snathan
08-18 05:10 PM
If your wife's I-94, which she have received at the time of entering to USA on dependent visa was valid till the date of the starting new the job, she should be fine even if she has not started working on H1 after approval. She has maintained the H4 status during that period as per I-94.
My wife here on H4 and she go H1 but she started job after a while as employer delayed. But her status was valid. Even she told the same to the US counselor New Delhi and she got h1 stamping done. Gap of H1 approval effective date and employment was about 2 months.
If you would ask this question to any attorney, you may get same reply. But asking to attorney is advisable.
This is not the case always...Your wife might be lucky or the IO was kind person. Normally if you can not provide the pay stub in H1B you are out of status. Please read the definition of H1B and you will get clear picture about this.
Also if your wife received the I-94 after the H1B approval, she was in status. Because whichever was the latest I-94 - thats the valid one and in effect. So that might be the reason your wife didnt fave any issue.
My wife here on H4 and she go H1 but she started job after a while as employer delayed. But her status was valid. Even she told the same to the US counselor New Delhi and she got h1 stamping done. Gap of H1 approval effective date and employment was about 2 months.
If you would ask this question to any attorney, you may get same reply. But asking to attorney is advisable.
This is not the case always...Your wife might be lucky or the IO was kind person. Normally if you can not provide the pay stub in H1B you are out of status. Please read the definition of H1B and you will get clear picture about this.
Also if your wife received the I-94 after the H1B approval, she was in status. Because whichever was the latest I-94 - thats the valid one and in effect. So that might be the reason your wife didnt fave any issue.
wallpaper Movie - Godzilla Wallpaper
JazzByTheBay
09-08 11:49 AM
Given the demographics of the greater Seattle area in general, and Redmond in particular - I'm surprised "softies" haven't taken over the WA chapter completely... :)
Hope to see all of you in DC..
cheers!
jazz
My wife and me have joined the yahoogroups for WA chapter, We are going for the rally, how can we encourage more friends in WA state to go? I know there are people willing to sponsor, provide part of funds, help with accommodation and so on and if anyone in WA has any of these limitations, people are willing to coordinate. How do we get the point across to all Washingtonian GC sufferers or people who just filed for 485 and don't see the bleak tomorrow. How do we wake them up all up? We have so many employers here, is there something we can do to wake them up from the slumber and mirage of filing 485? I must admit, I was sleeping too until yesterday when we booked our tickets.
Hope to see all of you in DC..
cheers!
jazz
My wife and me have joined the yahoogroups for WA chapter, We are going for the rally, how can we encourage more friends in WA state to go? I know there are people willing to sponsor, provide part of funds, help with accommodation and so on and if anyone in WA has any of these limitations, people are willing to coordinate. How do we get the point across to all Washingtonian GC sufferers or people who just filed for 485 and don't see the bleak tomorrow. How do we wake them up all up? We have so many employers here, is there something we can do to wake them up from the slumber and mirage of filing 485? I must admit, I was sleeping too until yesterday when we booked our tickets.
LostInGCProcess
03-03 11:24 AM
I did AC21 from a Consulting company into a big financial company and moved using EAD. My old employer requested USCIS to revoke my 140 and as a result I got a NOID from USCIS asking details of new employment. I gave the details and my case processing resumed.
AC21 issues can be resolved. So don't worry about it.
Chanduv23, When you moved to another employer, did they give you a permanent offer letter for your GC process that you would attach with the Ac21 documents or did you use the employment letter that they gave for joining the new company?? Am I confusing you? I meant to ask, since GC is for future employment, did thay give you a separate employment letter for the future job?
AC21 issues can be resolved. So don't worry about it.
Chanduv23, When you moved to another employer, did they give you a permanent offer letter for your GC process that you would attach with the Ac21 documents or did you use the employment letter that they gave for joining the new company?? Am I confusing you? I meant to ask, since GC is for future employment, did thay give you a separate employment letter for the future job?
2011 Godzilla Final Wars wallpaper.
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
more...
.jpg "Wallpapers lego-godzilla.com!")
quizzer
02-25 11:39 PM
If somebody wants to enter IT field from a non-IT background, any list of suggestions of the certifications and courses to be taken? There are so many of them that it is hard to choose.
SAP and Oracle are any day hot!!!!!!!!!!!
SAP and Oracle are any day hot!!!!!!!!!!!
Ramba
12-22 07:13 PM
If a person has filed I-485 at least 6 months back and got laid off from job,
How much time does the rule permit to find another similar job and use AC 21.
Is this similar to H1B grace period or say no grace period.
thanks
Unlike H1B, at the time of layoff, if 485 is pending more than 6 months, you are still in legal status, (in h1b case there is no grace period). There is no time limit to find a similar job. You can stay at home for till your 485 approval, with legal status. Having said that, if INS asks for a eveidence of full time-permanat job you should be in a postion to show the job offer. In simple terms, tou should have a vaild job offer at the time of approval of your 485.
How much time does the rule permit to find another similar job and use AC 21.
Is this similar to H1B grace period or say no grace period.
thanks
Unlike H1B, at the time of layoff, if 485 is pending more than 6 months, you are still in legal status, (in h1b case there is no grace period). There is no time limit to find a similar job. You can stay at home for till your 485 approval, with legal status. Having said that, if INS asks for a eveidence of full time-permanat job you should be in a postion to show the job offer. In simple terms, tou should have a vaild job offer at the time of approval of your 485.
more...
mchundi
05-17 08:40 PM
Mchundi,
I understand your anxiety. To answer your questions:
There is no chance of having any single set of provisions "become law immediately."
Unfortunately, we have to let this current round of discussions on CIR play out. What should we root for? That amendments to the current CIR that basically gut the bill fail. If the bill survives these amendments then we stand a good chance of succeeding in our efforts.
For strategic reasons, we cannot disclose everything we know about behind the scenes agreements.
Hang in there!
best,
Berkeleybee
Thanks,
I am not even sure if this bill is good for me. (I am EB-2 2003 PD, I140 approved, India, 8th Year H1-B). I am sure this is good for people who r just stepping into the process.
I know u guys r doing a good job shuttling between work and D.C. This is the closest we have ever come with the lawmakers (that i know). If only we had this cohesion during S-1932 days we would have got something. Hope it works out well for us.
--MC
I understand your anxiety. To answer your questions:
There is no chance of having any single set of provisions "become law immediately."
Unfortunately, we have to let this current round of discussions on CIR play out. What should we root for? That amendments to the current CIR that basically gut the bill fail. If the bill survives these amendments then we stand a good chance of succeeding in our efforts.
For strategic reasons, we cannot disclose everything we know about behind the scenes agreements.
Hang in there!
best,
Berkeleybee
Thanks,
I am not even sure if this bill is good for me. (I am EB-2 2003 PD, I140 approved, India, 8th Year H1-B). I am sure this is good for people who r just stepping into the process.
I know u guys r doing a good job shuttling between work and D.C. This is the closest we have ever come with the lawmakers (that i know). If only we had this cohesion during S-1932 days we would have got something. Hope it works out well for us.
--MC
2010 Godzilla vs the Avengers by
pscdk
08-21 10:29 AM
Congratulations.
more...
CreatedToday
03-29 04:09 PM
Which airport in Bangalore you landed?
this is not a game , this happened really to me .I am Indian .They did not gave my passport back . They took my passport and send me to Bangalore Airport back .I know they don't have any right to hold any one's property that too a country citizenship passport.I am looking for an answer and advice , not question for a question
this is not a game , this happened really to me .I am Indian .They did not gave my passport back . They took my passport and send me to Bangalore Airport back .I know they don't have any right to hold any one's property that too a country citizenship passport.I am looking for an answer and advice , not question for a question
hair Godzilla through the years
gc28262
07-18 03:47 PM
On H1B it is illegal for employer to enforce bond:
Please read employees rights in DOL page:
Employment Law Guide - Workers in Professional and Specialty Occupations (H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Visas) (http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/h1b.htm)
Employee Rights
H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers are granted a number of rights. The employer must give the worker a copy of the LCA. The employer must pay the worker at least the same wage rate as paid to other employees with similar experience and qualifications or the local prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of employment, whichever is higher. The employer must pay for non-productive time caused by the employer or by the worker's lack of a license or permit. The employer must offer the worker fringe benefits on the same basis as its other employees. Also, the employer may not require the worker to pay a penalty for leaving employment prior to any agreed date. However, this restriction does not preclude the employer from seeking "liquidated damages" pursuant to relevant state law. Liquidated damages are generally estimates stated in a contract of the anticipated damages to the employer caused by the worker's breach of contract.
Please read employees rights in DOL page:
Employment Law Guide - Workers in Professional and Specialty Occupations (H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Visas) (http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/h1b.htm)
Employee Rights
H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 workers are granted a number of rights. The employer must give the worker a copy of the LCA. The employer must pay the worker at least the same wage rate as paid to other employees with similar experience and qualifications or the local prevailing wage for the occupation in the area of employment, whichever is higher. The employer must pay for non-productive time caused by the employer or by the worker's lack of a license or permit. The employer must offer the worker fringe benefits on the same basis as its other employees. Also, the employer may not require the worker to pay a penalty for leaving employment prior to any agreed date. However, this restriction does not preclude the employer from seeking "liquidated damages" pursuant to relevant state law. Liquidated damages are generally estimates stated in a contract of the anticipated damages to the employer caused by the worker's breach of contract.
more...
clif
06-15 09:07 AM
Bumping up...
:confused: My H1B is about to expire in Oct 2007 and I haven't yet filed for 7th year extension. I have approved I-140 with April 2006 PD. Should I file for 7th year ext. of H1B or I-485 or both? If I file for H1B extension, will I get 1 year ext. or 3 year ext? :confused:
:confused: My H1B is about to expire in Oct 2007 and I haven't yet filed for 7th year extension. I have approved I-140 with April 2006 PD. Should I file for 7th year ext. of H1B or I-485 or both? If I file for H1B extension, will I get 1 year ext. or 3 year ext? :confused:
hot Wallpapers lego-godzilla.com!
axp817
02-03 01:49 PM
Documentation informing the USCIS of your having utilized AC21 benefits isn't necessary, but is a proactive measure usually taken to have a clean slate on the applicant's part.
It is true that in a majority of the cases the AC21 documentation might never reach the applican't 485 file, but in an unforeseen circumstance such as the denial of one's 485 based on 140 revocation (which, as we know isn't very uncommon) and matters reaching an immigration court, proof that one had taken proactive steps and gone out of one's way to inform the USCIS might make one's case stronger and thus make it easier to have the case reopened.
I was fortunate enough to not have to make that decision -whether to send AC21 documentation or not, the attorneys (Fragomen) representing the new employer recommended sending it making it easy for me.
Just my 2 cents,
It is true that in a majority of the cases the AC21 documentation might never reach the applican't 485 file, but in an unforeseen circumstance such as the denial of one's 485 based on 140 revocation (which, as we know isn't very uncommon) and matters reaching an immigration court, proof that one had taken proactive steps and gone out of one's way to inform the USCIS might make one's case stronger and thus make it easier to have the case reopened.
I was fortunate enough to not have to make that decision -whether to send AC21 documentation or not, the attorneys (Fragomen) representing the new employer recommended sending it making it easy for me.
Just my 2 cents,
more...
house godzilla wallpaper.
kingkon_2000
06-08 11:59 AM
I entered the US as a student in Jan '99 and did a couple of trips on my F1 visa and since I got my H1-B approval notice in 2001, I never left until last December '07 and returned with a stamped H1-B visa.
I would be "ok" if they asked for all returns since 2001 as that's when I actually started working and used the H1-B, but why is he asking for returns from 1999, I have no clue...
That's why I mentioned it feels like he wants to deny my applicatoin. Can he deny it if I can't produce the returns for '99 and '00 even though I filed my returns and the IRS can't produce evidence that I did or didn't?
I do have the W-2's from '99 and '00...
Any ideas/help from senior members or someone that had a similar situation?
If you have w-2's you just need to fill 1040NR-EZ and send it back to the requesting officer. I don't understand what is the problem in fill a form and signing it and sending in the copies of it... what difference does it make if it was filled in 1999 or 2008 as it will be the same thing.... if they have a problem ask them to verify it with IRS which I am sure they will not able to do as there is no way so they have to accept what you submit... just my $0.02.. ask your attorney about this...
I would be "ok" if they asked for all returns since 2001 as that's when I actually started working and used the H1-B, but why is he asking for returns from 1999, I have no clue...
That's why I mentioned it feels like he wants to deny my applicatoin. Can he deny it if I can't produce the returns for '99 and '00 even though I filed my returns and the IRS can't produce evidence that I did or didn't?
I do have the W-2's from '99 and '00...
Any ideas/help from senior members or someone that had a similar situation?
If you have w-2's you just need to fill 1040NR-EZ and send it back to the requesting officer. I don't understand what is the problem in fill a form and signing it and sending in the copies of it... what difference does it make if it was filled in 1999 or 2008 as it will be the same thing.... if they have a problem ask them to verify it with IRS which I am sure they will not able to do as there is no way so they have to accept what you submit... just my $0.02.. ask your attorney about this...
tattoo godzilla most dangerous
poorslumdog
09-04 03:38 PM
If at this rate the people are dying, In 1-2 years every one will be finished.
Do they die because of RAT FEVER, SLUM DOG FEVER, MONKEY FEVER or SWINE FLUE ???
Man...you rock
Do they die because of RAT FEVER, SLUM DOG FEVER, MONKEY FEVER or SWINE FLUE ???
Man...you rock
more...
pictures a wallpaper from godzilla
ajju
10-15 02:21 PM
agree.. 90 days is too much.. esp when just dates need to be extended.. In the first place.. it should be non-expiring .. something like valid with I-485 Receipt... and then when accepting EAD employer can check the I-485 status that its still pending... and any change will send email to the employer about 485 current status...
But then my dear.. where's the money...
Guess people can't even take PUN any more... Got negative and abusive remarks for this.. atleast have guts/courtesy to leave name/handle...
But then my dear.. where's the money...
Guess people can't even take PUN any more... Got negative and abusive remarks for this.. atleast have guts/courtesy to leave name/handle...
dresses 60%. Yuko
richasamuel@yahoo.com
08-29 10:51 PM
Hi frnds,
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
Keep one thing in mind every decision in life has its own pro's and con's.First of all with all self respect for yourself change your job.H1b itself is legalised slavery or human trafficking whatever you call it.unfortunately whether your employer tortures you or not every employer irrespective of whether you are a H1b or a Green card or a citizen will exploit you to the fullest, no matter what, that's the irony.
I used to work for a company A in california.. Boss is kind of using very bad language constantly and torchers almost everyday. Is there any1 who can help me out or has similar situations. Is there any1 that i can file a complain. Since he knew that I am on H1B and international student he was continuously abusing. any help would appreciated.
Tanx.
Keep one thing in mind every decision in life has its own pro's and con's.First of all with all self respect for yourself change your job.H1b itself is legalised slavery or human trafficking whatever you call it.unfortunately whether your employer tortures you or not every employer irrespective of whether you are a H1b or a Green card or a citizen will exploit you to the fullest, no matter what, that's the irony.
more...
makeup Wallpaper 11:Godzilla
Sachin_Stock
02-03 04:51 PM
anyone know if,
Bachelors Equivalent ( Bachelors-3Yrs + Masters-2Yrs )
+ 5 years Experience
qualify for EB2 ?
thanks,
Your Masters should suffice for the educational requirements. 3-year Bachelors is irrelevent in this context. However your job position must nessiccitate the Master's qualification.
Bachelors Equivalent ( Bachelors-3Yrs + Masters-2Yrs )
+ 5 years Experience
qualify for EB2 ?
thanks,
Your Masters should suffice for the educational requirements. 3-year Bachelors is irrelevent in this context. However your job position must nessiccitate the Master's qualification.
girlfriend .nocookie.net/godzilla/
brb2
11-08 06:31 PM
remember the bulk of the pending AOS are from retrogressed countries. So even those from ROW who have not yet filed (and may do so next few years) need to be added to the "pending AOS" in order to obtain the 'real' que size of pending AOS applications.
hairstyles Godzilla Wallpaper by ~Tomrade
srikanthmavurapu
08-16 03:53 PM
Srikanth,
It all depends on the language in the Agreement that you signed. More over in some state doesn't consider these kind of agreements.
Tell him that you are going to complain to DOL if he threatens you. Even though he sues you, as the reason behind your H1 transfer is not getting paid in time, there are very good chances getting final verdict in your favor.
So don't worry.
Thanks for the advice. I also told him that i will complain to DOL and USCIS but no response from him he asked for compensation but i didn't agreed on it . Now, I am in process of complaining to DOL and they are saying that the case is in court so now i am searching for a lawyer in virginia.
Thanks,
Srikanth
It all depends on the language in the Agreement that you signed. More over in some state doesn't consider these kind of agreements.
Tell him that you are going to complain to DOL if he threatens you. Even though he sues you, as the reason behind your H1 transfer is not getting paid in time, there are very good chances getting final verdict in your favor.
So don't worry.
Thanks for the advice. I also told him that i will complain to DOL and USCIS but no response from him he asked for compensation but i didn't agreed on it . Now, I am in process of complaining to DOL and they are saying that the case is in court so now i am searching for a lawyer in virginia.
Thanks,
Srikanth
chanduv23
07-11 02:42 PM
My EAD and AP application was received June 19, 2009 at TSC. To my pleasant shocking & surprise USCIS approved mine and wife's application in 20 days and we received the card today.
We are happy with the speed and efficiency USCIS and wish they could do everything the same way. we received two year EAD but concerned as receiving a two year EAD indicates that it may take a while to get my PD (Dec 2005).
Thanks
Senthil.
My EAD and AP were receipted on June 9th from TSC. AP got approved, EAD still pending. So I guess these approvals are random.
We are happy with the speed and efficiency USCIS and wish they could do everything the same way. we received two year EAD but concerned as receiving a two year EAD indicates that it may take a while to get my PD (Dec 2005).
Thanks
Senthil.
My EAD and AP were receipted on June 9th from TSC. AP got approved, EAD still pending. So I guess these approvals are random.
dollar500
04-10 06:23 PM
Moonlighting will be acceptable easily as long as it's on the code internist. Problem is some fellowships are so demanding that you wont be able to moonlight as an internist. If you can figure this out smoothly and yr employer agrees nothing is better. Good thought.
HI I am a physician (hospitalist) whose labor was under the catagory 'Internist' job code. The fellowship I am considering is open only to internist. I am also planning to moonlight as an internist while in fellowship. Would it be acceptable from the I485 point of view? Incidentally my I140 was approved more the 180 days ago.
HI I am a physician (hospitalist) whose labor was under the catagory 'Internist' job code. The fellowship I am considering is open only to internist. I am also planning to moonlight as an internist while in fellowship. Would it be acceptable from the I485 point of view? Incidentally my I140 was approved more the 180 days ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment