eb3_nepa
07-29 06:46 PM
CHC speaks only for illegals...
they fear any partial immigration reforms will harm their political constituents..namely the hispanic voter base.
They will never come onboard for legals..we have to fight our own battle.
So individual constituents on this forums can have personal views..
Yes, but we do not represent the CHC, nor are we in any way affiliated to them.
Secondly there are no "individual constituents" when it comes to Immigration Voice. This is an organization OF, FOR and BY the "EMPLOYMENT BASED LEGAL IMMIGRANTS". We neither support nor oppose rewards or penalties for or against the undocumented workers (illegal immigrants). Individual members can have their own "opinions/biases", but NO individual member can speak on behalf of Immigration Voice on major issues. As per my understanding, ONLY the IV Core team/Board members as a WHOLE can make such decisions.
they fear any partial immigration reforms will harm their political constituents..namely the hispanic voter base.
They will never come onboard for legals..we have to fight our own battle.
So individual constituents on this forums can have personal views..
Yes, but we do not represent the CHC, nor are we in any way affiliated to them.
Secondly there are no "individual constituents" when it comes to Immigration Voice. This is an organization OF, FOR and BY the "EMPLOYMENT BASED LEGAL IMMIGRANTS". We neither support nor oppose rewards or penalties for or against the undocumented workers (illegal immigrants). Individual members can have their own "opinions/biases", but NO individual member can speak on behalf of Immigration Voice on major issues. As per my understanding, ONLY the IV Core team/Board members as a WHOLE can make such decisions.
wallpaper Ford Explorer Sport Trac
kondur_007
09-17 09:38 PM
I dont want to duplicate, but I think following "cut and paste" from my previous post may be a fair thing to do; just for the information.
I am not a lawyer; but this is what I believe to the best of my knowledge:
1. If you never used AC21 (still working with the employer who sponsored I 140); your obligation at the time of GC approval is to have a "good faith intention to work with the same employer permanently". It is not clear in the law as to how would you prove that intention...most people say that you should work for some duration (6 months or 12 months at least...or something like that) after GC is approved to "show" your good faith intention.
2. If you ported to employer B using AC 21 (before the approval of GC); you have the same obligation to the new employer B and NO obligation to original I 140 sponsoring employer. (this is especially true if you informed USCIS of your porting and also true if you did not inform USCIS but law is less clear in the later scenario)
There is really no law that specifies the duration.
All it says is :"you should have intention to work for the GC sponsoring employer (or AC21 employer if you ported) permanently."
Intention is a state of mind and it can change!! also all these employments are at will, and so it is possible that you may not like that job! Or on the other hand employer may not like you and fire you in a week.
Bottomline: You will be fine under most circumstances. However, if the issue is raised at the time of naturalization, it would be much easier for you to explain/show that you did have intention to work for the employer if you actually work for the sponsoring employer for some duration (6 months, 1 year...all these are arbitrary numbers).
If you never worked for the sponsoring employer, you may not have a lot of grounds to show that entire GC was not a fraud...
Again, there is no clear law on this...
followup post:
I think there is a mix up here between two things:
180 day clock does start on the first day after filing 485, but that is for the purpose of AC21. Once you use AC21, then the next employer assumes the role of "your future permanent employer" and you should have "intent to permanently work for that(new, not the sponsoring) employer" AT the time of GC approval.
If you use change the employers 7 times using AC21 before your GC gets approved; you should have "intent to work permanently for the latest employer".
You are not bonded slaves. The only issue is that the "burden of proof" of proving the intent to work for such and such employer is on the GC beneficiary and not on USCIS. So in future, if USCIS questions (or CBP questions), it is YOU who has to prove that intent.
One scenario where you WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROVE IT: if you never worked for the sponsoring employer.
One scenario where you WILL NOT HAVE A PROBLEM PROVING IT: if you worked with sponsoring (or latest AC21) employer after GC approval for some duration (60 days?? 90 days?? 6 months?? 1 year??)...no law on this.
This is the whole purpose of Labor Certification process and I140. And it applies to the categories of EB2 (except NIW) and EB3--any category that requires LC.
This is from my discussion in following thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3305&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=20403
Hope this helps.
Good Luck.
I am not a lawyer; but this is what I believe to the best of my knowledge:
1. If you never used AC21 (still working with the employer who sponsored I 140); your obligation at the time of GC approval is to have a "good faith intention to work with the same employer permanently". It is not clear in the law as to how would you prove that intention...most people say that you should work for some duration (6 months or 12 months at least...or something like that) after GC is approved to "show" your good faith intention.
2. If you ported to employer B using AC 21 (before the approval of GC); you have the same obligation to the new employer B and NO obligation to original I 140 sponsoring employer. (this is especially true if you informed USCIS of your porting and also true if you did not inform USCIS but law is less clear in the later scenario)
There is really no law that specifies the duration.
All it says is :"you should have intention to work for the GC sponsoring employer (or AC21 employer if you ported) permanently."
Intention is a state of mind and it can change!! also all these employments are at will, and so it is possible that you may not like that job! Or on the other hand employer may not like you and fire you in a week.
Bottomline: You will be fine under most circumstances. However, if the issue is raised at the time of naturalization, it would be much easier for you to explain/show that you did have intention to work for the employer if you actually work for the sponsoring employer for some duration (6 months, 1 year...all these are arbitrary numbers).
If you never worked for the sponsoring employer, you may not have a lot of grounds to show that entire GC was not a fraud...
Again, there is no clear law on this...
followup post:
I think there is a mix up here between two things:
180 day clock does start on the first day after filing 485, but that is for the purpose of AC21. Once you use AC21, then the next employer assumes the role of "your future permanent employer" and you should have "intent to permanently work for that(new, not the sponsoring) employer" AT the time of GC approval.
If you use change the employers 7 times using AC21 before your GC gets approved; you should have "intent to work permanently for the latest employer".
You are not bonded slaves. The only issue is that the "burden of proof" of proving the intent to work for such and such employer is on the GC beneficiary and not on USCIS. So in future, if USCIS questions (or CBP questions), it is YOU who has to prove that intent.
One scenario where you WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PROVE IT: if you never worked for the sponsoring employer.
One scenario where you WILL NOT HAVE A PROBLEM PROVING IT: if you worked with sponsoring (or latest AC21) employer after GC approval for some duration (60 days?? 90 days?? 6 months?? 1 year??)...no law on this.
This is the whole purpose of Labor Certification process and I140. And it applies to the categories of EB2 (except NIW) and EB3--any category that requires LC.
This is from my discussion in following thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3305&page=2
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=20403
Hope this helps.
Good Luck.
RollingStone12
04-23 06:05 PM
Friends,
I will be relocating to Houston soon. I am new to the area. I would really appreciate if you can give your inputs on good neighborhoods, cost of living, etc.
Thanks,
nmdial
Welcome TX Chappter...
I will be relocating to Houston soon. I am new to the area. I would really appreciate if you can give your inputs on good neighborhoods, cost of living, etc.
Thanks,
nmdial
Welcome TX Chappter...
2011 2005 Ford Explorer Sport Trac
paskal
12-20 11:55 PM
Thanks Anil,
Please also update us on IL activities that you guys have planned
Please also update us on IL activities that you guys have planned
more...
newuser
08-17 11:27 AM
ashkam
How many years do they renew the license based on I-485 receipt at Malvern DMV?
Thanks
I think the expiry date is based on EAD, not based on I-485 receipt notice.
How many years do they renew the license based on I-485 receipt at Malvern DMV?
Thanks
I think the expiry date is based on EAD, not based on I-485 receipt notice.
pakrish
06-22 09:29 AM
My laywer has adviced me that the skin test is mandatory
more...
AirWaterandGC
05-12 10:14 AM
This is what I received :
Thank you for taking action on AILA's Contact Congress website. If you'd like to get more involved in our advocacy efforts, please contact AILA's Manager of Grassroots Advocacy, Jenny Levy.
Your message was sent to:
Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN)
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
Representative Keith M. Ellison (D-MN 5th)
Thank you for taking action on AILA's Contact Congress website. If you'd like to get more involved in our advocacy efforts, please contact AILA's Manager of Grassroots Advocacy, Jenny Levy.
Your message was sent to:
Senator Norm Coleman (R-MN)
Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
Representative Keith M. Ellison (D-MN 5th)
2010 Ford Explorer Sport Trac 2011.
martinvisalaw
06-25 02:12 PM
1. My view on pre-adjudication is that they processing is done on the application and is put in an approvable status. once the PD is current and the immigrant visa number is available, then such an application can be approved. but it has to be noted that these applications can be reviewed again before approving and can be denied at that time.
2. when an AOS application is being adjudicated, if the underlying terms of the 485 application are not satisfied, then it can be denied. it does not matter if the PD is current. the 485 is based on the 140, which in turn is based on a bonafide job. using ac21, you can change employers, but i still feel that you need to be employed in a similar position and not looking for a similar position.
any thoughts anyone?
I agree. The argument that the AOS applicant doesn't need to have a job now is very aggressive and should only be used if absolutely necessary. If there is any chance of finding a new job soon, the first step would be to ask for more time to respond to the RFE.
2. when an AOS application is being adjudicated, if the underlying terms of the 485 application are not satisfied, then it can be denied. it does not matter if the PD is current. the 485 is based on the 140, which in turn is based on a bonafide job. using ac21, you can change employers, but i still feel that you need to be employed in a similar position and not looking for a similar position.
any thoughts anyone?
I agree. The argument that the AOS applicant doesn't need to have a job now is very aggressive and should only be used if absolutely necessary. If there is any chance of finding a new job soon, the first step would be to ask for more time to respond to the RFE.
more...
arihant
02-15 11:15 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/02/15/science.math.ap/index.html
Here is an article that indicates that the push for better education in Math and Science is not shared by the public.
The correlation I am making is, if they do not percieve there is a problem with existing Math and Science education as it applies to the current employment environment, why will there be any interest about the proposals in PACE?
Here is an article that indicates that the push for better education in Math and Science is not shared by the public.
The correlation I am making is, if they do not percieve there is a problem with existing Math and Science education as it applies to the current employment environment, why will there be any interest about the proposals in PACE?
hair Ford - Explorer Sport Trac
martinvisalaw
06-25 08:50 AM
Hi,
I recently (one month back) got laid off from the company who filed for my green card. Today i got RFE on my 485 (AOS) requesting "currently dated and original letter from current employerthat specifies dates of employment, current postion, wage, and that the terms and conditions of the empployment petition continue to exist".
I am not working with the company anymore but I am on their payroll till July 21st 2009.
I am still looking for a new job so i don't have any prospective employer yet. I have to reply back before July 19th so I don't have enough time left.
My company said they can't give me employment letter now so my companies lawyer suggested that they will send reply with their own cover letter and my last two months paystubs. 3 years of tax returns.
Do you think it will work and it won't cause any problems to my petition?
What other options do I have ?
Thanks in advance!
You could argue that you don't need to have a job now, just that you need to be in a "same or similar"position when the 485 is approved. if your priority date is very backlogged, you have lots of time to find a job.
I recently (one month back) got laid off from the company who filed for my green card. Today i got RFE on my 485 (AOS) requesting "currently dated and original letter from current employerthat specifies dates of employment, current postion, wage, and that the terms and conditions of the empployment petition continue to exist".
I am not working with the company anymore but I am on their payroll till July 21st 2009.
I am still looking for a new job so i don't have any prospective employer yet. I have to reply back before July 19th so I don't have enough time left.
My company said they can't give me employment letter now so my companies lawyer suggested that they will send reply with their own cover letter and my last two months paystubs. 3 years of tax returns.
Do you think it will work and it won't cause any problems to my petition?
What other options do I have ?
Thanks in advance!
You could argue that you don't need to have a job now, just that you need to be in a "same or similar"position when the 485 is approved. if your priority date is very backlogged, you have lots of time to find a job.
more...
kirupa
12-08 01:58 AM
Wow, another close one! Congrats to templarian, mugyaded, and flocke for having the top winning entries :cowbell:
I'll more formally announce this later this week.
Cheers!
Kirupa :sailor:
I'll more formally announce this later this week.
Cheers!
Kirupa :sailor:
hot Ford Explorer Sport Trac 2005
guyfromsg
07-17 09:50 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
Lawyer says that should not be a problem. My 140 is pending in TSC, could that be a reason don't know.
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
Lawyer says that should not be a problem. My 140 is pending in TSC, could that be a reason don't know.
more...
house #39;08 Sport Trac, Gibson exhaust
maine_gc
04-20 03:30 PM
Thankk You Sunny1000. This is very helpful information. I will go to the nearest international airport and get it corrected. Thank you all for your advice. I will post here when i resolved the issue
tattoo 2005 Ford Explorer Sport Trac
LondonTown
03-30 08:36 AM
Have you ever participated any of the IV's campaign on various issues. Have you ever volunteered your time or donated money.
If no, you deserve this and rot in hell. There is no solution and you people are running to IV only when disastor strikes. But its too late.
If you cannot get the original contract nothing can be done...
poorslumdog: Please try to be polite.
If no, you deserve this and rot in hell. There is no solution and you people are running to IV only when disastor strikes. But its too late.
If you cannot get the original contract nothing can be done...
poorslumdog: Please try to be polite.
more...
pictures Mike#39;s Ford Explorer Sport
sanjayc
05-27 08:45 PM
Can you please help, if there are some instructions handy. I am having difficulty for following fields
1. Manner of Last Entry : I think it should be PAR:PAROLEE
2. Current Immigration Status : Again think should be PAR:PAROLEE
3. There is a field where it asks for previous EAD's. I am not sure of the date when i applied last time, what date i should put, the date from which EAD is valid ?
4. Also i have applied for EAD twice, do we need to put the information for both of them.
5. Other Names/Aliases : I think it should be 'None' in my case as i never had any other name, am i right or should it be left blank.
6. for Eligibility status i think the value should be : (c)(9) FILED I-485
I am in EB2, pririty date Aug 2006. last entry to US Jan 2010 using Advance Parole.
Thanks and appreciate your help.
1. Manner of Last Entry : I think it should be PAR:PAROLEE
2. Current Immigration Status : Again think should be PAR:PAROLEE
3. There is a field where it asks for previous EAD's. I am not sure of the date when i applied last time, what date i should put, the date from which EAD is valid ?
4. Also i have applied for EAD twice, do we need to put the information for both of them.
5. Other Names/Aliases : I think it should be 'None' in my case as i never had any other name, am i right or should it be left blank.
6. for Eligibility status i think the value should be : (c)(9) FILED I-485
I am in EB2, pririty date Aug 2006. last entry to US Jan 2010 using Advance Parole.
Thanks and appreciate your help.
dresses Ford Explorer Sport Trac
iptel
04-18 12:48 PM
Guys:
Before we get all excited and start signing petitions, please check to confirm whether you are legally safe by doing so. For more information please see this link from Murthy website http://www.murthy.com/news/n_parele.html
I write this because the petition is sponsored by a campaign manager for Kennedy. Please be very careful in signing such petitions. I would recommend discussing any such petition on this forum and getting input from the IV folks or from your lawyers before signing any petition that supports an individual or any particular political party.
Thanks bkarnik
Before we get all excited and start signing petitions, please check to confirm whether you are legally safe by doing so. For more information please see this link from Murthy website http://www.murthy.com/news/n_parele.html
I write this because the petition is sponsored by a campaign manager for Kennedy. Please be very careful in signing such petitions. I would recommend discussing any such petition on this forum and getting input from the IV folks or from your lawyers before signing any petition that supports an individual or any particular political party.
Thanks bkarnik
more...
makeup Ford Explorer Sport TracTXO
cessua
10-13 07:09 PM
How much of an argument we have if US keeps toping rankings of most competitive countries to do business in the world?
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5454.html
http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Global_Competitiveness_Reports/Reports/gcr_2006/BCI.pdf
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5454.html
http://www.weforum.org/pdf/Global_Competitiveness_Reports/Reports/gcr_2006/BCI.pdf
girlfriend Ford Explorer Sport Trac
mammoy2k
11-12 05:56 PM
I wouldappreciate if any of you could shed light on the following scenario:
If485 i spending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
If485 i spending for over six months and someone switched the job using AC21 for a position which would require extended stay [upto 2-3 years] outside the US. Would it any way impact the GC process? Given that priority date is 2007, it is unlikely(?) that 485 would be adjusted in that time.
Thanks
hairstyles Ford Explorer Sport Trac
gccube
03-19 04:14 PM
Its unfortunate that you have a very recent RD. I talked to an IO at NSC yesterday and i was told that they will process the case based on the order they recieved. So they go by RD. If this is true then i guess you will have to wait some more time. Because thousands of people applied I-485 between June first to July 30.
May be this is the general process, but I know of a case with RD in June last week and PD in 2003 Mar got approved last Nov/Dec area. It is an EB3 India case.
May be this is the general process, but I know of a case with RD in June last week and PD in 2003 Mar got approved last Nov/Dec area. It is an EB3 India case.
GooblyWoobly
07-18 06:25 PM
Wrong! Yes, you will be the new fee but then you will pay the same fee each year you renew your EAD. No fee payment only applies if you file your I-485 with the new fee structure.
If you are not planning on using EAD and she won't either then she needs to change status to H4.
Can someone else confirm this too? For Q2, I think you are wrong. Take this case....
Primary is on H1, derivative on H4, both apply for AOS, primary goes on EAD (thus invalidating H1, and in turn spouse's H4). So, the spouse just has AOS receipt number, and no H4. Is she out of status? Of course not. This is a very common scenario.
Also, for Q1, I765 is a completely different entity in the pay schedule http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
So, why wouldn't I get the benefit of the higher fee if I pay that? Any source of information for you to say I will have to pay each year?
If you are not planning on using EAD and she won't either then she needs to change status to H4.
Can someone else confirm this too? For Q2, I think you are wrong. Take this case....
Primary is on H1, derivative on H4, both apply for AOS, primary goes on EAD (thus invalidating H1, and in turn spouse's H4). So, the spouse just has AOS receipt number, and no H4. Is she out of status? Of course not. This is a very common scenario.
Also, for Q1, I765 is a completely different entity in the pay schedule http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
So, why wouldn't I get the benefit of the higher fee if I pay that? Any source of information for you to say I will have to pay each year?
jthomas
06-10 12:30 PM
we should fax/email letters to lawmakers/senators from every angle. One way of doing this would be drafting a letter with the calculation and a quote " Just for Indians, and chinese nationality for rest of the world = 1year"
We should be attacking in each and every angle so they get used to reading our issues and would come with a solution.
MAKE A NOISE
We should be attacking in each and every angle so they get used to reading our issues and would come with a solution.
MAKE A NOISE
No comments:
Post a Comment