, which issues a monthly bulletin detailing who is eligible to file a green-card application, and USCIS, which processes the visa applications. The State Department has said that its role is to ensure that every visa slot available is used. In the past, however, the immigration agency has failed to use all of the slots.
Write to Miriam Jordan at miriam.jordan@wsj.com
more...
hopefulgc
09-12 12:45 PM
Lets start IV wiki then....
and people here who are going through the process can contribute to it first hand.... coupled with moderation from admins.
What say IVians?
I just saw this in latest Murthy bulletin about USCIS using Wikipedia and other internet based sources to gather information. This is serious news.
RFEs or Denials May Not Be Based on Wikipedia Information
The USCIS has been known to use an ever-growing number of publicly available sources, including internet sources such as Wikipedia. AILA members have been receiving denials based on the USCIS's use of information found on Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia to which anyone in the world may contribute information. As such, it should not be considered an objective or completely reliable source of information. SCOPS advised that it has notified the service centers and there should not be additional RFEs or denials based upon Wikipedia.
It should be noted that, as a corollary, applicants and petitioners should not try to use Wikipedia as support for their filings or arguments, since it has been deemed an unreliable source.
Link http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html
and people here who are going through the process can contribute to it first hand.... coupled with moderation from admins.
What say IVians?
I just saw this in latest Murthy bulletin about USCIS using Wikipedia and other internet based sources to gather information. This is serious news.
RFEs or Denials May Not Be Based on Wikipedia Information
The USCIS has been known to use an ever-growing number of publicly available sources, including internet sources such as Wikipedia. AILA members have been receiving denials based on the USCIS's use of information found on Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia to which anyone in the world may contribute information. As such, it should not be considered an objective or completely reliable source of information. SCOPS advised that it has notified the service centers and there should not be additional RFEs or denials based upon Wikipedia.
It should be noted that, as a corollary, applicants and petitioners should not try to use Wikipedia as support for their filings or arguments, since it has been deemed an unreliable source.
Link http://www.murthy.com/bulletin.html
gcformeornot
02-03 02:14 PM
AILA/CBP Liaison Practice Alert : H-1B Admissions at Newark, NJ Airport
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
more...
pandu_hawaldar
05-10 10:07 AM
applies to me too, as I came in this thread to read this post :D
Thanks. I have fixed the typo.
.
Thanks. I have fixed the typo.
.
anjans
07-09 09:46 PM
thanks
more...
rbharol
08-19 02:39 AM
I could find this useful. I am in my 6th year expiring June 1, 2007. My employers are just about to file LC, so I guess being able to process I140 by premium will enable me file for a three year extension before my current stay expires.
May be they did it for those who are in 6th year and did not file LC 365 day before 6 year expiry.. Now they can file LC in perm get approval fast and then get Premium 140 to get 3 year extension on H1B.
May be they did it for those who are in 6th year and did not file LC 365 day before 6 year expiry.. Now they can file LC in perm get approval fast and then get Premium 140 to get 3 year extension on H1B.
yabadaba
07-18 09:58 AM
its uscis...they can do anything...logically they should have been returned by now.. but logic does not exist out there...we may think wherever there is life there is logic...but that only exists in logiclife. (yea PJ i know)
more...
retropain
08-18 02:05 PM
what do u mean go back in line? theyare supposed to be processed like that (LC processing is a different creature though)
sledge_hammer
06-09 05:37 PM
Write a letter to the employer explaining that you need to get paid. Attach a copy of the timesheets and all other documets for proof. Send this via registered mail. Give him some time to respond, if he doesn't, then file a complaint with DOL.
Dear Viewers
Could anyone please advice me on how to claim the unpaid salary from the previous employers.
I was working for a company based in Michigan run by an Indian. This person did not pay me my last month salary. He does not pick up his phone or respond to my email. I have all the proof that my client has paid him the money for which I worked but he continue to ignore my request. This guy owes me around 5000 dollars.
Any piece of advice would be of great help.
Dear Viewers
Could anyone please advice me on how to claim the unpaid salary from the previous employers.
I was working for a company based in Michigan run by an Indian. This person did not pay me my last month salary. He does not pick up his phone or respond to my email. I have all the proof that my client has paid him the money for which I worked but he continue to ignore my request. This guy owes me around 5000 dollars.
Any piece of advice would be of great help.
more...
langagadu
07-31 09:34 PM
Totally confusing story. I am like Ram Gopal Varma (movie director), I don't know the end.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/348927-post14.html
Your situation may be real situation but the way you are describing is so confusing in the 2 threads.
Hello All,
I am here in Australia on a short visit with a recently approved United States Conditional GC.Before my interview for GC in July09,I had already received my visit visa ,Single entry to Australia with restrictions on entry and exit dates..(I couldnot enter Australia after Aug1st and I have to return to US before Oct23'09)/..
Now ,my concern is if I can travel to India and back to Australia .Does the single entry restrcition still apply for me ..even with a GC?....(at the Sydney airport,the IO stamped on my visit visa' Not valid for Further travel'..does that mean I cannot travel outside Australia and return?..I need to visit India..in Sept.but I am worried how ?
please advsie..
thank you
Tina
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/348927-post14.html
Your situation may be real situation but the way you are describing is so confusing in the 2 threads.
Hello All,
I am here in Australia on a short visit with a recently approved United States Conditional GC.Before my interview for GC in July09,I had already received my visit visa ,Single entry to Australia with restrictions on entry and exit dates..(I couldnot enter Australia after Aug1st and I have to return to US before Oct23'09)/..
Now ,my concern is if I can travel to India and back to Australia .Does the single entry restrcition still apply for me ..even with a GC?....(at the Sydney airport,the IO stamped on my visit visa' Not valid for Further travel'..does that mean I cannot travel outside Australia and return?..I need to visit India..in Sept.but I am worried how ?
please advsie..
thank you
Tina
GCNirvana007
08-22 09:39 AM
Anyone still waiting for approval whose PD is within October 2003 EB2?
Well no one yet, thats a good sign
Well no one yet, thats a good sign
more...
WeldonSprings
10-14 12:30 PM
I have a few questions on using AP-
1. I have a valid AP till Jan. 04, 2009. I have applied for a new AP in Sept. last week. Can I travel on my current AP which is valid till Jan. 04, 2009 or will I have any problems with I-485, since I cannot travel on current AP, because I have applied for a new one.
2. Next, suppose I travel on my valid AP (the one till Jan. 04, 2009) in November first week and return on Dec. 10, 2008, what date will I get I-84 till? Will I get it till Dec. 09, 2009 or till Jan. 04, 2008. Ofcourse, the officer will stamp 'Parolee' on I-94, but till what date?
3. Have anyone had any bad experience, when boarding airlines at Indian airports, particularly Mumbai- Do they understand what AP documentation is, in lieu of the normal visa on passport?
Please let me know. Thanks in advance.
Renew you AP before Feb 25, 2009. You are usually paroled upto an year from the date of entry.
Yes you can file for AP your self, its as easy as filling out the form.
The stamps having nothing to do with the renewal.
1. I have a valid AP till Jan. 04, 2009. I have applied for a new AP in Sept. last week. Can I travel on my current AP which is valid till Jan. 04, 2009 or will I have any problems with I-485, since I cannot travel on current AP, because I have applied for a new one.
2. Next, suppose I travel on my valid AP (the one till Jan. 04, 2009) in November first week and return on Dec. 10, 2008, what date will I get I-84 till? Will I get it till Dec. 09, 2009 or till Jan. 04, 2008. Ofcourse, the officer will stamp 'Parolee' on I-94, but till what date?
3. Have anyone had any bad experience, when boarding airlines at Indian airports, particularly Mumbai- Do they understand what AP documentation is, in lieu of the normal visa on passport?
Please let me know. Thanks in advance.
Renew you AP before Feb 25, 2009. You are usually paroled upto an year from the date of entry.
Yes you can file for AP your self, its as easy as filling out the form.
The stamps having nothing to do with the renewal.
beavis
02-14 10:09 PM
I always book tickets for my mom on travelocity.co.in using my US credit card. works perfectly and they have great prices.
more...
johnamit
06-30 08:49 AM
If I were you, I would decide office by Receipt Number EAC/LIN
a_yaja
04-18 09:32 AM
if u like to pay for it, there's already an option for u: EB5. price tag: $500K minimum!
Only in under-developed areas. For a developed area, it is $1 million.
Only in under-developed areas. For a developed area, it is $1 million.
sbmallik
06-06 08:12 PM
By now perhaps the orginal poster is travelling to India. He can return to US on an unexpired H-1 visa with new H-1B documents. But it is difficult to get a H-4 stamp unless the new H-1 petition is approved.
sasidhar79
07-01 01:53 PM
No matter what , no other country has balls or guts to accept huge number of immigrants like US does, yes do you huge volume it is slow but the govt. is more aware of the fact that high skilled immigrants add to the benefit of their country compared to Canada (conservatives in liberal skin- because they have undocumented race based limitation), Britian(high skilled immigrants are usually colored therefore anything colored is considered not British) and Australia (how can a decent high skilled immigrant be accepted by bunch of outback thugs).
Please observe all these countries' immigration policies in this day of economic downturn, all of them are actively shutting their doors except USA (comparatively). I think USA is more closer for me as a home after India, I got misled by Canada but after what happened in their Alberta Province's AINP program for H1b holders I realised that Canadian pasture is really not green it is just an illusion.
thank you
Please observe all these countries' immigration policies in this day of economic downturn, all of them are actively shutting their doors except USA (comparatively). I think USA is more closer for me as a home after India, I got misled by Canada but after what happened in their Alberta Province's AINP program for H1b holders I realised that Canadian pasture is really not green it is just an illusion.
thank you
chanduv23
07-31 03:52 PM
Last week, I submitted my documents to my lawyer but until now I haven't received any confirmation from my employer yet if my application has been filed already. We are not allowed to contact our lawyer directly so I'm just relying on my employer about this. I'm quite concerned coz there's no way for me to find out if they have filed it or not.
Is there a way? Please help me please. Thank you
485 is your petition and does not have anything confidential about your company, so legally your employer should not cut ur access to lawyer.
Labor and 140, it is undeerstandable for employer - lawyer protocol, but 485 that must not be the case.
Contact your lawyer, nothing wrong in asking for reciept notice. But remember, I am a third person and don't know about your employer and lawyer and how they are. So do it at your discretion
Is there a way? Please help me please. Thank you
485 is your petition and does not have anything confidential about your company, so legally your employer should not cut ur access to lawyer.
Labor and 140, it is undeerstandable for employer - lawyer protocol, but 485 that must not be the case.
Contact your lawyer, nothing wrong in asking for reciept notice. But remember, I am a third person and don't know about your employer and lawyer and how they are. So do it at your discretion
![[Valid RSS]](valid-rss-rogers.png "Validate my RSS feed")
No comments:
Post a Comment