georchen
08-02 07:08 AM
Hello Core Members ,
We are seeing that some applications are being returned by USCIS mail room people , for improper fees and missing forms . This looks to be a very bit issue for people who have filed the cases , during July . Its possible that the filers may have made any mistake or this can be a mistake of Mail room People too due to huge volume of applications they have received . During Normal process every one had a fair chance of applying again with in the current month or many times even the preceding months. This is definitely not the case this time. If some case is rejected after Aug 17, they will not be able to file I 485 for Years . Can any of the core members suggest a way to contact the USCIS or DHS people and get some relief from this , and allow to re file the I 485 .
Thanks
Kumar
make sure that uscis does not play a tric to us after aug 17th.
We are seeing that some applications are being returned by USCIS mail room people , for improper fees and missing forms . This looks to be a very bit issue for people who have filed the cases , during July . Its possible that the filers may have made any mistake or this can be a mistake of Mail room People too due to huge volume of applications they have received . During Normal process every one had a fair chance of applying again with in the current month or many times even the preceding months. This is definitely not the case this time. If some case is rejected after Aug 17, they will not be able to file I 485 for Years . Can any of the core members suggest a way to contact the USCIS or DHS people and get some relief from this , and allow to re file the I 485 .
Thanks
Kumar
make sure that uscis does not play a tric to us after aug 17th.
wallpaper lack ops prestige symbols wii
coolmanasip
08-16 08:06 PM
Kondur - First, thanks for your reply. Its all volunteer time here and I appreciate your time to help me out.
The way I read it, and its not becos I want to read it like that, the AC21 memo all the time talks about "Same or similar occupational classification" not same/similar job. There is a world of difference here. Same job means we have to be the same engineer or programmer that we were about 4 yrs ago. Thats not the intent of the law. The law says occupational classification, which means job category.....Engineering or whatever we do....so I think there is a difference....
I checked my current SOC code and that is under 17-2051- Civil Engineer...The SOC language also says this "Supervisors of major professions groups 13-29 (including 17) have experience and perform the same duties as the workers they supervise and hence are classified in the same group" ---- This tells me that if you oversee engineers doing technical work, that is fine.
Now, the management part of the "Director" title is a concern. So,if we take that into account, in worst the classification would be under 11-9141- Architectural and Engineering Managers. Which, I believe, would still qualify under the (if not same) similar occupational classification. On DOL website, under 11-9141, in related occupations - one of them is 17-2051 Civil Engineer. So, again, I think we should meet same/similar occupational classification.
I talked to one of the lawyers from Murthy firm, and they seem to see this as meeting the requirements. While she did say that I was pushing the envelope, she said CIS is pretty liberal in this interpretation and would not be an issue.
Having said this, is there a possibility that CIS could get restrictive about their interpretation - absolutely! And there is that risk that would jeopardize the whole process....so, here we are, insulting our own intelligence because an agency would not define in black and white what is acceptable and what is not.....
sorry for a long rant.....have not decide what to do yet.....realistically, GC should be here in another 10 months.....thanks for your time
The way I read it, and its not becos I want to read it like that, the AC21 memo all the time talks about "Same or similar occupational classification" not same/similar job. There is a world of difference here. Same job means we have to be the same engineer or programmer that we were about 4 yrs ago. Thats not the intent of the law. The law says occupational classification, which means job category.....Engineering or whatever we do....so I think there is a difference....
I checked my current SOC code and that is under 17-2051- Civil Engineer...The SOC language also says this "Supervisors of major professions groups 13-29 (including 17) have experience and perform the same duties as the workers they supervise and hence are classified in the same group" ---- This tells me that if you oversee engineers doing technical work, that is fine.
Now, the management part of the "Director" title is a concern. So,if we take that into account, in worst the classification would be under 11-9141- Architectural and Engineering Managers. Which, I believe, would still qualify under the (if not same) similar occupational classification. On DOL website, under 11-9141, in related occupations - one of them is 17-2051 Civil Engineer. So, again, I think we should meet same/similar occupational classification.
I talked to one of the lawyers from Murthy firm, and they seem to see this as meeting the requirements. While she did say that I was pushing the envelope, she said CIS is pretty liberal in this interpretation and would not be an issue.
Having said this, is there a possibility that CIS could get restrictive about their interpretation - absolutely! And there is that risk that would jeopardize the whole process....so, here we are, insulting our own intelligence because an agency would not define in black and white what is acceptable and what is not.....
sorry for a long rant.....have not decide what to do yet.....realistically, GC should be here in another 10 months.....thanks for your time
teachamerica07
08-01 06:04 PM
Will it work if the parole stamp on I 94 has expired ?
Should the stamp be kept valid by travelling out of the country and reentering on AP every year ?
Thanks for your input .
Should the stamp be kept valid by travelling out of the country and reentering on AP every year ?
Thanks for your input .
2011 Black Ops Summit gameplay
gc_chahiye
08-15 04:57 AM
Greencard fever -why take so much pain with your gc when you plan to rellocate to india/currently its even hard to predict when can one receive the gc. One can always visit US on tourist visa which is the most easy part. My opinion is only if one does not want to settle in US -
there could be issues getting a tourist visa (non-immigration intent) once you have filed your I-140 here and displayed immigration intent.
there could be issues getting a tourist visa (non-immigration intent) once you have filed your I-140 here and displayed immigration intent.
more...
dan19
11-07 02:13 PM
Thanks Chandu...
Never knew somebody had compiled such a large list!!!
look at www.h1bmates.com
Never knew somebody had compiled such a large list!!!
look at www.h1bmates.com
forgerator
04-08 08:12 PM
US govt. must get all their money from HBSC and then strip them of their US citizenship and deport them. You can do everything in America except cheat more than allowed on taxes. Everyone enjoys a little wriggle space with taxes...the IRS knows that about each filer. Certain things however cannot and should not be done. These evaders are nothing but THEIVES stealing from us ALL. :mad:
I believe US citizenship cannot be revoked unless you're charged with treason or something.
I believe US citizenship cannot be revoked unless you're charged with treason or something.
more...
Yeldarb
04-13 06:58 PM
One way to get a couple of cheap sites under your belt is to advertise in online games. Lots of clans need sites, but they most likely don't have much money. (Just a little tip lol, that's where I got some of my first business :))
2010 upgraded of duty lack ops
mmanurker
05-04 04:47 PM
ur title made me think that USCIS sent u a query (RFE) about your US India flight via frankfurt?
Just imagining what the details of the RFE could be?
I thought same as you..and I was like what, now a query(RFE) on air travel? :)
Just imagining what the details of the RFE could be?
I thought same as you..and I was like what, now a query(RFE) on air travel? :)
more...
hinvin66
06-02 02:49 AM
Recently, I made my own PP photos using http://www.epassportphoto.com/
This is a great service - It creates a jpeg file from a picture that you upload, and you can choose the "free" option in which you can save the jpeg file with 4-6 pictures in one frame (A 4" x 6" photo can yield 6 pp photos of 2" x 2"), and take it to Walgreens/Costco/Kinkos for a printout for $0.25 each. Otherwise you pay about $8-$12 for 2 photos at the same stores!!
For a family of 4, this equates to savings of ~ $40!!!
The site has all the tools for meeting various types of visa/pp/etc photo requirements for various countries.
This is a great service - It creates a jpeg file from a picture that you upload, and you can choose the "free" option in which you can save the jpeg file with 4-6 pictures in one frame (A 4" x 6" photo can yield 6 pp photos of 2" x 2"), and take it to Walgreens/Costco/Kinkos for a printout for $0.25 each. Otherwise you pay about $8-$12 for 2 photos at the same stores!!
For a family of 4, this equates to savings of ~ $40!!!
The site has all the tools for meeting various types of visa/pp/etc photo requirements for various countries.
hair Noob Weapons in Black Ops
mhtanim
03-03 03:26 PM
Well.. either way they are making things more opaque.
more...
god_bless_you
06-14 09:14 PM
From Today's Lou Dobb's....
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
hot ton of Black Ops. There#39;s
virtual55
05-03 09:01 AM
^
more...
house Black Ops | Domination | WMD |
CaliHoneB
09-21 10:50 AM
After 7 + years of wait time I am thinking just sticking to the rules(or not using creating solutions like buying labor, porting etc not that I am judging any one) may not help me get GC in near future. Previously I thought may be it will take some extra years but ultimately I will get my GC but with latest USCIS misallocation of numbers for last year it seems getting my GC is simply a moving target.
I am proposing a solution which could be relatively easy but it does need help from USCIS and should not cause any major backlash (except from a few Eb2 folks). It is relatively easily implementable and I believe it is well inside current laws so nobody need not worry about breaking the law.
The solution is simple
Eb2 = B.S+ 5 years of experience or M.S degree
So the current Eb3 folks who accumulated 5 years experience since filing the LC are asked to apply for consideration of Eb2 category and USCIS has discretion over whether it can be granted (or LC is recertified as Eb2)
I am sure a lot of folks had thought about it and probably mentioned it but what I am proposing is to include USCIS in the discussion on how to achieve this. I am sure anybodywho has a concept of fairness understands Eb3 candidate waiting for 5 years deserves to be in Eb2 just by definition of Eb2 and he is not taking any new job which means he is not displacing any new american worker.
I am sure USCIS also understands that the laws are archiac so may be it is willing to help administratively. I am drawing this conclusion based on how it acted during backlog elimination centers..a lot of people were cleared using RIR in the end days and I am sure USCIS overlooked a few things there because those people deserved those labors and it wasnt their mistake for the massive buildup.
Similarly Eb3 folks are not responsible for all the Visa number wastage which would have alleviated this problem and the responsible party (USCIS) may do something in its power to correct this.
The beauty of this the porting Eb3 applicant will always be behind Eb2 by 5 years and gains 5 years experience to be eligible for Eb2. If Eb3 has enough numbers this is non issue but in case (just like now) Eb3 is falling behind there is an option to port it to Eb2 after 5 years of waiting.
I know it is a wishful thinking but I see this as a most practical solution on the table.
I am proposing a solution which could be relatively easy but it does need help from USCIS and should not cause any major backlash (except from a few Eb2 folks). It is relatively easily implementable and I believe it is well inside current laws so nobody need not worry about breaking the law.
The solution is simple
Eb2 = B.S+ 5 years of experience or M.S degree
So the current Eb3 folks who accumulated 5 years experience since filing the LC are asked to apply for consideration of Eb2 category and USCIS has discretion over whether it can be granted (or LC is recertified as Eb2)
I am sure a lot of folks had thought about it and probably mentioned it but what I am proposing is to include USCIS in the discussion on how to achieve this. I am sure anybodywho has a concept of fairness understands Eb3 candidate waiting for 5 years deserves to be in Eb2 just by definition of Eb2 and he is not taking any new job which means he is not displacing any new american worker.
I am sure USCIS also understands that the laws are archiac so may be it is willing to help administratively. I am drawing this conclusion based on how it acted during backlog elimination centers..a lot of people were cleared using RIR in the end days and I am sure USCIS overlooked a few things there because those people deserved those labors and it wasnt their mistake for the massive buildup.
Similarly Eb3 folks are not responsible for all the Visa number wastage which would have alleviated this problem and the responsible party (USCIS) may do something in its power to correct this.
The beauty of this the porting Eb3 applicant will always be behind Eb2 by 5 years and gains 5 years experience to be eligible for Eb2. If Eb3 has enough numbers this is non issue but in case (just like now) Eb3 is falling behind there is an option to port it to Eb2 after 5 years of waiting.
I know it is a wishful thinking but I see this as a most practical solution on the table.
tattoo Call of Duty: Black Ops:
amoschid
07-18 04:01 PM
thanks for the answer buddy
1) Yes, 140K includes primary applicant,spouse and minor children.
woaaah.. that's a very little number.... :p
2) It means India or any other country can be alloted upto 9800 green card per Fiscal Year, again this number includes spouse and children.
i see... thanks for the explanation,
this part still confused me though:
if i divide 140000 / 9800 = 14.28
that's only 14 countries, how was that suppose to work ?
also... let's use Japan & India again for example:
- suppose that India already used up to 9800 GC, and Japan only use 1500,
the 8300 GC (9800-1500) will remain unused ?
thanks again for the answer :D
1) Yes, 140K includes primary applicant,spouse and minor children.
woaaah.. that's a very little number.... :p
2) It means India or any other country can be alloted upto 9800 green card per Fiscal Year, again this number includes spouse and children.
i see... thanks for the explanation,
this part still confused me though:
if i divide 140000 / 9800 = 14.28
that's only 14 countries, how was that suppose to work ?
also... let's use Japan & India again for example:
- suppose that India already used up to 9800 GC, and Japan only use 1500,
the 8300 GC (9800-1500) will remain unused ?
thanks again for the answer :D
more...
pictures CoD Black ops: Nitro
teky
03-25 11:31 PM
You can use follow to join to allow your wife to get an EAD after she finishes her waiver (If you have a GC by then and your PD is current). I am not sure if she can immediately file after her waiver. Any gurus please reply. Signing another contract in a waiver location is painful (after initial contract pf 3 yrs is over). Also if anybody can reply on how much time we can stay legally after the initial 3 years.
As far as issues, its a lenghty and a painful journey to a waiver job and clearance. Needs a lot of work. But once you r thru with getting a H-1b to start the job should be no issues.
Let me know if you need anything. Mine is EB3 PD-04/2002 India and still waiting.
Regards,
Teky.
As far as issues, its a lenghty and a painful journey to a waiver job and clearance. Needs a lot of work. But once you r thru with getting a H-1b to start the job should be no issues.
Let me know if you need anything. Mine is EB3 PD-04/2002 India and still waiting.
Regards,
Teky.
dresses read cortazar Black ops
diptam
08-18 12:27 PM
In Jun-July 2008 they will pass the unused Visa for Fiscal 2008 to India/China/Mexico/Philippines.So according to NY Times if 300K filed - then we July 2nd -Aug 17th 2007 filers will get GC within 2-3 yrs ? ( 300K/140K yearly)
I might be missing something - the real picture is not so good.
out of 300K applications ,may be 150K apps are from indians , then it'll take 150K/10K = 15 years for the one who applied in July/Aug 07.
I might be missing something - the real picture is not so good.
out of 300K applications ,may be 150K apps are from indians , then it'll take 150K/10K = 15 years for the one who applied in July/Aug 07.
more...
makeup hs10 lack ops
MrDesi
02-07 04:36 PM
you are the kinda guy who is screwing up everyone by filing unnecessary labors, too many I140 and clogging the system for genuine people. Shame on you.
Hello , Basically i was working in company B for a long time and they applied GC. Then I shifted to comp A and filed labor recently.
The company B was not doing good and for safety sake applied GC in company A also
Regards
Hello , Basically i was working in company B for a long time and they applied GC. Then I shifted to comp A and filed labor recently.
The company B was not doing good and for safety sake applied GC in company A also
Regards
girlfriend Another golden famas black ops
HRPRO
02-09 01:31 PM
You will have to file an amended petition to be in compliance.
The PW could be different and you can check that on the OES website at flcdatacenter.com
Hope this helps.
The PW could be different and you can check that on the OES website at flcdatacenter.com
Hope this helps.
hairstyles lack, ops, modern, warfare,
AllVNeedGcPc
04-17 06:33 AM
My suggestion would be to get in touch with your local DMV/auto insurance agent regarding the legal requirements for someone on visitors visa to drive in US.
I am sure he can drive with an Indian international license, but I think "meridiani.planum" is talking more in terms of liability issues. For example, if there is an accident or any other lawsuit (driving or non-driving related), will the sponsored party (the one who sent the letter that got him the visa) be liable?
Does anyone know about this?
I am sure he can drive with an Indian international license, but I think "meridiani.planum" is talking more in terms of liability issues. For example, if there is an accident or any other lawsuit (driving or non-driving related), will the sponsored party (the one who sent the letter that got him the visa) be liable?
Does anyone know about this?
iviviv
11-01 09:33 PM
Contact www.murthy.com
fromnaija
10-26 11:35 AM
EAD is specifically authorization to work in the US. So in your situation, the answer is NO, you cannot use EAD for employment outside the USA. To work in another country and keep your green card process going, you will have to change your application from AOS to consular processing.
No comments:
Post a Comment