gcseeker28
07-28 03:54 PM
So, I was talking to one of the attorneys and he mentioned that one should contest the denial within 30 days and as long as it is approved, we don't have any problem. But, if the MTR is rejected, then all the days that have been accumulated after the denial will be in illegal status.
What is the probability of cases of MTR getting approved after the relevant documents have been published?
For the client letter denial reason, did anybody furnish further documents?
Appreciate your inputs
What is the probability of cases of MTR getting approved after the relevant documents have been published?
For the client letter denial reason, did anybody furnish further documents?
Appreciate your inputs
wallpaper Only God can Judge me tattoo.
go_guy123
01-11 09:47 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This is still riddled with amnesty....more punitive versions will surely come which the democratic party will oppose for sure.
jay75
05-06 11:23 PM
Both my wife and myself got soft LUD today on 485. Aug'07 filed, EB3 India, PD 2004.
2011 TATTOOS HAVE BECOME LIKE
kumar1
12-13 04:17 PM
On top of that, companies that come for campus placement - they will put a big board for you -"Only US citizens and Green Card holders apply". I have friends who spent 50-60 K on MBA degree and they are doing software development job (They were developers even before doing MBA and they wanted to get out of it). Think about their investment - 2 years of MBA tution fee ~ 60 K + 2 years of wage loss ~ 160 K. After investing 220K if someone tell you to go and get Green Card first, dude believe me that ain't gonna feel good. Someone please give me few green dots, I have lost hope for my green card....for the time being red dots are good.
My 2 cents.
My 2 cents.
more...
Madhuri
05-22 04:57 PM
In that case we ourselves can keep a counter how many IV members did file 485 in June 07. It might give us a rough idea.
New filings will not effect to move the dates either you file on 1st or 30th. The Visa(GC) numbers will be deducted only after the approval of I-485. Any of these new filings will not be touched(Approved) for 4-5 months. USCIS has to consume the balance visas(GCs) before October 1st 2007.
If The Number of Visas > The number of Approved + To be approved(Mostly filed at least 4-5 months before) in the coming months.....then you can expect further movement from the State Department..
Ask(Pray) the USCIS(God) not to approve any 485's till June 15th....
So...there will not be any change in the movement of dates even all of them file on the day 1....Keep watching the approvals till June 10th atleast...
Sree
New filings will not effect to move the dates either you file on 1st or 30th. The Visa(GC) numbers will be deducted only after the approval of I-485. Any of these new filings will not be touched(Approved) for 4-5 months. USCIS has to consume the balance visas(GCs) before October 1st 2007.
If The Number of Visas > The number of Approved + To be approved(Mostly filed at least 4-5 months before) in the coming months.....then you can expect further movement from the State Department..
Ask(Pray) the USCIS(God) not to approve any 485's till June 15th....
So...there will not be any change in the movement of dates even all of them file on the day 1....Keep watching the approvals till June 10th atleast...
Sree
pa_arora
03-26 04:38 PM
This sustain act is total BS. They want to increase H1-B numbers without reforming the EB system. They do not want to increase EB numbers. They do not want to do away with country quotas. They don't have country quotas in H1-B. This just creates more and more backlogs for everyone. I HOPE THIS BILL DOESN'T PASS. The companies and lawmakers just want cheap labor without "paying" for it. Just a bunch of self-serving bigots !
I disagree with u, i think this bill should pass which lets the EB pipeline inflates so much that it explodes.
I disagree with u, i think this bill should pass which lets the EB pipeline inflates so much that it explodes.
more...
vin13
03-11 04:28 PM
The answer to that question would be "no". Would the IO be satisfied with the job description of the new job? Would he ask if I filed AC21? I don't want to sound paranoid, but it would be great if there was anyone on these forums that was in a similar situation and was asked that question...
You do sound paranoid.
When the law doesnot require tht a person file AC21 when changing jobs and yet you are not satisfied. That is PARANOID.
People are going to give their personal experience. If you are not satisfied then get legal advise from a lawyer.
All Immigraton Officers will not ask the same questions nor react the same way for similar answers.
You do sound paranoid.
When the law doesnot require tht a person file AC21 when changing jobs and yet you are not satisfied. That is PARANOID.
People are going to give their personal experience. If you are not satisfied then get legal advise from a lawyer.
All Immigraton Officers will not ask the same questions nor react the same way for similar answers.
2010 Only Judy can Judge Me tattoo
rajuram
01-15 01:47 AM
I think more members will join and people will be willing to contribute more if they see positive things happening. Right now we seem to be going no where. Even if a basic thing like filing for 485 during retrogression gets passed, people will gain confidence in IV and they will be willing to contribute money.
more...
indio0617
09-21 04:53 PM
Currently since labour is progressing really slowly and considering that it looks like fresh labour will get approved quickly .. but folks will have to wait 4-5 years to get into the 140/485 stage, are there are efforts being made by IV to get dependents say an interim EAD, so that they can start working, rather than be a victim of the process.
I think the biggest casualty of the process are the dependents, who unless qualified to get an h1, have no option but sit at home. I know both male and female dependents in this situation.
Wouldn't it make sense to lobby for an interim EAD in following cases:
1. if labour has not been cleared say for a long time period .. (maybe 2 years), or
2. cleared .. but people have waited a long time period but the dates for 140/485 are not current?
Not sure if this issue has been debated before.
vivache:
Top on IV's goals is 'ability to file for I-485' even when visa number is not available. As you perhaps know this will enable securing an EAD. Hope this answers your question.
I think the biggest casualty of the process are the dependents, who unless qualified to get an h1, have no option but sit at home. I know both male and female dependents in this situation.
Wouldn't it make sense to lobby for an interim EAD in following cases:
1. if labour has not been cleared say for a long time period .. (maybe 2 years), or
2. cleared .. but people have waited a long time period but the dates for 140/485 are not current?
Not sure if this issue has been debated before.
vivache:
Top on IV's goals is 'ability to file for I-485' even when visa number is not available. As you perhaps know this will enable securing an EAD. Hope this answers your question.
hair Only God Can Judge Me 4 kspree
H1B-GC
08-03 08:36 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
Yes. I'm July 2nd Filer at TSC and Still waiting. Any Examples that TSC is processing Apps. from July 3rd ... There might be 1000's still waiting who filed on July 2nd.
Yes. I'm July 2nd Filer at TSC and Still waiting. Any Examples that TSC is processing Apps. from July 3rd ... There might be 1000's still waiting who filed on July 2nd.
more...
GCStatus
09-15 12:17 PM
Good to see this
We all join together in our mission. We will include this in part of confronting first. Check out the other thread as well
We all join together in our mission. We will include this in part of confronting first. Check out the other thread as well
hot tattoo Only Judy can Judge Me
anandrajesh
09-21 04:52 PM
Point 2 in ur post is in the agenda. Ability to File 140/485 even if the dates are not current. Looks like this will be the least controversial of all things we can ask for, but will solve majority of our issues. This one thing doesnt ask for any EB numbers increase, doesnt look for H1 B increase and doesnt ask for anything that will have our opposition groups jumping up and down
more...
house Only God Can Judge Me
nozerd
01-24 11:31 AM
Personally I feel the most disgusting of all the provisions is country quota. Why the hec should 2 employees in excat same situation be discriminated because of country of birth ?
I can believe its even legal. They should get rid of it.
I can believe its even legal. They should get rid of it.
tattoo I guess only God can judge
anu_t
06-16 01:11 AM
http://grassley.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.View&PressRelease_id=5428
GRASSLEY CONTINUES WORK TO CLOSE H-1B AND L VISA LOOPHOLES
WASHINGTON -- Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin today continued their quest to ensure that American workers are protected, and that companies who bring in foreign workers are complying with the law.
The Senators today sent a letter to Emilio Gonzalez, the director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, asking more questions about how the agency is addressing fraud and abuse in the H-1B visa program.
Earlier this month, the Senators sent letters to the top 9 foreign-owned companies to determine the companies' usage of H-1B visas. Today's letter comes on the heels of responses received from several of the foreign companies.
"From the responses we've received thus far, it�s evident that American workers are in the minority at these companies. I expect Citizenship and Immigration Services to take a hard look at their recruiting methods to make sure they are complying with the law," Grassley said. "We cannot just increase the annual allocation of visas without understanding how companies are using them."
"We've begun to question how many companies are complying with H-1B visa requirements," Durbin said. "I look forward to hearing back from Director Gonzalez on what the government is doing to enforce the law."
At this time, Grassley and Durbin will not be releasing the information received from the companies.
Here is a copy of the letter to Gonzalez.
June 13, 2007
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20529
Dear Director Gonzalez:
Recently, we asked the foreign-based companies who obtain the most H-1B visas to answer questions regarding their workforce, wages, recruitment efforts, and usage of H-1B visas in the United States. Our letters were intended to learn more about how some companies are using the H-1B visa program. We remain concerned that the H-1B and L visa programs are facilitating the displacement of Americans by cheaper foreign workers. We continue our effort to understand how the H-1B and L visa programs are being used by U.S. and foreign-based companies, and therefore request that you provide details related to these programs.
Under current law, H-1B-dependent employers are required to attest that they have not displaced comparable workers in the United States before hiring a foreign worker. They must also make a good faith effort to recruit Americans first.
The responses to our letters to foreign-based H-1B users have led us to question how many companies are currently defined as H-1B-dependent, and if these employers who depend on H-1B visa holders are being adequately monitored for compliance with H-1B program requirements. While we understand that the Department of Labor has primary jurisdiction over H-1B dependent employers, we would like to understand your agency�s role in ensuring compliance with laws regarding displacement and recruitment.
We have also become concerned about the use of L visas by companies who also use large numbers of H-1B visas. Many companies are allowed to bring in L visa workers through a Ablanket petition,@ which is approved by USCIS. While the blanket petition is meant to simplify the process, we fear that some foreign workers may be approved for visas by the Department of State without proper oversight by USCIS, which has primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with L visa program requirements.
In order to better understand the nature of the L visa program, we need to have access to better statistics. We would like to know how many L visas are approved each year, and what companies use the program. We would also like to know more about the use of the blanket petition for L visa holders, and USCIS=s ability to monitor individual visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on a blanket petition.
Finally, we are concerned about the level of fraud monitoring of the H-1B and L visa programs. While we understand that the Fraud Detection and National Security unit is analyzing and writing an assessment of the H-1B program, we are concerned that abuse of both programs is not being addressed adequately. Given that the immigration bill before the Senate includes a provision to allow USCIS to divert special funds to other operations, we would like to know how many dollars have been used specifically for H-1B and L fraud efforts. We also seek more details about how these investigations are being handled within the Department.
Given these concerns, we respectfully ask that the following answers be provided to us by Wednesday, June 20, 2007.
H-1B Dependent Employers
$ Please explain the process of identifying employers as H-1B dependent employers pursuant to INA Section 212(n)(3).
$ How many companies are defined by USCIS to be AH-1B dependent@ employers?
$ How are these H-1B dependent employers being monitored, if at all, by USCIS?
Blanket L Visa Petitions
$ How many L visas have been approved each year since 2000?
$ Please provide lists of companies that have used the L visa program for each of the two most recently available years, and how many visas each company has obtained in each year.
$ Since USCIS has primary jurisdiction over blanket petitions and visa policies, what role has been delegated to the Department of State and how is your agency ensuring that aliens under the blanket petition are being properly screened before entering the U.S.?
$ What role, if any, does USCIS play in monitoring the approval of L visas covered by blanket petitions?
$ Please provide an explanation of USCIS=s ability to track individual L visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on visas covered by a blanket petition.
Investigations of Fraud and Abuse
$ Annually, what has been the total amount of funds deposited into the Fraud Prevention and Detection Account under INA Section 286(v) since it was established? Of this amount, what amount has been provided to the Department of Homeland Security under 286(v)(2)(B)?
$ How have the funds provided pursuant to 286(v)(2)(B) been used in FY2005, FY2006, and thus far in FY2007? How many funds have not been expended in a given year?
$ How does USCIS plan to spend the remaining funds left in FY2007?
$ How many total fraud and abuse referrals have been sent to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the last two years? How many of these referrals, to your knowledge, have been pursued? How many referrals, to your knowledge, are pending? Please provide any further details about specific cases or referrals to ICE that may be helpful to understanding the process within the Department.
$ Please provide examples of recent investigative referrals to ICE dealing with H-1B or L visas. Please explain any referrals in the last two years that have not been pursued or that have been closed, and provide information on how many are currently pending.
While we anticipate your concerns about providing such information to us by Wednesday, June 20th, we must stress the fact that the U.S. Senate is considering comprehensive legislation that would change immigration policies for years to come. The H-1B and L visa programs must be better understood before further action is taken on this bill. We appreciate your cooperation in providing us with input in the next week.
Please contact XXXXXXXX if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator United States Senator
GRASSLEY CONTINUES WORK TO CLOSE H-1B AND L VISA LOOPHOLES
WASHINGTON -- Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin today continued their quest to ensure that American workers are protected, and that companies who bring in foreign workers are complying with the law.
The Senators today sent a letter to Emilio Gonzalez, the director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, asking more questions about how the agency is addressing fraud and abuse in the H-1B visa program.
Earlier this month, the Senators sent letters to the top 9 foreign-owned companies to determine the companies' usage of H-1B visas. Today's letter comes on the heels of responses received from several of the foreign companies.
"From the responses we've received thus far, it�s evident that American workers are in the minority at these companies. I expect Citizenship and Immigration Services to take a hard look at their recruiting methods to make sure they are complying with the law," Grassley said. "We cannot just increase the annual allocation of visas without understanding how companies are using them."
"We've begun to question how many companies are complying with H-1B visa requirements," Durbin said. "I look forward to hearing back from Director Gonzalez on what the government is doing to enforce the law."
At this time, Grassley and Durbin will not be releasing the information received from the companies.
Here is a copy of the letter to Gonzalez.
June 13, 2007
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20529
Dear Director Gonzalez:
Recently, we asked the foreign-based companies who obtain the most H-1B visas to answer questions regarding their workforce, wages, recruitment efforts, and usage of H-1B visas in the United States. Our letters were intended to learn more about how some companies are using the H-1B visa program. We remain concerned that the H-1B and L visa programs are facilitating the displacement of Americans by cheaper foreign workers. We continue our effort to understand how the H-1B and L visa programs are being used by U.S. and foreign-based companies, and therefore request that you provide details related to these programs.
Under current law, H-1B-dependent employers are required to attest that they have not displaced comparable workers in the United States before hiring a foreign worker. They must also make a good faith effort to recruit Americans first.
The responses to our letters to foreign-based H-1B users have led us to question how many companies are currently defined as H-1B-dependent, and if these employers who depend on H-1B visa holders are being adequately monitored for compliance with H-1B program requirements. While we understand that the Department of Labor has primary jurisdiction over H-1B dependent employers, we would like to understand your agency�s role in ensuring compliance with laws regarding displacement and recruitment.
We have also become concerned about the use of L visas by companies who also use large numbers of H-1B visas. Many companies are allowed to bring in L visa workers through a Ablanket petition,@ which is approved by USCIS. While the blanket petition is meant to simplify the process, we fear that some foreign workers may be approved for visas by the Department of State without proper oversight by USCIS, which has primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with L visa program requirements.
In order to better understand the nature of the L visa program, we need to have access to better statistics. We would like to know how many L visas are approved each year, and what companies use the program. We would also like to know more about the use of the blanket petition for L visa holders, and USCIS=s ability to monitor individual visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on a blanket petition.
Finally, we are concerned about the level of fraud monitoring of the H-1B and L visa programs. While we understand that the Fraud Detection and National Security unit is analyzing and writing an assessment of the H-1B program, we are concerned that abuse of both programs is not being addressed adequately. Given that the immigration bill before the Senate includes a provision to allow USCIS to divert special funds to other operations, we would like to know how many dollars have been used specifically for H-1B and L fraud efforts. We also seek more details about how these investigations are being handled within the Department.
Given these concerns, we respectfully ask that the following answers be provided to us by Wednesday, June 20, 2007.
H-1B Dependent Employers
$ Please explain the process of identifying employers as H-1B dependent employers pursuant to INA Section 212(n)(3).
$ How many companies are defined by USCIS to be AH-1B dependent@ employers?
$ How are these H-1B dependent employers being monitored, if at all, by USCIS?
Blanket L Visa Petitions
$ How many L visas have been approved each year since 2000?
$ Please provide lists of companies that have used the L visa program for each of the two most recently available years, and how many visas each company has obtained in each year.
$ Since USCIS has primary jurisdiction over blanket petitions and visa policies, what role has been delegated to the Department of State and how is your agency ensuring that aliens under the blanket petition are being properly screened before entering the U.S.?
$ What role, if any, does USCIS play in monitoring the approval of L visas covered by blanket petitions?
$ Please provide an explanation of USCIS=s ability to track individual L visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on visas covered by a blanket petition.
Investigations of Fraud and Abuse
$ Annually, what has been the total amount of funds deposited into the Fraud Prevention and Detection Account under INA Section 286(v) since it was established? Of this amount, what amount has been provided to the Department of Homeland Security under 286(v)(2)(B)?
$ How have the funds provided pursuant to 286(v)(2)(B) been used in FY2005, FY2006, and thus far in FY2007? How many funds have not been expended in a given year?
$ How does USCIS plan to spend the remaining funds left in FY2007?
$ How many total fraud and abuse referrals have been sent to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the last two years? How many of these referrals, to your knowledge, have been pursued? How many referrals, to your knowledge, are pending? Please provide any further details about specific cases or referrals to ICE that may be helpful to understanding the process within the Department.
$ Please provide examples of recent investigative referrals to ICE dealing with H-1B or L visas. Please explain any referrals in the last two years that have not been pursued or that have been closed, and provide information on how many are currently pending.
While we anticipate your concerns about providing such information to us by Wednesday, June 20th, we must stress the fact that the U.S. Senate is considering comprehensive legislation that would change immigration policies for years to come. The H-1B and L visa programs must be better understood before further action is taken on this bill. We appreciate your cooperation in providing us with input in the next week.
Please contact XXXXXXXX if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator United States Senator
more...
pictures “Only God Can Judge Me”
jonty_11
07-11 04:38 PM
Normally a Month, ask ur lawyer to call and find out.
dresses God can judge me#39; tattooed
Chicago Desi
04-13 01:02 PM
All visa stamping is now done outside US. As long as you dont travel outside of USA, you can stay legally till the date mentioned on your I-94 attached on I797. But, if your H1 extension is subjected to your visa interview in Islamabad, you have to go to interview.
I dont know what DWI is, but whatever it is, do not hide it on your visa application. AFAIK, traffic violations are not criminal offences, but I might be wrong.
You better have criminal record strighten out with DHS ASAP, one wrong info and it will become a huge problem.
Good luck.
I dont know what DWI is, but whatever it is, do not hide it on your visa application. AFAIK, traffic violations are not criminal offences, but I might be wrong.
You better have criminal record strighten out with DHS ASAP, one wrong info and it will become a huge problem.
Good luck.
more...
makeup Only God Can Judge Him
nlssubbu
12-24 01:22 PM
Hi,
I have a question:
- H1-B's I-797 is valid, but visa stamping has expired.
- I use AP document to re-enter.
- I do not use EAD at all
After using AP, can I move to a different company by petitioning for H1-B?
The other question is: Is it worthwhile to go for H1-B stamping when I have an AP?
I don't see a reason for you going in for H1-B stamping. You can enter using AP and still have H1B validity, if you don't use EAD for job. If different company willing to sponsor H1, then you can transfer it without any issue. Please make sure that the job offer from the new company is "same or similar" in nature.
-----------------
Detailed scenario
-----------------
My only reason for being on H1-B is to have a backup if there is a problem with my I-485 application. I don't want to use EAD, since it will terminate my H1-B status. With the recent retrogression I think its going to be a real long while.
My questions are:
1. If I use the AP (and don't use EAD), I read that I can be on H1-B with the same employer, and get my H1-B renewed with the same company. However, in future can I re-apply for a H1-B through some other company?
As stated by you, use of AP does not invalidate your H1B. If you want to change employer, you can transfer the existing H1B instead of re-apply for a new one.
2. If I use my AP, I will be on a parolee status (on I-94), so when reapply for H1-B, and I send my I-94 , would my new H1-B be approved? Any such cases? Links, etc. would be helpful
I myself came back to US using AP thrice and extended my H1B twice after such entry. You need not send your existing I-94 to them. Your H1B will come with the new I-94 with the same number of your white one for the extended time period.
I have a appt. in Chennai in mid january and am wondering if its worthwhile to go there at all. I have seen some messages about delays in visa approvals.
I think it is only waste of time (to go to consulate) and money (to spend for the visa stamping)
Thanks
Thanks
I have a question:
- H1-B's I-797 is valid, but visa stamping has expired.
- I use AP document to re-enter.
- I do not use EAD at all
After using AP, can I move to a different company by petitioning for H1-B?
The other question is: Is it worthwhile to go for H1-B stamping when I have an AP?
I don't see a reason for you going in for H1-B stamping. You can enter using AP and still have H1B validity, if you don't use EAD for job. If different company willing to sponsor H1, then you can transfer it without any issue. Please make sure that the job offer from the new company is "same or similar" in nature.
-----------------
Detailed scenario
-----------------
My only reason for being on H1-B is to have a backup if there is a problem with my I-485 application. I don't want to use EAD, since it will terminate my H1-B status. With the recent retrogression I think its going to be a real long while.
My questions are:
1. If I use the AP (and don't use EAD), I read that I can be on H1-B with the same employer, and get my H1-B renewed with the same company. However, in future can I re-apply for a H1-B through some other company?
As stated by you, use of AP does not invalidate your H1B. If you want to change employer, you can transfer the existing H1B instead of re-apply for a new one.
2. If I use my AP, I will be on a parolee status (on I-94), so when reapply for H1-B, and I send my I-94 , would my new H1-B be approved? Any such cases? Links, etc. would be helpful
I myself came back to US using AP thrice and extended my H1B twice after such entry. You need not send your existing I-94 to them. Your H1B will come with the new I-94 with the same number of your white one for the extended time period.
I have a appt. in Chennai in mid january and am wondering if its worthwhile to go there at all. I have seen some messages about delays in visa approvals.
I think it is only waste of time (to go to consulate) and money (to spend for the visa stamping)
Thanks
Thanks
girlfriend diminish me will only make
lostinbeta
10-21 12:27 AM
Sometimes I have an idea of what I am going for in my head. In a case like that I do everything I can and try and find anyway I can do achieve a near effect as the one in my head.
But most of the time I let my imagination take me where it wants at that moment.
It isn't edwins comp that does it.... it is part of edwins amazing ability :beam:
But most of the time I let my imagination take me where it wants at that moment.
It isn't edwins comp that does it.... it is part of edwins amazing ability :beam:
hairstyles hot No+one+can+judge+me+quotes
amitga
12-06 04:41 PM
I came from India to US on a intercompany transfer on L1 Visa. After 3 yrs I left the company and joined another one on H1B. Now I Joined back the old company and in the mean while my old company sold its Indian subsidiary. I am asking them to file an EB1 for me, but they are telling me that since they have sold the Indian Subsidiary, now they cannot file EB1 based on that company transfer.
In my view the eligibity is determined based on the fact that I originally joined that company on a company transfer.
Please let me know your view.
In my view the eligibity is determined based on the fact that I originally joined that company on a company transfer.
Please let me know your view.
lazycis
06-05 10:11 PM
Hello,
I live in Massachusetts, Where should I send my EAD application ( Initial EAD, not renewal). My I-485 is pending with Texas Service Center.
Should I mail the EAD application to the following address:
Texas Service Center
P.O Box 851041
Mesquite, TX
Thank you for letting me know.
USCIS Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
see page 10
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
I live in Massachusetts, Where should I send my EAD application ( Initial EAD, not renewal). My I-485 is pending with Texas Service Center.
Should I mail the EAD application to the following address:
Texas Service Center
P.O Box 851041
Mesquite, TX
Thank you for letting me know.
USCIS Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
see page 10
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
gxr
09-26 02:12 PM
Got EAD approved on 09/25. Filed on 07/03, RN is 09/11. - NSC, 140 still pending.
No comments:
Post a Comment