rahulpatel
08-14 04:26 PM
Guys, thanks very much for your kind advices, but I already took the sufficient steps to ensure my H1 safety.
The only thing I am concerned here, is in regards my money--it being hard earned (it is not smaller amount, but nearly 8K!), and my chances of winning my case with DOL/Courts.
I already threatened my employer with the DOL/Court claim, but the guy may be over-stupid or over-reckless, he is just not bothering about this issue. So i want to really know what my chances are, on winning it? Because even if a paper asks me to wait for vendor pay, it can never mean months and years long,.... can it????
The only thing I am concerned here, is in regards my money--it being hard earned (it is not smaller amount, but nearly 8K!), and my chances of winning my case with DOL/Courts.
I already threatened my employer with the DOL/Court claim, but the guy may be over-stupid or over-reckless, he is just not bothering about this issue. So i want to really know what my chances are, on winning it? Because even if a paper asks me to wait for vendor pay, it can never mean months and years long,.... can it????
wallpaper died in a car accident in
sunilsj
01-21 10:43 AM
I wouldn't make the assumption that this is only happening to consulting cases. I know example where a full-time non-consulting candidate has been held up. Be careful.
GreenMe
01-21 01:47 PM
My wife and I work for Consulting firm. We both had to travel to India for Visa Stamping.
My wife appeared on 4th Dec 2010. The Consular asked all regular work questions to her and then issued her a blue 221(g) form asking for additional documents from employer. The documents asked were Employer tax returns, each state tax returns, employee list with their salaries and position.
My wife went to Mumbai Consulate again on 17th Jan with all additional documents. To our surprise she was interviewed same day by the same Consular and issued a visa. Typically in the past, the consulate would take the paper and would ask the candidate to wait for the email from consulate.
I appeared for my Visa interview on 23rd Dec and was issued yellow 22(g) form without checking any of my documents. I was asked how I am working on 7th year of my H1 and then issued a yellow form to verify my details. I was told to wait for email from consulate. Luckily I received email on 3rd business day. Typically these cases take anywhere from1 to 3 months.
At VFS center I met 3 more people who received yellow 221(g) and got reply from consulate with 2-3 business days.
My observation is that the Mumbai consulate was issuing 221(g)s to many folks. And this is not just limited to IT consultants but also affects Fulltime non-IT folks too. One of my friend from Manufacturing received yellow 221(g) last month but got email from consulate after 10 business days.
So to conclude, I think Mumbai consulate is issuing these 221(g)s a lot but at the same time the turn around time is also quick.
My wife appeared on 4th Dec 2010. The Consular asked all regular work questions to her and then issued her a blue 221(g) form asking for additional documents from employer. The documents asked were Employer tax returns, each state tax returns, employee list with their salaries and position.
My wife went to Mumbai Consulate again on 17th Jan with all additional documents. To our surprise she was interviewed same day by the same Consular and issued a visa. Typically in the past, the consulate would take the paper and would ask the candidate to wait for the email from consulate.
I appeared for my Visa interview on 23rd Dec and was issued yellow 22(g) form without checking any of my documents. I was asked how I am working on 7th year of my H1 and then issued a yellow form to verify my details. I was told to wait for email from consulate. Luckily I received email on 3rd business day. Typically these cases take anywhere from1 to 3 months.
At VFS center I met 3 more people who received yellow 221(g) and got reply from consulate with 2-3 business days.
My observation is that the Mumbai consulate was issuing 221(g)s to many folks. And this is not just limited to IT consultants but also affects Fulltime non-IT folks too. One of my friend from Manufacturing received yellow 221(g) last month but got email from consulate after 10 business days.
So to conclude, I think Mumbai consulate is issuing these 221(g)s a lot but at the same time the turn around time is also quick.
2011 princess diana car crash chi.
HereIComeGC
03-25 02:58 PM
Has anyone gone to Vancouver for H1B stamping? Please share your experience and any pointers. It will be a great help.
Also, I found this on Vancouver consolate website:
"Passports and visas will be returned to the applicants with Canadian addresses by Canada Post, generally within three to five business days after the visa is approved. In person pick up will be available only in a legitimate emergency (as determined by the Consulate). "
This is disconcerting. I do not have luxary to wait 3-5 days to get my stamped passport via mail. Is this a standard process? Will they allow in-person pick up the same day?
Thank you.
Also, I found this on Vancouver consolate website:
"Passports and visas will be returned to the applicants with Canadian addresses by Canada Post, generally within three to five business days after the visa is approved. In person pick up will be available only in a legitimate emergency (as determined by the Consulate). "
This is disconcerting. I do not have luxary to wait 3-5 days to get my stamped passport via mail. Is this a standard process? Will they allow in-person pick up the same day?
Thank you.
more...
a_yaja
09-14 01:17 PM
bc_rp,
Thanks for your reply.
For some reason even I just received the LC approval, the company attorney mention that the visa number is not available yet so that he can apply for I-140 and I-485 together. As I understand the visa number is the PD?
Also what you mentioned is that there is no point of apply for I-140 now to port the PD to a new filing case because the PD is always current? Is that when you meant.
Thanks
Are you sure that you are EB2 and not EB3? EB3 is not current for ROW (which is your chargeability). If you are EB2, then I am not sure why your attorney did not file I-140 & I-485 together (but since you mentioned you used premium processing - maybe you cannot apply for I-485 till I-140 is approved - I am not sure - just guessing here).
You really do not need to worry about PD porting if your new I-140 is going to be applied under EB2 category. EB2 is current for ROW. You can take a look at the link provided by bc_rp.
Thanks for your reply.
For some reason even I just received the LC approval, the company attorney mention that the visa number is not available yet so that he can apply for I-140 and I-485 together. As I understand the visa number is the PD?
Also what you mentioned is that there is no point of apply for I-140 now to port the PD to a new filing case because the PD is always current? Is that when you meant.
Thanks
Are you sure that you are EB2 and not EB3? EB3 is not current for ROW (which is your chargeability). If you are EB2, then I am not sure why your attorney did not file I-140 & I-485 together (but since you mentioned you used premium processing - maybe you cannot apply for I-485 till I-140 is approved - I am not sure - just guessing here).
You really do not need to worry about PD porting if your new I-140 is going to be applied under EB2 category. EB2 is current for ROW. You can take a look at the link provided by bc_rp.
Dakshini R. Sen
06-25 11:12 PM
My H1 filed & approved thorugh company A from October 2004.
H1 then transferred to company B & approved from Nov 2005.
My GC process (EB3 Category) started & labor filed through company C for future job in Feb 2006. Labor approved & I-140 filed in June 2006. RFE received in April 2007 & documents received by INS in May 2007. SINCE THEN I-140 is pending... I-485 & EAD filed in July fiasco. EAD approved and renewed once. Valid until september 2010.
My H1 extension through company B denied in Jan 2009 (H1 expired in september 2008). MTR filed in Feb 2009, still pending. This made my EAD active as I have continued working for company B.
Another H1 filed through company C (GC sponsoring company) in April 2009 and RFE notice dated 23rd June, 2009 yet to be received.
In the process of filing 2nd labor through Comapny C ( same company), but this time under EB2 category.
At this point, my questions are:
1) Since my new H1 is through my GC sponsoring company, will RFE for H1 impact old GC process & new GC process?
2) Is my old pending I-140 eligible for premium processing since it is stuck for almost 3 years now? If yes, is it worth doing it?
The reason I want to get my old I-140 to be approved so that I can retain my old priority date.
Experts please share some knwoledge and suggest the steps best for my situation....Am really stressed out...
Thank You in advance...
The RFE on the H1 will not have a negative effect on the GC as long as the employer and the job offer are legitimate. Yes, you can premium process your I-140. Effective June 29, 2009, USCIS will resume Premium Processing Service for I-140 forms.
Dakshini R. Sen,
Attorney at Law
212-242-1677
713-278-1677
H1 then transferred to company B & approved from Nov 2005.
My GC process (EB3 Category) started & labor filed through company C for future job in Feb 2006. Labor approved & I-140 filed in June 2006. RFE received in April 2007 & documents received by INS in May 2007. SINCE THEN I-140 is pending... I-485 & EAD filed in July fiasco. EAD approved and renewed once. Valid until september 2010.
My H1 extension through company B denied in Jan 2009 (H1 expired in september 2008). MTR filed in Feb 2009, still pending. This made my EAD active as I have continued working for company B.
Another H1 filed through company C (GC sponsoring company) in April 2009 and RFE notice dated 23rd June, 2009 yet to be received.
In the process of filing 2nd labor through Comapny C ( same company), but this time under EB2 category.
At this point, my questions are:
1) Since my new H1 is through my GC sponsoring company, will RFE for H1 impact old GC process & new GC process?
2) Is my old pending I-140 eligible for premium processing since it is stuck for almost 3 years now? If yes, is it worth doing it?
The reason I want to get my old I-140 to be approved so that I can retain my old priority date.
Experts please share some knwoledge and suggest the steps best for my situation....Am really stressed out...
Thank You in advance...
The RFE on the H1 will not have a negative effect on the GC as long as the employer and the job offer are legitimate. Yes, you can premium process your I-140. Effective June 29, 2009, USCIS will resume Premium Processing Service for I-140 forms.
Dakshini R. Sen,
Attorney at Law
212-242-1677
713-278-1677
more...
Trinity79
04-08 05:00 PM
May 2011 Bulletin is out
Employment- Based Category
INDIA EB2 July 2006 (from May 2006)
http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5424.html[/IMG]
I received an email from NVC on Mar 31st with invoice of 794$. My lawyer says that means nothing to me if I don't go for Consulate Processing. But dont they know when they send the email that we didn't opt for CP in I-140. I am confused.
For those of you who received the letter from NVC are you EB2?
Employment- Based Category
INDIA EB2 July 2006 (from May 2006)
http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_5424.html[/IMG]
I received an email from NVC on Mar 31st with invoice of 794$. My lawyer says that means nothing to me if I don't go for Consulate Processing. But dont they know when they send the email that we didn't opt for CP in I-140. I am confused.
For those of you who received the letter from NVC are you EB2?
2010 princess diana car crash.
.jpg "princess diana car crash chi.")
imm_pro
05-20 01:13 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26605
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
looks like the Agjobs amendment tagged to this bill is drawing lot of attention and negative publicity..
This is why we keep close watch on Congress. In a bipartisan effort accomplished quickly and virtually under the table, Sens. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) -- in Senate Appropriations markup of the War Supplemental bill -- obtained approval of an amendment that would create an amnesty for illegal alien farm workers. The measure, called the Emergency Agriculture Relief Act, was added to the War Supplemental bill in a 17-12 vote last Thursday.
Known as the AgJob amendment, the Feinstein-Craig measure revived instantaneously the controversy that caused conservatives to lash out at the White House and Congress last summer.
The measure would grant temporary legal status to 1.35 million illegal immigrants and their families currently working in the agricultural field. The legislation was passed out of committee at the request of agribusiness interests who have been insisting that they need illegal aliens to harvest crops and run horse shows. The legislation is nothing less than �comprehensive immigration reform� on a smaller scale.
What supporters of the amendment are calling �emergency� and �temporary�, opponents have labeled an �amnesty visa.� Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV) said he considered the amendment amnesty and that �all these immigration issues should be addressed through the regular order."
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) opposes the amendment and said he will be working to remove it from the supplemental bill.
�Instead of ensuring that American troops are provided with the tools and resources that they need to protect our homeland, some in the Senate have instead chosen to jeopardize this funding by inserting provisions that are -- at best -- counterproductive to the efforts of our military members,� said Vitter in a press release.
According to Feinstein, the legislation is supported by the American Farm Bureau, the United Farm Workers, and other similar organizations but this is likely because it allows those employers to continue paying excessively low wages.
Feinstein assured the Appropriations Committee that the bill was not an amnesty because it requires the individuals work at least 100 days a year in the agricultural industry for the next five years.
�It is an emergency agricultural worker bill, which will give protected status to those workers who have worked in agriculture within the last 48 months,� she said, also noting that the U.S. would lose $5-9 billion to foreign competition without it.
Those are the same arguments that we heard last summer. In truth, Feinstein-Craig DOES provide amnesty for an unknown number of illegal workers. It provides, as the Bush-McCain-Kennedy bill did, a path to citizenship for some illegal aliens.
The amendment will go through the Senate this week as they consider the Iraq spending bill as a whole. At this writing, it isn�t clear that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will bring the measure to the floor for a vote.
NumbersUSA, an organization fighting illegal immigration, called the amendment �outrageous� and urged constituents to contact their political leaders. They noted that because families can also obtain temporary legal status through the amendment, it could reach almost 3 million people.
�The most important point to stress is that there is no need for an amnesty to provide growers with workers�there already is an H-2A foreign agricultural worker program that provides growers with an unlimited number of temporary workers if the growers agree to pay a decent wage and ensure that they go home at the end of the season,� said NumbersUSA news release.
Some farming organizations, like the Northwest Growers Association, not only support the measure but don�t think it does enough. They claim the AgJobs amendment doesn�t do enough for illegal aliens because it includes an �unrealistic visa cap.�
But the H-2A visa program exists and works without a cap. While Craig and others claim �oranges are rotting� on trees and needs illegal aliens to tend to our agriculture, places like the North Carolina Grower�s Association (NCGA, spotlighted on Michelle Malkin�s blog), oppose the amendment and have fared well with H-2A. NCGA utilizes H-2A to its fullest capacity as other agricultural organizations do not.
Additionally, AgJobs would maximize H-2B visas (lower skill, non-agricultural seasonal workers) and push an influx of more illegal immigrants, which clashes with what the American people want. They demonstrated their disapproval of amnesty proposals last year by a bipartisan grassroots effort to kill the immigration reform bill of 2007.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md) also slipped in an amendment supporting illegal immigrants in the supplemental bill. Mikulski hopes to extend a program for temporary workers to re-enter the country without being subject to the limits on H2B visas. In a Congress Daily article, she said, "If you like Maryland crabs, vote for this amendment.�
"It seems that the members of the Senate Appropriations Committee love our troops�but for entirely different reasons: they provide convenient cover for passing special interest legislation to benefit illegal aliens and powerful business lobbies," wrote Ira Mehlman, Media Director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) in an opinion piece yesterday.
Mehlman also reported that Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) added a provision that would include 218,000 visas for skilled foreign workers. Part of the problem is this: Right now, America�s population is 300 million. At the rate we are going with illegal immigrants (sped up by amendments like these), the US Census Bureau estimates the population will be 450 million by 2050. If a Democrat, entitlement-oriented government sinks its teeth in, taxes will be higher than ever and freedom will be in jeopardy.
The Senate will begin debate on the supplemental bill tomorrow and is likely to vote on it before the end of the week. Some Republican senators -- including Alabama�s Jeff Sessions and others -- are working hard to expunge the illegal alien amnesty provisions. The only thing that may save the day is that the Democrats are including many of the antiwar measures that the president has vetoed in previous bills. If the bill passes, it�s likely to be vetoed.
And Congress will be back to ground zero after Memorial Day.
more...
donelson
January 7th, 2005, 03:28 PM
I picked up the 105 Micro Nikkor about a month ago to use with my D100, and while I haven't taken a lot of pictures with it, yet, I've been happy with the ones I have taken. I did quite a bit of research before I bought it and determined that this would be a little better for my needs than the 60mm. Hope this helps.
Don :)
I take macro photographs of gems and jewelry to be sold on the Internet. Currently, I use a coolpix 5000 and get some pretty good photos from it. I use a light box and different light sources (fluorescent & incandescent) to capture color and color-changes in the gems.
I just bought a d70 and now need a good macro lens for it. I tried the promaster 100mm macro (I think it is the vivitar lens) and it didn't work to well for me. My 1:1 macro images are all under exposed and not as clear as I have seen. They are actually blurry when blown up 100% on my monitor. I use a good tripod and stopped down to f22 to increase depth of field. If I pull back a bit, the images get better, but then I don't have the magnification I need.
I take the photos on extra white laser printer paper and most of the time, use indirect 5000K fluorescent lighting in a light box. I don't understand why my 1:1 photos seem to be underexposed. The white paper looks gray and the gem is dark and dull. Photos taken with my coolpix 5000 look great. The background is white, and the gems are lively.
After my disappointment with the cheap promaster lens, I made the decision to purchase the Nikon 105 Micro, but when I called to order it (from expresscamera.com), they asked me why I was purchasing a 35mm lens for my digital camera. They suggested the Sigma 105mm EX DG lens and wanted to sell it to me for $650. They said that this sigma lens was better than the Nikon for digital cameras and that the Nikon would also take underexposed photos. This could be that they just didn�t want to sell me the Nikon lens for $500 and wanted to sell me a $400 sigma lens for $650.:mad:
I need a lens that will allow me to blow the photos up to 100% on my monitor and they will be clear and the gem needs to look like a gem and not a dark crystal.
Don :)
I take macro photographs of gems and jewelry to be sold on the Internet. Currently, I use a coolpix 5000 and get some pretty good photos from it. I use a light box and different light sources (fluorescent & incandescent) to capture color and color-changes in the gems.
I just bought a d70 and now need a good macro lens for it. I tried the promaster 100mm macro (I think it is the vivitar lens) and it didn't work to well for me. My 1:1 macro images are all under exposed and not as clear as I have seen. They are actually blurry when blown up 100% on my monitor. I use a good tripod and stopped down to f22 to increase depth of field. If I pull back a bit, the images get better, but then I don't have the magnification I need.
I take the photos on extra white laser printer paper and most of the time, use indirect 5000K fluorescent lighting in a light box. I don't understand why my 1:1 photos seem to be underexposed. The white paper looks gray and the gem is dark and dull. Photos taken with my coolpix 5000 look great. The background is white, and the gems are lively.
After my disappointment with the cheap promaster lens, I made the decision to purchase the Nikon 105 Micro, but when I called to order it (from expresscamera.com), they asked me why I was purchasing a 35mm lens for my digital camera. They suggested the Sigma 105mm EX DG lens and wanted to sell it to me for $650. They said that this sigma lens was better than the Nikon for digital cameras and that the Nikon would also take underexposed photos. This could be that they just didn�t want to sell me the Nikon lens for $500 and wanted to sell me a $400 sigma lens for $650.:mad:
I need a lens that will allow me to blow the photos up to 100% on my monitor and they will be clear and the gem needs to look like a gem and not a dark crystal.
hair princess diana car crash
diptam
06-08 01:11 AM
rimzhim , Totally agree with ya ...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,279213,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,279213,00.html
more...
alterego
01-04 09:30 AM
Anyone with recent experience moving to Texas on EAD? Please share your experience with regards to Drivers license etc.
What does one do when less than 180 days left on EAD? Do they accept an approved 140 or pending 485 proof?
What does one do when less than 180 days left on EAD? Do they accept an approved 140 or pending 485 proof?
hot princess diana car crash
kirupa
01-22 04:57 AM
Oh, of course! What do you want said near your entry?
I already added a brief caption to one of glos's entries becase users won't see anything unless they click and drag for example.
:sonic:
I already added a brief caption to one of glos's entries becase users won't see anything unless they click and drag for example.
:sonic:
more...
house princess diana car crash pics.
peer123
04-17 09:20 AM
Check the directory of occupational titles and ensure the new and old jobs have the same / very close occupational code. You can find it on the DOL website. Duties is one thing, but the code is also important.
I did check, job code is 13-1111.00. the two titles used in labor cert are principal management consultant -system analysis - this is primary
and system analysis - mentioned in related occupation
the approval job code is 13-1111.00 - the new title i am getting is system analyst.
also i just have 1 page of approval for ETA750. are there more than one pages in this application and if so I should have all the pages...
I did check, job code is 13-1111.00. the two titles used in labor cert are principal management consultant -system analysis - this is primary
and system analysis - mentioned in related occupation
the approval job code is 13-1111.00 - the new title i am getting is system analyst.
also i just have 1 page of approval for ETA750. are there more than one pages in this application and if so I should have all the pages...
tattoo princess diana car crash body.
new2gc
06-24 04:05 PM
to take appointment that close to the arrival date. What if your flight cancelled or delayed?
I know it will eat up at least 3 days of our vacation if we have to travel from hometown to these cities, but I feel we have to factor in while planing our vacation.
What is the best way to send the documents to the emabassy? I asked because I live in Ahmedabad and I am planning to go for stamping the very next day I arrive in India.
Thanks for your help.
jignesh
I know it will eat up at least 3 days of our vacation if we have to travel from hometown to these cities, but I feel we have to factor in while planing our vacation.
What is the best way to send the documents to the emabassy? I asked because I live in Ahmedabad and I am planning to go for stamping the very next day I arrive in India.
Thanks for your help.
jignesh
more...
pictures princess diana car crash chi.
GooblyWoobly
08-08 04:23 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/FAQ3.pdf
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated “7/30/07 Y” should be used. The form can be found at www.uscis.gov
Q34: To ensure that the correct fee is submitted, may an applicant submit both a check for the old fee and a second check for the new fee?
A34: USCIS requires that all applications and petitions be submitted with the required filing fee or a waiver, if applicable. USCIS urges the public to exercise caution in submitting additional checks in incorrect amounts: extraneous checks may slow down the intake process and may result in an erroneous rejection of an application (as in the case where the check in the correct amount is missed) or in the inadvertent cashing of such checks, since filing fees are normally non-refundable. For additional information, the public is referred to the fee requirements announced in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (Temporary Adjustment of the Immigration and Naturalization Benefit Application and Petition Fee Schedule for Certain Adjustment of Status, FR at 41888). This regulation amends the new Fee Rule, and requires that aliens who file an employment-based Form I–485 and any related Forms I–765 and I–131, pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107, through August 17, 2007, must include the filing fees in effect prior to July 30, 2007. The new fee schedule becomes effective on July 30, 2007, for all other immigration and naturalization applications and petitions and on August 18, 2007, for Forms I–485 and all subsequent or ‘‘renewal’’ applications for advance parole and employment authorization based on pending Forms I–485 filed pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107.
Q35: Will previous USCIS policy still apply in those instances where the original approved labor certification cannot be included in support of an I-140 petition, such as when the original has been lost or previously filed with USCIS, or when a duplicate approval must be requested?
A35: Yes. While an original labor certification must be submitted in support of certain I-140 petitions, USCIS will continue to accept duplicates of previously filed Labor certificates and, as in the instances stated above, in cases where an original labor certificate has been properly filed with USCIS.
1 USCIS may issue future “FAQs” on this topic for the benefit of the public, should additional questions arise. Such FAQs will be dated and numbered for ease of reference. Department of Homeland Security
Q36: Will USCIS accept Schedule A concurrently filed I-140 petitions and adjustment of status applications that are filed on or after August 1, 2007?
A36: As previously stated, USCIS will accept properly filed Forms I-140 filed on behalf of aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007; however, pursuant to August Visa Bulletin No. 108, USCIS will reject any concurrently filed adjustment of status applications filed by aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007.
Q37: Will the new I-765 filing instructions apply to Forms I-765 filed based on employment-based adjustment of status applications filed pursuant to the July Visa Bulletin No. 107, if filed between July 30, 2007 – August 17, 2007?
A37: No. The fee of $180 for Forms I-765 and the fee of $170 for Form I-131 will remain in effect for those aliens eligible to file an employment-based adjustment of status application pursuant to July Visa Bulletin No. 107 until August 17, 2007.
Q38: Where should an employment-based adjustment of status application be filed if the underlying I-140 petition remains pending with USCIS?
A38: Forms I-485 may be filed at either the Nebraska Service Center or the Texas Service Center in accordance with the Direct Filing Update issued June 21, 2007, regardless of where the pending I-140 was filed. Applicants should submit a copy of the I-140 receipt notice or, if the applicant does not have a receipt notice, include a brightly colored sheet of paper on top of the filing with the following notice and information:
TO THE MAILROOM: The enclosed I-485 Adjustment Application(s) should be matched with a pending I-140 Immigrant Petition for which no Receipt Notice has been received. The Immigrant Petition [type, e.g., I-140] was delivered to [Service Center] on [provide date of filing and tracking number]; Petitioner's name; Beneficiary's name; Beneficiary's date of birth; Beneficiary's country of birth.
Q33: When filing an EB I-485 using the old fee, what version of the I-485 form do we use?
A33: The current I-485 form version dated “7/30/07 Y” should be used. The form can be found at www.uscis.gov
Q34: To ensure that the correct fee is submitted, may an applicant submit both a check for the old fee and a second check for the new fee?
A34: USCIS requires that all applications and petitions be submitted with the required filing fee or a waiver, if applicable. USCIS urges the public to exercise caution in submitting additional checks in incorrect amounts: extraneous checks may slow down the intake process and may result in an erroneous rejection of an application (as in the case where the check in the correct amount is missed) or in the inadvertent cashing of such checks, since filing fees are normally non-refundable. For additional information, the public is referred to the fee requirements announced in the Federal Register on August 1, 2007 (Temporary Adjustment of the Immigration and Naturalization Benefit Application and Petition Fee Schedule for Certain Adjustment of Status, FR at 41888). This regulation amends the new Fee Rule, and requires that aliens who file an employment-based Form I–485 and any related Forms I–765 and I–131, pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107, through August 17, 2007, must include the filing fees in effect prior to July 30, 2007. The new fee schedule becomes effective on July 30, 2007, for all other immigration and naturalization applications and petitions and on August 18, 2007, for Forms I–485 and all subsequent or ‘‘renewal’’ applications for advance parole and employment authorization based on pending Forms I–485 filed pursuant to Visa Bulletin No. 107.
Q35: Will previous USCIS policy still apply in those instances where the original approved labor certification cannot be included in support of an I-140 petition, such as when the original has been lost or previously filed with USCIS, or when a duplicate approval must be requested?
A35: Yes. While an original labor certification must be submitted in support of certain I-140 petitions, USCIS will continue to accept duplicates of previously filed Labor certificates and, as in the instances stated above, in cases where an original labor certificate has been properly filed with USCIS.
1 USCIS may issue future “FAQs” on this topic for the benefit of the public, should additional questions arise. Such FAQs will be dated and numbered for ease of reference. Department of Homeland Security
Q36: Will USCIS accept Schedule A concurrently filed I-140 petitions and adjustment of status applications that are filed on or after August 1, 2007?
A36: As previously stated, USCIS will accept properly filed Forms I-140 filed on behalf of aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007; however, pursuant to August Visa Bulletin No. 108, USCIS will reject any concurrently filed adjustment of status applications filed by aliens with a priority date on or after August 1, 2007.
Q37: Will the new I-765 filing instructions apply to Forms I-765 filed based on employment-based adjustment of status applications filed pursuant to the July Visa Bulletin No. 107, if filed between July 30, 2007 – August 17, 2007?
A37: No. The fee of $180 for Forms I-765 and the fee of $170 for Form I-131 will remain in effect for those aliens eligible to file an employment-based adjustment of status application pursuant to July Visa Bulletin No. 107 until August 17, 2007.
Q38: Where should an employment-based adjustment of status application be filed if the underlying I-140 petition remains pending with USCIS?
A38: Forms I-485 may be filed at either the Nebraska Service Center or the Texas Service Center in accordance with the Direct Filing Update issued June 21, 2007, regardless of where the pending I-140 was filed. Applicants should submit a copy of the I-140 receipt notice or, if the applicant does not have a receipt notice, include a brightly colored sheet of paper on top of the filing with the following notice and information:
TO THE MAILROOM: The enclosed I-485 Adjustment Application(s) should be matched with a pending I-140 Immigrant Petition for which no Receipt Notice has been received. The Immigrant Petition [type, e.g., I-140] was delivered to [Service Center] on [provide date of filing and tracking number]; Petitioner's name; Beneficiary's name; Beneficiary's date of birth; Beneficiary's country of birth.
dresses Princess Diana Car Crash
rharan
05-02 02:29 PM
Hello All,
My RIR (EB3) is still pending and the PD is Nov 2004.
My Perm (EB3) got approved April 2007.
Now I'm on 7th year H1b based on my RIR date.
If i file 140 based PERM and PD will be april 2007, If approved I'm eligible for 3 years H1 extension.
What happen if my RIR got approved? Can I file another I140 and retain my PD as Nov 2004?
Pl. advice.
Thanks
My RIR (EB3) is still pending and the PD is Nov 2004.
My Perm (EB3) got approved April 2007.
Now I'm on 7th year H1b based on my RIR date.
If i file 140 based PERM and PD will be april 2007, If approved I'm eligible for 3 years H1 extension.
What happen if my RIR got approved? Can I file another I140 and retain my PD as Nov 2004?
Pl. advice.
Thanks
more...
makeup Woodley Car Crash
gcisadawg
03-25 04:52 PM
voted for vamsi's qn....
girlfriend princess diana car crash
apahilaj
12-31 01:32 PM
No FP notice either. Check signatue for more details.
hairstyles hair Princess Diana Car Crash
RDB
08-16 05:12 PM
Yes, this is part of the pre-adjudication process. No need to take an Attorney if your case is straight forward - but it really depends on you!
Even though yours and your wife's interview time is different - they will call you together :)....just drop in both the Interview Notices together once in the room.
Take all the documents that you can - both original and photocopies (don't worry if you don't have originals).
We had our interview couple of weeks back and all the officer asked was for photocopies of EVL, W-2's along with Tax returns for last 3 years and birth Certificates.
Hope this helps.
Recently received interview letter, scheduled for Sep,3rd.
1. My interview time is 8:15AM and my wife has at 8:45AM. Does it mean we should appear separately or can we go together?
2. Is I-140 approval copy required? Interview letter does not say anything about it.
3. My attorney is not coming since he is too far from my place. Can I take any local attorney? Does it require applying G-28 again?
Even though yours and your wife's interview time is different - they will call you together :)....just drop in both the Interview Notices together once in the room.
Take all the documents that you can - both original and photocopies (don't worry if you don't have originals).
We had our interview couple of weeks back and all the officer asked was for photocopies of EVL, W-2's along with Tax returns for last 3 years and birth Certificates.
Hope this helps.
Recently received interview letter, scheduled for Sep,3rd.
1. My interview time is 8:15AM and my wife has at 8:45AM. Does it mean we should appear separately or can we go together?
2. Is I-140 approval copy required? Interview letter does not say anything about it.
3. My attorney is not coming since he is too far from my place. Can I take any local attorney? Does it require applying G-28 again?
bindas74
05-15 05:04 PM
To Bindas74,
Did the e-file process ask you to pay the biometric fee? I ask because my attorney informed me this afternoon that I do not need to pay a biometric fee, or send in a G-325A form, when sending in my EAD/AP renewal. Do please let me know if this is not the case.
On the Advance Parole justification, I would put in a note stating that I maintain close ties with my family in <country here> and travel frequently to see them. Additionally, state that you wish to travel abroad on vacation on multiple occasions through the year, and request them to grant you an Advance Parole for these reasons. This document request seems to be in lieu of the covering letter that's usually sent with an AP request. I'm sure they don't need you to send them ticket receipts.
Thanks,
Hi X-Wing,
Thanks for the response.
I dont think it asked me for the $80 biometric fee during the E-filing process. Someone else had answered to my quesiton on a different thread as well that I dont have to pay it.
I will make sure I put in the reasons you suggested for the AP in my documentation. Thanks again.
Another questions is that since I files EAD and AP concurrently, can I send both the documents in the same packet? ( I am guessing it's ok since the attorneys usually send everything in a single packet , right? )
-Thanks
Did the e-file process ask you to pay the biometric fee? I ask because my attorney informed me this afternoon that I do not need to pay a biometric fee, or send in a G-325A form, when sending in my EAD/AP renewal. Do please let me know if this is not the case.
On the Advance Parole justification, I would put in a note stating that I maintain close ties with my family in <country here> and travel frequently to see them. Additionally, state that you wish to travel abroad on vacation on multiple occasions through the year, and request them to grant you an Advance Parole for these reasons. This document request seems to be in lieu of the covering letter that's usually sent with an AP request. I'm sure they don't need you to send them ticket receipts.
Thanks,
Hi X-Wing,
Thanks for the response.
I dont think it asked me for the $80 biometric fee during the E-filing process. Someone else had answered to my quesiton on a different thread as well that I dont have to pay it.
I will make sure I put in the reasons you suggested for the AP in my documentation. Thanks again.
Another questions is that since I files EAD and AP concurrently, can I send both the documents in the same packet? ( I am guessing it's ok since the attorneys usually send everything in a single packet , right? )
-Thanks
yabadaba
12-12 12:45 PM
why dont y'all come to Atlanta. have lunch at Sarvana bhavan and do some grocery shopping too....we could club that with a GA chapter meeting
No comments:
Post a Comment