DareYouFireMe
03-09 03:52 PM
For the second I-140, He should have applied asking for the previous Priority date. I am not sure about this, but if there is a way to get previous Priority date of Dec-2002 on the EB2 (NEW I-140). Then s/he would be current (assuming India, China).
Document URL
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...22_091206R.pdf
PAGE 27
(1) Determining the Priority Date.
In general, if a petition is supported by an individual labor certification issued by DOL, the priority date is the earliest date upon which the labor certification application was filed with DOL. In those cases where the alien�s priority date is established by the filing of the labor certification, once the alien�s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation. This includes cases where a change of employer has occurred; however, the new employer must obtain a new labor certification if the classification requested requires a labor certification (see the section on successor in interest).
PAGE 28
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions. For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification
Document URL
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...22_091206R.pdf
PAGE 27
(1) Determining the Priority Date.
In general, if a petition is supported by an individual labor certification issued by DOL, the priority date is the earliest date upon which the labor certification application was filed with DOL. In those cases where the alien�s priority date is established by the filing of the labor certification, once the alien�s Form I-140 petition has been approved, the alien beneficiary retains his or her priority date as established by the filing of the labor certification for any future Form I-140 petitions, unless the previously approved Form I-140 petition has been revoked because of fraud or willful misrepresentation. This includes cases where a change of employer has occurred; however, the new employer must obtain a new labor certification if the classification requested requires a labor certification (see the section on successor in interest).
PAGE 28
If an alien is the beneficiary of two (or more) approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions, the priority of the earlier petition may be applied to all subsequently-filed employment-based petitions. For example:
Company A files a labor certification request on behalf of an alien ("Joe") as a janitor on January 10, 2003. The DOL issues the certification on March 20, 2003. Company A later files, and USCIS approves, a relating I-140 visa petition under the EB-3 category. On July 15, 2003, Joe files a second I-140 visa petition in his own behalf as a rocket scientist under the EB-1 category, which USCIS approves. Joe is entitled to use the January 10, 2003, priority date to apply for adjustment under either the EB-1 or the EB-3 classification
wallpaper may 21 judgment day billboard.
hopefulgc
09-16 10:22 PM
Please don't lose heart.. hang in there.
What you are experiencing has happened to a couple of people. But it sounds pretty counter-intuitive as to why they would deny substitution with for Eb2 labor?
Whatever the case, it sucks if it jeopardizes the primary Eb3 petition.
Are you able to locate any precedents to this?
Keep us updated here on this thread.
Hi,
Here is my case specifics:
--------------------------
1. Filed PERM EB3 LC - PD:01/2006 - Approved.
2. Filed EB3 I-140 using LC Sub from my company(company's policy..) - 06/2006 - was pending
3. Filed I-485 using pending LC Sub I-140 - 07/2007
4. Second I-140 Filed - 01/2008 based on my original PERM LC.
5. Second I-140 - Approved - 02/2008
6. Attorney sent AILA Request last month on my pending I-140. Got AILA Response as below
"Talked with the I-140 senior officer this afternoon about this case. We both reviewed the I-140 and the issue with the substitution of the labor cert. It appears that the individual that had the labor cert originally, adjusted off of it. Therefore, we can not substitute it again for the individual listed below. I believe that he has one I-140 already approved and will have to stay with that priority date. Have a good weekend."
7. Based on this, my attorney told me that my first I-140 will be denied soon; but she said that my AOS will continue to be active based on my approved I-140.
8. As my attorney said, Today, I got an CRIS email saying that my LC Sub I-140 is denied.
I have couple of questions now:
1. I am worried about my I-485 since my wofe is working on EAD. My understanding is that if your I-140 is denied, then your I-485 is denied too. But, my lawyer says that since I have an approved I140, they will use that and she is quoting the AILA Response email also. Is it true? or she is just convincing me with her lies.
2. I can continue to check the status of my I-485. But, how can I verify my AOS is now tied with my approved I-140? Interestingly, my AP Renewal is approved yesterday and notice mailed (a day before my I-140 denial)
Please let me know guys. Your help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
What you are experiencing has happened to a couple of people. But it sounds pretty counter-intuitive as to why they would deny substitution with for Eb2 labor?
Whatever the case, it sucks if it jeopardizes the primary Eb3 petition.
Are you able to locate any precedents to this?
Keep us updated here on this thread.
Hi,
Here is my case specifics:
--------------------------
1. Filed PERM EB3 LC - PD:01/2006 - Approved.
2. Filed EB3 I-140 using LC Sub from my company(company's policy..) - 06/2006 - was pending
3. Filed I-485 using pending LC Sub I-140 - 07/2007
4. Second I-140 Filed - 01/2008 based on my original PERM LC.
5. Second I-140 - Approved - 02/2008
6. Attorney sent AILA Request last month on my pending I-140. Got AILA Response as below
"Talked with the I-140 senior officer this afternoon about this case. We both reviewed the I-140 and the issue with the substitution of the labor cert. It appears that the individual that had the labor cert originally, adjusted off of it. Therefore, we can not substitute it again for the individual listed below. I believe that he has one I-140 already approved and will have to stay with that priority date. Have a good weekend."
7. Based on this, my attorney told me that my first I-140 will be denied soon; but she said that my AOS will continue to be active based on my approved I-140.
8. As my attorney said, Today, I got an CRIS email saying that my LC Sub I-140 is denied.
I have couple of questions now:
1. I am worried about my I-485 since my wofe is working on EAD. My understanding is that if your I-140 is denied, then your I-485 is denied too. But, my lawyer says that since I have an approved I140, they will use that and she is quoting the AILA Response email also. Is it true? or she is just convincing me with her lies.
2. I can continue to check the status of my I-485. But, how can I verify my AOS is now tied with my approved I-140? Interestingly, my AP Renewal is approved yesterday and notice mailed (a day before my I-140 denial)
Please let me know guys. Your help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
surabhi
10-22 01:29 PM
I filed second set on August 16 as a insurance policy . ANd sure enough, I didnt actually got the checks cashed until October 13th. I am glad I didnt spend sleepless nights specially after 90 day window.
The second set got cashed on October 15th.
Now I have 2 sets of receipt notices.
I have indicated in the cover letter when I filed the second I-485 mentioning that this is a second appliication. I indicated in the actual application as well.
As per the USCIS' SOP manual, they have to check if there is a duplicate filing and in case they find one, they will attach to the first application.
According to USCIS updates, they are doing minimal data entry to ensure faster receipting and hence it is possible that they didnt validate if there was an existing filiing.
This is different from "second I-485' which you will do if you and spouse claim each other as dependents. In this case, the application will go to review by a IO.
I didnt do stop check becuase I didnt want another set of issues and treat the second application as insurance fees . What else I could do.
Plan of Action:
I will write another letter with both receipt notices asking to merge the application. In the meanwhile, if I will attend both FP if I get them.
I will ask for refund on that application. If they dont, I understand that.
but I think overall application will not get affected since such scenario is part of USCIS Standard Operating Procedures.
The second set got cashed on October 15th.
Now I have 2 sets of receipt notices.
I have indicated in the cover letter when I filed the second I-485 mentioning that this is a second appliication. I indicated in the actual application as well.
As per the USCIS' SOP manual, they have to check if there is a duplicate filing and in case they find one, they will attach to the first application.
According to USCIS updates, they are doing minimal data entry to ensure faster receipting and hence it is possible that they didnt validate if there was an existing filiing.
This is different from "second I-485' which you will do if you and spouse claim each other as dependents. In this case, the application will go to review by a IO.
I didnt do stop check becuase I didnt want another set of issues and treat the second application as insurance fees . What else I could do.
Plan of Action:
I will write another letter with both receipt notices asking to merge the application. In the meanwhile, if I will attend both FP if I get them.
I will ask for refund on that application. If they dont, I understand that.
but I think overall application will not get affected since such scenario is part of USCIS Standard Operating Procedures.
2011 May 21, 2011: Judgement Day?
sanju
06-30 02:36 PM
Thanks babloo!!
I BELIEVE that we will all be fine. Just hang-in there, and do the best that we all can and must.
Guys and Gals,
It's all speculation... Wait and see... we will all be fine... if you have your papers ready then file it.......
I'am staying positive..... Want y'all to do it too....
All the best....
I BELIEVE that we will all be fine. Just hang-in there, and do the best that we all can and must.
Guys and Gals,
It's all speculation... Wait and see... we will all be fine... if you have your papers ready then file it.......
I'am staying positive..... Want y'all to do it too....
All the best....
more...
bobby
04-03 11:09 AM
I returned to the US last year after a vacation and while my current visa's expiration date is July 2007 the customs official would only stamp my I-94 & authorize entry until May 2007 when my passport expires. My lawyer has applied for our extension using copies of my passport which is expiring soon but she advised that USCIS would need a copy of the new passport with new expiry date before approving my extension. The lawyer says your passport has to have an expiry date after the date of expiration of your visa extension. I will get a new I-94 with my visa extension btw this extension is the 3 year extension as our I-140 is approved but we have not filed for adj. of status yet. PD 5/03 EB3 ROW
SunnySurya
07-17 12:44 PM
Any Idea, why the processing times have not been released yet?
more...
cool_desi_gc
08-10 11:15 AM
Guys please dont make such comments and scare everyone...There is no rule that that address shud match the address in ur 485 application.USCIS is not so dumb to look at the address on each of the check.No one ever in this country will ever validate the address on checks...no worries guys
2010 Judgment Day May 21 Billboard
TexDBoy
06-16 05:57 PM
If only Labour is approved and you change employer, you will lose it and have to start from the scrach. Only if your I-140 is approved and its more than six months, you can use the PD.
I am not sure about six months ... That is only when you file 485 and want to use AC21 to continue your GC process.
Once your I-140 is approved, then you lock the PD from that moment itself.
I am not sure about six months ... That is only when you file 485 and want to use AC21 to continue your GC process.
Once your I-140 is approved, then you lock the PD from that moment itself.
more...
traveldoc
09-30 07:16 AM
Ken,
First off priority mail could take about 5 days to reach and sounds like you are right about there now. Second, if you sent via priority mail with delivery confirmation the post office is responsible for it, contact them and try to locate the package. If you are not in a hurry for the AP I advice you to take this route. If you are in a hurry I suggest you send a second package in Express mail. Good luck with you AP.
First off priority mail could take about 5 days to reach and sounds like you are right about there now. Second, if you sent via priority mail with delivery confirmation the post office is responsible for it, contact them and try to locate the package. If you are not in a hurry for the AP I advice you to take this route. If you are in a hurry I suggest you send a second package in Express mail. Good luck with you AP.
hair Judgment Day billboards have
sobers
02-09 08:58 AM
Discussion about challenges in America�s immigration policies tends to focus on the millions of illegal immigrants. But the more pressing immigration problem facing the US today, writes Intel chairman Craig Barrett, is the dearth of high-skilled immigrants required to keep the US economy competitive. Due to tighter visa policies and a growth in opportunities elsewhere in the world, foreign students majoring in science and engineering at US universities are no longer staying to work after graduation in the large numbers that they once did. With the poor quality of science and math education at the primary and secondary levels in the US, the country cannot afford to lose any highly-skilled immigrants, particularly in key, technology-related disciplines. Along with across-the-board improvements in education, the US needs to find a way to attract enough new workers so that companies like Intel do not have to set up shop elsewhere.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
----------------------------------
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Craig Barrett
The Financial Times, 1 February 2006
America is experiencing a profound immigration crisis but it is not about the 11m illegal immigrants currently exciting the press and politicians in Washington. The real crisis is that the US is closing its doors to immigrants with degrees in science, maths and engineering � the �best and brightest� from around the world who flock to the country for its educational and employment opportunities. These foreign-born knowledge workers are critically important to maintaining America�s technological competitiveness.
This is not a new issue; the US has been partially dependent on foreign scientists and engineers to establish and maintain its technological leadership for several decades. After the second world war, an influx of German engineers bolstered our efforts in aviation and space research. During the 1960s and 1970s, a brain drain from western Europe supplemented our own production of talent. In the 1980s and 1990s, our ranks of scientists and engineers were swelled by Asian immigrants who came to study in our universities, then stayed to pursue professional careers.
The US simply does not produce enough home-grown graduates in engineering and the hard sciences to meet our needs. Even during the high-tech revolution of the past two decades, when demand for employees with technical degrees was exploding, the number of students majoring in engineering in the US declined. Currently more than half the graduate students in engineering in the US are foreign born � until now, many of them have stayed on to seek employment. But this trend is changing rapidly.
Because of security concerns and improved education in their own counties, it is increasingly difficult to get foreign students into our universities. Those who do complete their studies in the US are returning home in ever greater numbers because of visa issues or enhanced professional opportunities there. So while Congress debates how to stem the flood of illegal immigrants across our southern border, it is actually our policies on highly skilled immigration that may most negatively affect the American economy.
The US does have a specified process for granting admission or permanent residency to foreign engineers and scientists. The H1-B visa programme sets a cap � currently at 65,000 � on the number of foreigners allowed to enter and work each year. But the programme is oversubscribed because the cap is insufficient to meet the demands of the knowledge-based US economy.
The system does not grant automatic entry to all foreign students who study engineering and science at US universities. I have often said, only half in jest, that we should staple a green card to the diploma of every foreign student who graduates from an advanced technical degree programme here.
At a time when we need more science and technology professionals, it makes no sense to invite foreign students to study at our universities, educate them partially at taxpayer expense and then tell them to go home and take the jobs those talents will create home with them.
The current situation can only be described as a classic example of the law of unintended consequences. We need experienced and talented workers if our economy is to thrive. We have an immigration problem that remains intractable and, in an attempt to appear tough on illegal immigration, we over-control the employment-based legal immigration system. As a consequence, we keep many of the potentially most productive immigrants out of the country. If we had purposefully set out to design a system that would hobble our ability to be competitive, we could hardly do better than what we have today. Certainly in the post 9/11 world, security must always be a foremost concern. But that concern should not prevent us from having access to the highly skilled workers we need.
Meanwhile, when it comes to training a skilled, home-grown workforce, the US is rapidly being left in the dust.
A full half of China�s college graduates earn degrees in engineering, compared with only 5 per cent in the US. Even South Korea, with one-sixth the population of the US, graduates about the same number of engineers as American universities do. Part of this is due to the poor quality of our primary and secondary education, where US students typically fare poorly compared with their international counterparts in maths and science.
In a global, knowledge-based economy, businesses will naturally gravitate to locations with a ready supply of knowledge-based workers. Intel is a US-based company and we are proud of the fact that we have hired almost 10,000 new US employees in the past four years. But the hard economic fact is that if we cannot find or attract the workers we need here, the company � like every other business � will go where the talent is located.
We in the US have only two real choices: we can stand on the sidelines while countries such as India, China, and others dominate the game � and accept the consequent decline in our standard of living. Or we can decide to compete.
Deciding to compete means reforming the appalling state of primary and secondary education, where low expectations have become institutionalised, and urgently expanding science education in colleges and universities � much as we did in the 1950s after the Soviet launch of Sputnik gave our nation a needed wake-up call.
As a member of the National Academies Committee assigned by Congress to investigate this issue and propose solutions, I and the other members recommended that the government create 25,000 undergraduate and 5,000 graduate scholarships, each of $20,000 (�11,300), in technical fields, especially those determined to be in areas of urgent �national need�. Other recommendations included a tax credit for employers who make continuing education available for scientists and engineers, so that our workforce can keep pace with the rapid advance of scientific discovery, and a sustained national commitment to basic research.
But we all realised that even an effective national effort in this area would not produce results quickly enough. That is why deciding to compete also means opening doors wider to foreigners with the kind of technical knowledge our businesses need. At a minimum the US should vastly increase the number of permanent visas for highly educated foreigners, streamline the process for those already working here and allow foreign students in the hard sciences and engineering to move directly to permanent resident status. Any country that wants to remain competitive has to start competing for the best minds in the world. Without that we may be unable to maintain economic leadership in the 21st century.
more...
kirupa
10-11 04:25 AM
Thanks - fixed! :)
hot may 21 judgement day billboard. may 21st judgement day billboard. a May 21
vasired
08-15 03:21 PM
Notice were from Nebraska.Recieved on 8/13 for me and 8/14 for my wife,even though both were posted on same date..good they gave up appointment at same date & same time
more...
house may 21 judgement day billboard. may 21 judgement day billboard. the judgment
ncrtpMay2004
07-03 06:38 AM
Got appt notice (for 7th)
2 days later appt cancellation notice
5 days later got a new appt notice (for 22nd)
2 days later appt cancellation notice
5 days later got a new appt notice (for 22nd)
tattoo 21 May Judgement Day Billboard
anand2007
07-16 10:50 AM
I agree with you. I am also just waiting for them to revise to send my App. why can't they revise bulletin and take all applications filed in July. There is no logic whatsoever.
If they accept people who didn't listen to govt annoucement and sent their applications and reject those who sincerely listened and obeyed, well all hell will break loose.I will sue USCIS personally(not a class action suit) and even sell my house to pay the lawyer fees.:mad: wait a minute! i dont have a house....
Thats right.i dont have a house, i dont have a life coz i wa waiting for this damn green card...
my PD Oct 2003, EB3
I-140 approved like years ago(Atleast seems to me.)
If they accept people who didn't listen to govt annoucement and sent their applications and reject those who sincerely listened and obeyed, well all hell will break loose.I will sue USCIS personally(not a class action suit) and even sell my house to pay the lawyer fees.:mad: wait a minute! i dont have a house....
Thats right.i dont have a house, i dont have a life coz i wa waiting for this damn green card...
my PD Oct 2003, EB3
I-140 approved like years ago(Atleast seems to me.)
more...
pictures Judgement Day billboard in
sandy_anand
04-07 09:42 AM
I do not know them personally.. I came across those cases on T.. r. A. c. K. i. T. t. :)
Thanks :)
Thanks :)
dresses The World Could End on May
tonyHK12
12-07 06:13 PM
Not really .... My brother worked in India for 3 years and worked here in US for 5 years before moving back to India and he is earning good too.
Salary for any job depends on lot of factors. How one negotiates is a key factor.
Cool how did he find the job, did he go through a recruiter from here or did he first land there and then search for a job?
Salary for any job depends on lot of factors. How one negotiates is a key factor.
Cool how did he find the job, did he go through a recruiter from here or did he first land there and then search for a job?
more...
makeup Judgment Day is coming May 21,
averagedesi
09-14 10:58 AM
Here is something interesting
My wife got her EAD approved for 2 years, she is suppose to get her extension only for a year as on Sep 10 when they renewed her card the priority dates were current.
USCIS an organization that is above and beyond the laws of this country.
My wife got her EAD approved for 2 years, she is suppose to get her extension only for a year as on Sep 10 when they renewed her card the priority dates were current.
USCIS an organization that is above and beyond the laws of this country.
girlfriend Judgment Day 21 May 2011 in
help43
09-11 05:03 PM
i am applying for H1-B amendment before going to the stamping
is it a good step to handle the situation?
They said like you have been applied for a new H1-B, NOT for Change of status thats y u didnt got the I-94.
Please advise on these options....
is it a good step to handle the situation?
They said like you have been applied for a new H1-B, NOT for Change of status thats y u didnt got the I-94.
Please advise on these options....
hairstyles images Judgement day is May 21st. may 21 judgment day billboard. may 21
jay1ram2
11-23 02:19 PM
Well Said.
WeShallOvercome
07-20 12:09 PM
I applied for my labor in July and my PD is July 2007. If I get approved before August 17 then will I be able to apply for I140/485 before August 17th.
Yes, but you'll need hard copy of your labour certificate which takes 1-3 weeks to arrive. I suggest keep ALL other documents 100% ready to go and send the application the moment your LC arrives. If it does not arrive by 16th, include whatever proof you have of the LC approval (email nitification etc..) and send your application. you never know they may accept it and issue an RFE later..
Yes, but you'll need hard copy of your labour certificate which takes 1-3 weeks to arrive. I suggest keep ALL other documents 100% ready to go and send the application the moment your LC arrives. If it does not arrive by 16th, include whatever proof you have of the LC approval (email nitification etc..) and send your application. you never know they may accept it and issue an RFE later..
eb3retro
12-11 02:54 PM
Hi there
I am asking the same question. I too want to take a job as a BA since that role is what I currently have for the last 4 yrs.
Are there any other ways to make this possible?
one way i am thinking of doing is asking for a EVL from the new company with the same kind of job description. 10 years ago, all these laws (to be in the same job description was having some meaning , people used to get GCs in less than a year), but these days it takes anywhere between 5-7 years, and how can uscis expect someone to be in the same description working for 7 years. it just doesnt make sense when you want to be competitive in the market.
I am asking the same question. I too want to take a job as a BA since that role is what I currently have for the last 4 yrs.
Are there any other ways to make this possible?
one way i am thinking of doing is asking for a EVL from the new company with the same kind of job description. 10 years ago, all these laws (to be in the same job description was having some meaning , people used to get GCs in less than a year), but these days it takes anywhere between 5-7 years, and how can uscis expect someone to be in the same description working for 7 years. it just doesnt make sense when you want to be competitive in the market.
No comments:
Post a Comment