ramaonline
10-15 03:01 PM
Per murthy.com:
h1 status ends when you start using ead for the current or new part-time/full time job. You can switch to ead for the current job and also work part time
Please confirm this with an immig attny - there is lot of confusion regarding this.
h1 status ends when you start using ead for the current or new part-time/full time job. You can switch to ead for the current job and also work part time
Please confirm this with an immig attny - there is lot of confusion regarding this.
wallpaper hairstyles for black women
anilsal
06-14 04:54 PM
Hopefully by labor PD. But I have read about cases being approved in no sane logic.
jsb
12-15 10:08 AM
Thanks Chris for sharing this info
This is a good news. But It is scary that they don't have any mechanism to pull the application based on PD/country.
....
USCIS offices process application in order they receive them physically (not in RD sequence). They don't process based on PD's. For adjudication ty need physical file to review documents, medicals, photocopies, etc. Sorting physical files of such a large volume in any other order would be a tedious task. Obviously they don't index files, and keep that info on the system, which would makei it easy to locate a file. Therefore, unless they do that, even if they know A# of cases due for approval, process is unlikely to work.
This is a good news. But It is scary that they don't have any mechanism to pull the application based on PD/country.
....
USCIS offices process application in order they receive them physically (not in RD sequence). They don't process based on PD's. For adjudication ty need physical file to review documents, medicals, photocopies, etc. Sorting physical files of such a large volume in any other order would be a tedious task. Obviously they don't index files, and keep that info on the system, which would makei it easy to locate a file. Therefore, unless they do that, even if they know A# of cases due for approval, process is unlikely to work.
2011 hairstyles short women. Trendy Women Short Hairstyles
san3297
08-31 01:07 PM
Cant i use the I 94 attached to my 797 document.Will it not solve my problem.
more...
SunnySurya
07-17 12:44 PM
Any Idea, why the processing times have not been released yet?
newuser
05-10 09:34 PM
We recently had the same problem for my in-laws appointment (Hyd). The calendar shows the dates are avaiable, but when we are about to make the actual appointment, the hyperlinks are missing on the calendar. VFS did acknowledge this issue when I called their customer support no. There said to try after couple of hours ( or may be days) and it did work.
Save the applications and try to schedule the date at a latter time. Call the customer support no on VFS website. Sometimes they would to try to schedule appointment. In my case, it didn't work even for the Customer Service Rep also.
Best of luck.
Save the applications and try to schedule the date at a latter time. Call the customer support no on VFS website. Sometimes they would to try to schedule appointment. In my case, it didn't work even for the Customer Service Rep also.
Best of luck.
more...
Pagal
09-17 12:50 PM
Hello,
Closing of the sponsoring company may turn out to be a blessing in disguise ... if you show up at Comany A and ask for the employment as listed in your application, Comany A can show its inability to employ you siting the pending closure. As soon as this happens, you are a free agent to work with any other company in same/similar job. I remember reading this advice on murthy last year and you might find some links through IV archives as well.
Good luck!
Closing of the sponsoring company may turn out to be a blessing in disguise ... if you show up at Comany A and ask for the employment as listed in your application, Comany A can show its inability to employ you siting the pending closure. As soon as this happens, you are a free agent to work with any other company in same/similar job. I remember reading this advice on murthy last year and you might find some links through IV archives as well.
Good luck!
2010 women have short
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
more...
vikramy
06-22 10:22 AM
Looks like you don't have any GC application pending. From what i know you can not work. You can only start working after your MTR gets approved.
I came to US on Company A visa in Feb 2007... They filed for a H1b amendment and it got disapproved .. Company A asked me to transfer my Visa as they don't want to apply for a MTR ...
Company B applied for my transfer and started working for company B... But unfortunately this one also got denied and they gave the reason that Company B didn't provide a valid end Client letter
In the denial letter they stated that
"The beneficiary may remain in the current immigration status until date indicated on Form I94.. "
So what are my option now?
Can I work now? if not Can I work after Company B files MTR?
I came to US on Company A visa in Feb 2007... They filed for a H1b amendment and it got disapproved .. Company A asked me to transfer my Visa as they don't want to apply for a MTR ...
Company B applied for my transfer and started working for company B... But unfortunately this one also got denied and they gave the reason that Company B didn't provide a valid end Client letter
In the denial letter they stated that
"The beneficiary may remain in the current immigration status until date indicated on Form I94.. "
So what are my option now?
Can I work now? if not Can I work after Company B files MTR?
hair hairstyles short women. short haircuts for older women
singhsa3
04-30 05:11 PM
All,
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly help me develop a model. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
So far I have the following rational (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Facts
1. Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
2. Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
3. FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
4. Per FLC data, 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47,251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumptions
1. Each labor application uses in 2.2 visas.
2. Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 180,000 BEC labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
3. Total BEC visas requirements 180,000*2.2= 396,000
4. NIW applications are negligible.
5. Retrogressed countries account for 50% of visas used.
Calculations
Scenario 1: Visa processing time is Zero
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(47,251+6000)x2.2=18,306
3. BEC visas remaining as on 10/01/08= 396,000-20,173-18,306= 357,521
Scenario 2: Visa processing time is one year. Note: it affects only the applications certified within the preceding year.
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20,173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(6000)x2.2=122,259
3. BEC visas (And NOT labor) remaining as on 10/01/08 = 396,000-122,259= 273,741.
What it means:
BEC contained labors from both retrogressed and non-retrogressed countries. Thus, in FY’08 and FY’09 visa consumptions will be attributed to BEC mainly. Once this backlog is cleared, the normal consumption (Supply = Demand) should resume. But it will also mean that there will always be 2-3 years wait.
Conclusion:
Suggested Cut-off dates for India as on 10/01/2008: ??? TBD.
Last update:
Time 11.32 AM ET , 05/01/08.
I am planning to write a letter to USCIS and DOS , suggesting the visa cut off dates for India. Kindly help me develop a model. I will send this letter over the weekend and also post over here.
So far I have the following rational (Of course , I will word them properly).
I have grouped applicants in the following groups
BEC, PERM ROW and PERM Non Row Countries. I then will estimate the visa usage by each categories using sources like FLCdata and DHS publications. Along the way I will make some assumption but the results should be realistic.
Facts
1. Per DOL , As of April'06 50K BEC labors were certified. Certification rates were 50% of labor processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
Per DOL, as of Sep'07 362,000 BEC labor were processed (certified, denied or withdrawn).
2. Per DHS, total EB (2, 3, 4 and 5 only) visas issued in FY’07 were 135,479 and FY’06 was 122,121.
3. FLC data center indicates that between March’05 and Oct’05, ~6000 PERM applications were filled and certified.
4. Per FLC data, 46,340 ROW PERM applications were certified in FY’06 and 47,251 ROW applications were certified in FY’07.
Assumptions
1. Each labor application uses in 2.2 visas.
2. Based on Fact 1 and Fact 2, let us assumed that in total 180,000 BEC labors were certified between March'05 and Sep'07 by BEC.
3. Total BEC visas requirements 180,000*2.2= 396,000
4. NIW applications are negligible.
5. Retrogressed countries account for 50% of visas used.
Calculations
Scenario 1: Visa processing time is Zero
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(47,251+6000)x2.2=18,306
3. BEC visas remaining as on 10/01/08= 396,000-20,173-18,306= 357,521
Scenario 2: Visa processing time is one year. Note: it affects only the applications certified within the preceding year.
1. BEC visas used in Fy'06 : = 122,121- (46,340)x 2.2 = 20,173
2. BEC visas issued in FY'07 : 135,459-(6000)x2.2=122,259
3. BEC visas (And NOT labor) remaining as on 10/01/08 = 396,000-122,259= 273,741.
What it means:
BEC contained labors from both retrogressed and non-retrogressed countries. Thus, in FY’08 and FY’09 visa consumptions will be attributed to BEC mainly. Once this backlog is cleared, the normal consumption (Supply = Demand) should resume. But it will also mean that there will always be 2-3 years wait.
Conclusion:
Suggested Cut-off dates for India as on 10/01/2008: ??? TBD.
Last update:
Time 11.32 AM ET , 05/01/08.
more...
gjoe
12-26 02:32 PM
I am not able to find the alien ship which I parked at JFK when I came here. Is it with NASA or the CIA?
;)
;)
hot short haircuts for women with
spicy_guy
08-28 12:12 AM
There is no point in moving the PD if they cannot process the PD's who are current. This is what is happenning now in USCIS. I would rather they move it by small amounts and process those who are current than give false hope to people!
Another struggle with USCIS amidst a lot other... huh? :D
Another struggle with USCIS amidst a lot other... huh? :D
more...
house short hair styles for black
jasmin45
07-31 06:44 PM
My I-485(with G-28) was filed by our company lawyer and company did not let us file EAD. I'm filing EAD on my own after USCIS made it clear with FAQ2 that they will accept EAD applications without the I-485 Receipt notice.
My questions is, Can I be sure the receipt notice for the EAD will come to me and not to the lawyer by any chance? I don't have any intention of using EAD but don't want my employer/lawyer know that I have filed it.
Thanks
I think, Receipt of the EAD application will come to you.
My questions is, Can I be sure the receipt notice for the EAD will come to me and not to the lawyer by any chance? I don't have any intention of using EAD but don't want my employer/lawyer know that I have filed it.
Thanks
I think, Receipt of the EAD application will come to you.
tattoo short haircuts for women
JP McMahon
November 23rd, 2004, 11:01 AM
I hope this does not happen to my precious.