Blog Feeds
07-09 12:30 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
wallpaper Lots of Nicole Atkins news to
ahiyer
09-08 10:47 AM
I am a little skeptical about how this would work.
Wont they charge you for International dialing when calling from here?
lastly, is it legal?
Wont they charge you for International dialing when calling from here?
lastly, is it legal?
nixstor
02-24 09:57 AM
That was just what I knew. For example NV does the same because they dont have state tax. They don't see a reason why they should give instate for people on temporary visas and do not pay taxes to the state. They consider us as people who are here on Non Immigrant visas who will leave any time. As you said ,TX might be more considerate.
2011 Nicole Atkins is not really
Ann Ruben
02-11 09:30 PM
Hi Euclid,
In my opinion, your situation clearly falls within the "receipt rule". The rec't for replacement of the lost EAD is good for up to 90 days. Below is an excerpt from the the most recent I-9 Handbook for Employers published by USCIS. This pretty clearly differentiates between a rec't for an initial or renewal application and a rec't for an application to replace a lost document.
Ann
Q When can employees present receipts for documents in lieu of actual documents establishing employment authorization?
A The “receipt rule” is designed to cover situations in which an employee is employment autho- rized at the time of initial hire or reverification, but he or she is not in possession of a document listed on page 5 of Form I-9. Receipts showing that a person has applied for an initial grant of employment authorization or for renewal of employment authorization are not acceptable.
An individual may present a receipt in lieu of a document listed on Form I-9 to complete Section 2 of Form I-9.The receipt is valid for a temporary period.There are three different documents that qualify as receipts under the rule:
32
1.
A receipt for a replacement document when the document has been lost, stolen, or damaged.The receipt is valid for 90 days, after which the individual must present the
replacement document to complete Form I-9.
Note: This rule does not apply to individuals who pres- ent receipts for new documents following the expiration of their previously held document.
In my opinion, your situation clearly falls within the "receipt rule". The rec't for replacement of the lost EAD is good for up to 90 days. Below is an excerpt from the the most recent I-9 Handbook for Employers published by USCIS. This pretty clearly differentiates between a rec't for an initial or renewal application and a rec't for an application to replace a lost document.
Ann
Q When can employees present receipts for documents in lieu of actual documents establishing employment authorization?
A The “receipt rule” is designed to cover situations in which an employee is employment autho- rized at the time of initial hire or reverification, but he or she is not in possession of a document listed on page 5 of Form I-9. Receipts showing that a person has applied for an initial grant of employment authorization or for renewal of employment authorization are not acceptable.
An individual may present a receipt in lieu of a document listed on Form I-9 to complete Section 2 of Form I-9.The receipt is valid for a temporary period.There are three different documents that qualify as receipts under the rule:
32
1.
A receipt for a replacement document when the document has been lost, stolen, or damaged.The receipt is valid for 90 days, after which the individual must present the
replacement document to complete Form I-9.
Note: This rule does not apply to individuals who pres- ent receipts for new documents following the expiration of their previously held document.
more...
greencardfever
12-11 08:33 AM
How many days prior to the EAD and AP expiry date can we apply for EAD and AP renewal?
Thanks.
greencardfever
Thanks.
greencardfever
morchu
05-21 09:39 PM
1. No
2. ??? don't do any amendment. Just file a new eb2-140.
3. No as long as you leave your EB3-140 as it is.
Attorneys or Gurus please:
I have a bit different situation than Raj (rajivkane), so please suggest/answer following queries:
1. Is it advisable to file amendment I-824 or other (requesting an amended approval notice with retention of earlier priority date) instead of filing a new EB2 I-140 once EB2 Labor will get clear? My 485 is pending with EB3 I-140, where as EB-3 I-140 got approved before filing I-485 in July'2007.
2. Or it�s compulsory to file new I-140 with EB2 and once I-140 after that amendment.
3. Will it impact my pending 485 in regards to any of the above cases, which ever is correct?
Regards,
Raman
2. ??? don't do any amendment. Just file a new eb2-140.
3. No as long as you leave your EB3-140 as it is.
Attorneys or Gurus please:
I have a bit different situation than Raj (rajivkane), so please suggest/answer following queries:
1. Is it advisable to file amendment I-824 or other (requesting an amended approval notice with retention of earlier priority date) instead of filing a new EB2 I-140 once EB2 Labor will get clear? My 485 is pending with EB3 I-140, where as EB-3 I-140 got approved before filing I-485 in July'2007.
2. Or it�s compulsory to file new I-140 with EB2 and once I-140 after that amendment.
3. Will it impact my pending 485 in regards to any of the above cases, which ever is correct?
Regards,
Raman
more...
joydiptac
03-17 02:31 PM
I had a friend who was in the same situation as you. Being a nice guy, he waited till they got GC. Then divorced.
Poor fellow then remarried to a Desi girl after being pressurized by parents on a trip to India.
He soon realized that he had no hope of being able to get her here anytime soon. He tried to get her on a H1. That did not work out I don't know the exact detail how that got rejected(she is also an engineer). He then got really creative he brought her to Canada then worked the week in US and spent the weekend in Canada. After doing this for some time the Canadian Authorities figured it out and cancelled his Canadian work visa. Long story short, now he stays 6 months in US the other 6 in India with his wife. He has applied for GC for her. Unless President Obama does something he will keep living half life for a long time.
So the point is, if you are decided then waiting might increase your pain in the long run... On the other hand if you are not so sure, then give yourself some time and see if the issues that you may be having sort out. It is sometimes worth going to a marriage counsellor when you weigh in the loss that you both are about to incur, not to mention the mental trauma. All the best buddy.
B'Informed... B'Entertained...B'Khush
www.bkhush.com
Poor fellow then remarried to a Desi girl after being pressurized by parents on a trip to India.
He soon realized that he had no hope of being able to get her here anytime soon. He tried to get her on a H1. That did not work out I don't know the exact detail how that got rejected(she is also an engineer). He then got really creative he brought her to Canada then worked the week in US and spent the weekend in Canada. After doing this for some time the Canadian Authorities figured it out and cancelled his Canadian work visa. Long story short, now he stays 6 months in US the other 6 in India with his wife. He has applied for GC for her. Unless President Obama does something he will keep living half life for a long time.
So the point is, if you are decided then waiting might increase your pain in the long run... On the other hand if you are not so sure, then give yourself some time and see if the issues that you may be having sort out. It is sometimes worth going to a marriage counsellor when you weigh in the loss that you both are about to incur, not to mention the mental trauma. All the best buddy.
B'Informed... B'Entertained...B'Khush
www.bkhush.com
2010 Pictures gt; Nicole Atkins
chanduv23
03-06 01:08 PM
I will do that first thing Monday. Thanks for the initiative Pappu
more...
Carlau
01-08 12:58 PM
It is not a rule, but it depends on how the approval is given by USCIS. If you get a extended I94 along with the H1 approval then you are all set, if you get an approval with no I94 then you need to get a stamping before starting work. Consult lawyers they will explain it better.
My wife went through the H4 - H1 Conversion which got approved last week, we are still wating to see the approval document.
I have a question, I am on H-4 too (never on H-1B) as I understand, if I find a job I need to wait until April 2007 to file for H-1B and would be able to start working in October 2007.
How did your wife get now in 2007 an H-4 to H-1B conversion when all the H-1Bs were granted & last quota met in October 2006? Am I missing something here? If I found an employer, could I just start working without waiting the employer to file the H-1 in april and getting the permit for oct 2007? THanks!
My wife went through the H4 - H1 Conversion which got approved last week, we are still wating to see the approval document.
I have a question, I am on H-4 too (never on H-1B) as I understand, if I find a job I need to wait until April 2007 to file for H-1B and would be able to start working in October 2007.
How did your wife get now in 2007 an H-4 to H-1B conversion when all the H-1Bs were granted & last quota met in October 2006? Am I missing something here? If I found an employer, could I just start working without waiting the employer to file the H-1 in april and getting the permit for oct 2007? THanks!
hair Mondo Amore (2011). Nota: 6.0
augustus
04-22 11:30 AM
Sorry, the reason I meant strange was due to the nature of questions - different from the RFE's received currently by many of the IV members.
Sorry for the confusion. But please do help me if you have any inputs.
In my response to the RFE should I say that my job title in my LC/I-140 position as being my current position or the one in H1-B visa application?
Sorry for the confusion. But please do help me if you have any inputs.
In my response to the RFE should I say that my job title in my LC/I-140 position as being my current position or the one in H1-B visa application?
more...
NolaIndian32
02-13 02:03 PM
This is one IV you don't want to be left without: IV - Immigration Voice, working for the Employment Based Legal Immigrant Community
hot late night: nicole atkins
sankap
08-20 02:51 PM
I'm getting the same response this week as y'all did. Perhaps they've been instructed to not pay any attention to "seeking-status" calls...:(
more...
house Mondo Amore by Nicole Atkins
Canadianindian
07-24 06:34 AM
You folks can apply for a Canadian immigration for yourself. It would take atleast 6 months. While she can live on Canadian bording city such as Windsor, and you can work in Detroit, MI. Detroit and Windsor are about 2 miles from each other, and I know many ppl who live in Windsro and work in Detroit.
tattoo Nicole Atkins: March 11,
sparky_jones
03-12 09:34 PM
Received a mail for myself and my wife. welcome to USA. But no email from CRIS.
:):):):):):)
Congratulations!
:):):):):):)
Congratulations!
more...
pictures Brooklyn#39;s Nicole Atkins was
shan74
10-23 07:20 AM
There is a chance that i might get laid off. I have a pending I485 filed on July 2. My I-140 was approved in June 06. Would like to know if i get laid off within how many days do i have to find a job.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
dresses Mondo Amore, is the new album
sapota
08-31 11:33 AM
believe that American companies are telling the truth when they claim there is a lack of qualified talent in the U.S. for the high tech industry?
Even though the disclaimer says unscientific poll, this is outrageously biased.
Please forward to all hi tech companies. Let it come from the horses mouth.
Even though the disclaimer says unscientific poll, this is outrageously biased.
Please forward to all hi tech companies. Let it come from the horses mouth.
more...
makeup Nicole Atkins :: Mondo Amore
nogc_noproblem
10-23 08:50 PM
Thanks Vivek (Walking_Dude) for taking effort and arranging this. Nice meeting all of you at Troy.
Interestingly, when we got introduced our self I found that couple of guys are from my apartment complex where I live for the past three years but never met them before. Another two guys from nearby apartments which are in walk able distance.
It is for sure that the State Chapters are good networking opportunity for everybody. Definitely it will help each of us one or the other way. Let us keep it going.
Interestingly, when we got introduced our self I found that couple of guys are from my apartment complex where I live for the past three years but never met them before. Another two guys from nearby apartments which are in walk able distance.
It is for sure that the State Chapters are good networking opportunity for everybody. Definitely it will help each of us one or the other way. Let us keep it going.
girlfriend Nicole Atkins is a NYC based
bluekayal
09-16 05:05 PM
Thank you!
here is an article from murthy about unemployment benefits:
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
here is an article from murthy about unemployment benefits:
MurthyDotCom : Unemployment Benefits and Impact on U.S. Immigration (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_unembe.html)
hairstyles Her new album, “Mondo Amore”,
H1InTrouble
09-21 09:31 AM
Hi
Thanks for the reply. My new employer is fine. He is sure that my current employer cannot do anything as he has failed to meet his obligation as an employer. He cannot provide me with a job at the moment. But my end client is hesitating now. They are a very big company and do not want to get into any legal issues.
If my end client says No then my new employer will also probably back out because of lack of project.
Regards
H1InTrouble.
Thanks for the reply. My new employer is fine. He is sure that my current employer cannot do anything as he has failed to meet his obligation as an employer. He cannot provide me with a job at the moment. But my end client is hesitating now. They are a very big company and do not want to get into any legal issues.
If my end client says No then my new employer will also probably back out because of lack of project.
Regards
H1InTrouble.
arc
04-14 09:50 AM
You know these reporting back, reistating the status, etc takes lots of effort, money and time. I hate this kind of things. Why the hell we should pay for somebody's mistake?
On a side note:
If someone returns this kind of mistake-GC, then what will happen to the visa number? Will it get reclaimed and reused or go wasted?
The person I know who got GC before the PD was current, debated for sometime asked his lawyer etc... but it was whoever's mistake, they have got to honor it... he decided to keep the GC act dumb and njoy life.:D.. by the way even if you get a GC when PD is current they reserve the right to revoke... check with lawyer and decide for yourself !!!
On a side note:
If someone returns this kind of mistake-GC, then what will happen to the visa number? Will it get reclaimed and reused or go wasted?
The person I know who got GC before the PD was current, debated for sometime asked his lawyer etc... but it was whoever's mistake, they have got to honor it... he decided to keep the GC act dumb and njoy life.:D.. by the way even if you get a GC when PD is current they reserve the right to revoke... check with lawyer and decide for yourself !!!
ags123
07-26 09:57 AM
I recently got my Eb2 India Employment based I-485 approved. I am going to file my spouse's I-485 soon and was wondering what address I should send the forms to.
The direct filing address says
USCIS Chicago Lockbox
For U.S. Postal Service (USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
PO Box 805887
Chicago, IL 60680-4120
For Express mail and courier deliveries:
USCIS
Attn: FBAS
131 South Dearborn, 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60603-5517
However my attorney says we need to send it to the Nebraska Service Centre as my application was filed and approved there.
So should my lawyer send it to the Chicago lock box or NSC? Please let me know if you have personally done this recently after the addresses changes
The direct filing address says
USCIS Chicago Lockbox
For U.S. Postal Service (USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
PO Box 805887
Chicago, IL 60680-4120
For Express mail and courier deliveries:
USCIS
Attn: FBAS
131 South Dearborn, 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60603-5517
However my attorney says we need to send it to the Nebraska Service Centre as my application was filed and approved there.
So should my lawyer send it to the Chicago lock box or NSC? Please let me know if you have personally done this recently after the addresses changes
