kumar1
12-03 12:30 PM
Thank you. Very encouraging.
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
wallpaper cross tattoos for arms
vxb2004
05-31 07:45 PM
tpcool,
I am not familiar with ur line of work. I am into manufacturing.I used my AC21 and working on EAD now.
You can invoke AC21 and work either on h1b(provided newcompany transfers) or EAD. It is highly advisable NOT to port on a pending I-140.
Hope this helps.
I am not familiar with ur line of work. I am into manufacturing.I used my AC21 and working on EAD now.
You can invoke AC21 and work either on h1b(provided newcompany transfers) or EAD. It is highly advisable NOT to port on a pending I-140.
Hope this helps.
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
2011 rip cross tattoo.
zoooom
05-05 04:10 PM
i second that...
more...
lecter
March 3rd, 2004, 06:07 PM
This is a fine image... Love the grainy B&W look... gives it age...
Rob
Rob
vroapp
02-22 10:26 AM
1--> you should qualify for a J1 as 140 is filed by your Husband's employer; better check with an attorney.
2--> HRR applies and hence you have to get a waiver to file 485 after completion of your Residency.
3--> Once your status changes to J1; HRR applies.
5--> depends on the specialty.
2--> HRR applies and hence you have to get a waiver to file 485 after completion of your Residency.
3--> Once your status changes to J1; HRR applies.
5--> depends on the specialty.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
11-06 04:57 PM
Glad to see your initiatives. But our focus should be different.
The Economy is in very bad shape. Unemployement is rising. At this moment any bill that ask for GC number increase won't pass. We need to wait for atleast few months.
In the meantime as a temprory releif we should push the "Country quoto elimination bill" that does not increase GC numbers.
Also please take a look at my plan that I presented couple of weeks earlier. It is a compromise bill and I feel it has the best chance to pass during lameduck session. My plan gives at least some releif to people waiting for 7 years or waiting for months with PD current.
Please keep the spirit alive. Thanks.
You are right. I guess GC for House concept may fly. Guys, think over it!
The Economy is in very bad shape. Unemployement is rising. At this moment any bill that ask for GC number increase won't pass. We need to wait for atleast few months.
In the meantime as a temprory releif we should push the "Country quoto elimination bill" that does not increase GC numbers.
Also please take a look at my plan that I presented couple of weeks earlier. It is a compromise bill and I feel it has the best chance to pass during lameduck session. My plan gives at least some releif to people waiting for 7 years or waiting for months with PD current.
Please keep the spirit alive. Thanks.
You are right. I guess GC for House concept may fly. Guys, think over it!
2010 rip cross tattoo. tattoos handcrafted to last a; tattoos handcrafted to last
fcres
07-20 05:18 PM
This is news to me also. Once my current H1 expires I'm also planning to work on EAD and change to H4. One attorney adviced me to do that so that in case something happens to our I-485, I'll be on H4 and be still on status in this country to appeal for an MTR.
Another attorney told me to just work on EAD, no need to file H4 but I can if that will give me a peace of mind.
But what this attorney described here make sense too. If working on EAD invalidates H1, it should invalidate H4 also. But then again like the OP said I have known people who were on H4 and started working when they got EAD and extended their H4.
Is it different in case its the beneficiary of the I485 thats moving to H4?
Saloni, have you gotten any more info and could you please provide the link to the memo you are talking about?
Another attorney told me to just work on EAD, no need to file H4 but I can if that will give me a peace of mind.
But what this attorney described here make sense too. If working on EAD invalidates H1, it should invalidate H4 also. But then again like the OP said I have known people who were on H4 and started working when they got EAD and extended their H4.
Is it different in case its the beneficiary of the I485 thats moving to H4?
Saloni, have you gotten any more info and could you please provide the link to the memo you are talking about?
more...
va_labor2002
09-24 05:44 PM
Dear Core Team and other Members,
Rajiv Chandrasekaran is an assistant managing editor of The Washington Post, where he has worked since 1994. He lives in Washington, D.C.
He had published an article on the Sept 17 Washington Post Main Page.He is a well known reporter in DC area. I think he is originally from India. If you search his name in google ,you will get lot of hits !
I sent an email to him ,requesting to publish an article on legal immigration issues. Please send him an email. Also, please send some documents and real stories to his address by Post. email id is : rajiv@washpost.com
Contact Rajiv Chandrasekaran at:
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20071
(202) 334-6000
rajiv@washpost.com
Rajiv Chandrasekaran is an assistant managing editor of The Washington Post, where he has worked since 1994. He lives in Washington, D.C.
He had published an article on the Sept 17 Washington Post Main Page.He is a well known reporter in DC area. I think he is originally from India. If you search his name in google ,you will get lot of hits !
I sent an email to him ,requesting to publish an article on legal immigration issues. Please send him an email. Also, please send some documents and real stories to his address by Post. email id is : rajiv@washpost.com
Contact Rajiv Chandrasekaran at:
The Washington Post
1150 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20071
(202) 334-6000
rajiv@washpost.com
hair Scars, Marks, Tattoos: Grim
nfadlalla
03-09 10:20 AM
Receipt Number: WACXXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I130, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR RELATIVE, FIANCE(E), OR ORPHAN
Current Status: Document OTHER THAN CARD manufactured and mailed.
On February 12, 2007, we mailed the document we manufactured based on our earlier approval of this case, and mailed it to the address on we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
what does this mean?...i havnt recieved anything yet....!!!:confused:
Application Type: I130, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR RELATIVE, FIANCE(E), OR ORPHAN
Current Status: Document OTHER THAN CARD manufactured and mailed.
On February 12, 2007, we mailed the document we manufactured based on our earlier approval of this case, and mailed it to the address on we have on file. You should receive the new document within 30 days. If you do not, or if you move before you get it, call customer service.
what does this mean?...i havnt recieved anything yet....!!!:confused:
more...
snathan
04-12 07:17 PM
Hi,
Last year i.e 2008, I had applied for H1 from 2 diff. employers. One (XYZ) got picked in lottery and the other(ABC) didn't. I had paid nothing but a post-dated cheque to XYZ; but had paid $1800 to ABC with no evidence with me at the moment. Now when i ask for my money back from ABC because i didn't get H1 from him anyways, he says he has borne some expenses on my application and there were some queries from USCIS related to my application. What he says is as below:
"My company ABC have highlighted that there were some concerns with from the USCIS on your application, as the USCIS had clearly told all petitioners to only file one single H1 application last and there should be no 2 applications for the same candidate. In your case you did file 2 independent H1 applications. The attorney was penalized."
And he puts the below figure his company has borne towards expenses for my H1 application:
1)Education evaluation: $125
2)Attorney fees: $1000
My question is:
1) Is attorney fees really $1000 or it is much less than what he claims it to be?
2) Can't i apply & hold more than 1 valid petition? I know i cannot have valid VISA on more than 1 petition, but having multiple valid petitions is "No problem" is what i feel.
How can I proceed in this matter? Plz advice.
Thanks
raj131982
Just respond to the above email, you are filing complaint with DOL, USCIS for collecting money from the employe. If you are getting back your money witin XX days, he needs to face the DOL audit. So he needs to decide which one to chose.
and see his reaction for that. Record all the conversation and email between you.
Thanks
Last year i.e 2008, I had applied for H1 from 2 diff. employers. One (XYZ) got picked in lottery and the other(ABC) didn't. I had paid nothing but a post-dated cheque to XYZ; but had paid $1800 to ABC with no evidence with me at the moment. Now when i ask for my money back from ABC because i didn't get H1 from him anyways, he says he has borne some expenses on my application and there were some queries from USCIS related to my application. What he says is as below:
"My company ABC have highlighted that there were some concerns with from the USCIS on your application, as the USCIS had clearly told all petitioners to only file one single H1 application last and there should be no 2 applications for the same candidate. In your case you did file 2 independent H1 applications. The attorney was penalized."
And he puts the below figure his company has borne towards expenses for my H1 application:
1)Education evaluation: $125
2)Attorney fees: $1000
My question is:
1) Is attorney fees really $1000 or it is much less than what he claims it to be?
2) Can't i apply & hold more than 1 valid petition? I know i cannot have valid VISA on more than 1 petition, but having multiple valid petitions is "No problem" is what i feel.
How can I proceed in this matter? Plz advice.
Thanks
raj131982
Just respond to the above email, you are filing complaint with DOL, USCIS for collecting money from the employe. If you are getting back your money witin XX days, he needs to face the DOL audit. So he needs to decide which one to chose.
and see his reaction for that. Record all the conversation and email between you.
Thanks
hot R.I.P Cross Tattoo Designs
desi_scorpion
08-10 12:01 PM
Called the NSC on wed and today....and was told that I need to wait 90 days from the date of submitting the 485 to receive a receipt number. Expecting something similar in todays update.....thats a pretty long wait.
more...
house cross tattoo images. crosses
msgoud
03-08 12:40 PM
thats what gist of it i was not there
the vo seems to be saying that last time when he went to stamping he filled his client details like where he working and which was az at that time and this VO was saying now you are working in NJ ,the confusion seems to becaused by the clinet letter in which his manager wrote that he directly reports to him as consultant,VO is assuming that he working here without preoper documents,atleast that what i understood:confused:.
the vo seems to be saying that last time when he went to stamping he filled his client details like where he working and which was az at that time and this VO was saying now you are working in NJ ,the confusion seems to becaused by the clinet letter in which his manager wrote that he directly reports to him as consultant,VO is assuming that he working here without preoper documents,atleast that what i understood:confused:.
tattoo rip cross tattoo.
jsb
10-30 02:33 PM
I was in the same situation until a few days ago. Those who are still waiting for this unreasonable period of time, may want to signup for Ombudsman's conference call on:
“USCIS Receipting Delay II – How Does This Affect You?” – November 2, 2007 2:00-3:00 EDT
by emailing your questions in advance, to: cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov
I attended last call, which was very helpful.
“USCIS Receipting Delay II – How Does This Affect You?” – November 2, 2007 2:00-3:00 EDT
by emailing your questions in advance, to: cisombudsman.publicaffairs@dhs.gov
I attended last call, which was very helpful.
more...
pictures rip cross tattoo. american
dba9ioracle
03-17 02:51 PM
With out a GC, you may not get the best rate. But you sure can get a mortgage loan while in H1/EAD.
When you shop around ask for rate quote and that time they won't ask your immigration status. If bank changes the rate based on your immi status, do not go with them.
I bought the house while I was on H1 4 years back (I am still using my H1 and I have an EAD now) and nobody asked me my imm status. I submitted the document at the time of doing paperwork but it did not change my rate. I got the best rate based on my credit from wells fargo.
good luck
When you shop around ask for rate quote and that time they won't ask your immigration status. If bank changes the rate based on your immi status, do not go with them.
I bought the house while I was on H1 4 years back (I am still using my H1 and I have an EAD now) and nobody asked me my imm status. I submitted the document at the time of doing paperwork but it did not change my rate. I got the best rate based on my credit from wells fargo.
good luck
dresses cross tattoos on calf.
psvk
11-05 05:13 PM
AMERICAblog News: ThinkProgress: GOP entering class is a bit nutty (http://www.americablog.com/2010/11/thinkprogress-gop-entering-class-is-bit.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+Americablog+(AMERICAblog))
Here is a snapshot of the GOP Class of 2010�s extremism:
ENVIRONMENT
- 50% deny the existence of manmade climate change
- 86% are opposed to any climate change legislation that increases government revenue
IMMIGRATION
- 39% have already declared their intention to end the 14th Amendment�s guarantee of birthright citizenship
- 32% want to reduce legal immigration
TAXES/SPENDING
- 91% have sworn to never allow an income tax increase on any individual or business � regardless of deficits or war
- 79% have pledged to permanently repeal the estate tax
- 48% are pushing for a balanced budget amendment
Here is a snapshot of the GOP Class of 2010�s extremism:
ENVIRONMENT
- 50% deny the existence of manmade climate change
- 86% are opposed to any climate change legislation that increases government revenue
IMMIGRATION
- 39% have already declared their intention to end the 14th Amendment�s guarantee of birthright citizenship
- 32% want to reduce legal immigration
TAXES/SPENDING
- 91% have sworn to never allow an income tax increase on any individual or business � regardless of deficits or war
- 79% have pledged to permanently repeal the estate tax
- 48% are pushing for a balanced budget amendment
more...
makeup rip cross tattoo. cross
STAmisha
08-13 08:58 PM
Can people convert LC pending in BEC to PERM? If So, how safe it is and how much time it takes totally.
girlfriend Sun god tattoo. RIP cross by
krishna_brc
07-06 11:18 AM
I just received this RFE on my spouse's I-485 application. It states that while the applicant's name is spelt **i**** on the application it is spelt **ee**** on the birth and marriage registration certificate. The RFE states that they require some sort of document to show that name was officially changed. In a following note the RFE states that the document (I would assume the green card) that the USCIS will issue will be issued in the name on the birth certificate instead of on I-485 application if sufficient proof of registration of name change is not provided. Only a copy of the passport will not be treated as sufficient proof and supporting documentation that the name was registered with authority has to be provided for the USCIS to accept the name change.
Did anyone face this type of issue. What did you do. Any information would be appreciated as I have no clue about how to deal with this. I will ofcourse consult a lawyer at the beginning of next week but would like some advice.
Not to panic. As said by "trump_gc" prepare an affidavit explaining the correct name and ask the attorney to send an amendment request on 485 if name has to be changed along with all supporting documents and explaining the current situation.
Also please let us know your Priority Date and Receipt Date of I-485 and service center, this helps members of IV understand what PD and RD currently uscis is reviewing.
Thanks,
Krishna
Did anyone face this type of issue. What did you do. Any information would be appreciated as I have no clue about how to deal with this. I will ofcourse consult a lawyer at the beginning of next week but would like some advice.
Not to panic. As said by "trump_gc" prepare an affidavit explaining the correct name and ask the attorney to send an amendment request on 485 if name has to be changed along with all supporting documents and explaining the current situation.
Also please let us know your Priority Date and Receipt Date of I-485 and service center, this helps members of IV understand what PD and RD currently uscis is reviewing.
Thanks,
Krishna
hairstyles is a memorial cross tattoo
Robert Kumar
02-12 02:51 PM
Why dont you consider one of attorney offices that provide free call services to IV members. That would help you as well as help IV community. May be you can consider Prashanthi Reddy or Raj at Shusterman or Siskind Law firm.
I would love to, as it will help IV community also, but unfortunately it is not very easy in a company to request change of lawyer when the lawyer is good one. I see from many comments here that the Chugh Firm is a good one. And the employer also feels the same. So what grounds can I request them change their processes which they are following for nearly 200 employees. It will be hard. Cant even ask..
I would love to, as it will help IV community also, but unfortunately it is not very easy in a company to request change of lawyer when the lawyer is good one. I see from many comments here that the Chugh Firm is a good one. And the employer also feels the same. So what grounds can I request them change their processes which they are following for nearly 200 employees. It will be hard. Cant even ask..
nrk
10-17 10:15 AM
Guys, Suggest me a good consulting company. My employer is OK until now and he just started demanding money even for H1 extensions. I am seriously thinking of moving. Please suggest good desi consulting companies who can support my GC and keep min billing. I have a very good project in hand
Hi I am in 4th year of working with a cosulting company. Their response is little slow, but committed to what ever they say. Overall i like the present company.
It is Paradigm Infotech based in Maryland. If you want to check out take a number from the website and call them directly.
Hi I am in 4th year of working with a cosulting company. Their response is little slow, but committed to what ever they say. Overall i like the present company.
It is Paradigm Infotech based in Maryland. If you want to check out take a number from the website and call them directly.
gulute
09-16 02:57 AM
The major grievance of people on H1 was their spouses cannot work and when the ruling came into effect that the time spent on H4 will not be counted and a new 6 year term is possible, H4s massively applied for H1, and this year�s H1 quota was over on the first day itself and then the lotto! Now when the H1 is approved they are too chicken and do not want to work!
They have taken away these most coveted H1 visa numbers from qualified professionals who wanted to come and work in this country. Please don�t do this next year!
So far two, any more in the same situation! :confused:
Same situation here. As per my lawyer (good lawyer can be trusted but could be ill informed) If my wife doesn't join the employer there is no status change. No need to file any reinstatement from H4 to H1. And I have reconfirmed this a couple of times now.
If you hear anything different from a legit source please do let me know.
Other relevant details in my case is that my wife's ead/ap application was filed on 2nd July. and She is under Adjustment of Status (485) as a derivative. On a second thought, I am not sure if this is the same case as yours.
They have taken away these most coveted H1 visa numbers from qualified professionals who wanted to come and work in this country. Please don�t do this next year!
So far two, any more in the same situation! :confused:
Same situation here. As per my lawyer (good lawyer can be trusted but could be ill informed) If my wife doesn't join the employer there is no status change. No need to file any reinstatement from H4 to H1. And I have reconfirmed this a couple of times now.
If you hear anything different from a legit source please do let me know.
Other relevant details in my case is that my wife's ead/ap application was filed on 2nd July. and She is under Adjustment of Status (485) as a derivative. On a second thought, I am not sure if this is the same case as yours.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق