dhesha
08-29 06:41 PM
what is the date shown on the online status message?
Is it RD or ND. I think ND is later than RD right. I believe they show the ND but say your application was "received on". Is it right ?
Does the processing time on website go via RD or ND?
I called USCIS today and they said they are using the receipt date on I797 and not on the website. Yes that is right on website they show ND and say receipt date..its all messed up, but as per totay's call, it seems 797 RD is what they are using.
Is it RD or ND. I think ND is later than RD right. I believe they show the ND but say your application was "received on". Is it right ?
Does the processing time on website go via RD or ND?
I called USCIS today and they said they are using the receipt date on I797 and not on the website. Yes that is right on website they show ND and say receipt date..its all messed up, but as per totay's call, it seems 797 RD is what they are using.
wallpaper ell amp; nikki running scared
mvijay85
08-04 07:58 AM
Hi,
I am eager to know what happened to your brother's visa?
It will help me a lot!
Thanks,
Vijay
I am eager to know what happened to your brother's visa?
It will help me a lot!
Thanks,
Vijay
eb3_nepa
11-10 12:27 AM
And shat exactly is the point of this discussion again? More ranting?
You know, maybe few people have noticed this, but when it comes to selecting the "lawyer", you have to pay, if you want your own lawyer. A lot of ppl are very happy that the company pays. So people want their cake and eat it too. They want the company to pay for the lawyer, BUT BUT they want the lawyer to work for them and even let them, when they can leave the employer without negatively affecting their GC process.
The problem is not just the lawyers or the HR ppl guys. The problem is also partly US. If we were to insist that WE pay for the process and we hire our own lawyers, we would have a LOT more control on the process. However, I understand that not all of us have that option, but then those of us who do not have that option, have to thank their stars that they did not end up paying close to $10K for this whole process. Face the facts guys, if your company is paying ur lawyer, ur lawyer is working for them NOT you. Your company and NOT you is the lawyer's client, so he is LEGALLY REQUIRED to serve them and NOT you.
We curse the USCIS everyday (I do too), but we have to admit, they have done an EXCELLENT job these past few months and almost everyone I know has received their EADs, APs and FP notices within the stipulated 90 day period. Let us commend the USCIS for that. We criticized and cursed them when the the time had come to do so. Now they have done a good job so let us commend them for it. Some USCIS centers are even doing actual finger printing on Saturdays (in the state of CT. My friend actually did his on a Saturday). They do not have to do any of this, BUT THEY ARE DOING IT.
About HR, again we all hate them, but they do the best they can. Ah what the heck i'll give you guys this one ;) Go ahead curse away :p. Although I will say this, some HR ppl are rather helpful. I have worked for 2 companies and touch wood both helped me a lot with paperwork and were quite prompt.
You know, maybe few people have noticed this, but when it comes to selecting the "lawyer", you have to pay, if you want your own lawyer. A lot of ppl are very happy that the company pays. So people want their cake and eat it too. They want the company to pay for the lawyer, BUT BUT they want the lawyer to work for them and even let them, when they can leave the employer without negatively affecting their GC process.
The problem is not just the lawyers or the HR ppl guys. The problem is also partly US. If we were to insist that WE pay for the process and we hire our own lawyers, we would have a LOT more control on the process. However, I understand that not all of us have that option, but then those of us who do not have that option, have to thank their stars that they did not end up paying close to $10K for this whole process. Face the facts guys, if your company is paying ur lawyer, ur lawyer is working for them NOT you. Your company and NOT you is the lawyer's client, so he is LEGALLY REQUIRED to serve them and NOT you.
We curse the USCIS everyday (I do too), but we have to admit, they have done an EXCELLENT job these past few months and almost everyone I know has received their EADs, APs and FP notices within the stipulated 90 day period. Let us commend the USCIS for that. We criticized and cursed them when the the time had come to do so. Now they have done a good job so let us commend them for it. Some USCIS centers are even doing actual finger printing on Saturdays (in the state of CT. My friend actually did his on a Saturday). They do not have to do any of this, BUT THEY ARE DOING IT.
About HR, again we all hate them, but they do the best they can. Ah what the heck i'll give you guys this one ;) Go ahead curse away :p. Although I will say this, some HR ppl are rather helpful. I have worked for 2 companies and touch wood both helped me a lot with paperwork and were quite prompt.
2011 ell amp; nikki running scared
americandesi
08-11 03:44 PM
I noticed a flaw in GC process with respect to “Ability to pay” and “AC21”
Here are the definitions
Ability to pay - Suppose a company files for I-140, it has to prove its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary.
AC21 states that an employee can change jobs to a similar position if I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. This could happen when I-485 is pending for more than 180 days or after its approval.
Let’s consider the following scenario
1) Company A files for I-140 and I-485 concurrently and proves its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary at I-140 stage.
2) I-140 gets approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days.
3) The employee quits employer A and remains idle (or) becomes self employed (or) joins employer B in a different position.
4) During the I-485 adjudication he provides an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A and says that he intends to work with employer C after I-485 approval.
5) I-485 gets approved.
Here is the flaw. USCIS doesn’t check if employer C has the ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary. All it asks for is an offer letter with wage, duties and annual salary.
What if company C is running in loss and not in a position to pay the proffered wage.
Why should USCIS make a big deal out of ability to pay when it’s not checked across all employers where the beneficiary intends to work?
Here are the definitions
Ability to pay - Suppose a company files for I-140, it has to prove its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary.
AC21 states that an employee can change jobs to a similar position if I-485 is pending for more than 180 days. This could happen when I-485 is pending for more than 180 days or after its approval.
Let’s consider the following scenario
1) Company A files for I-140 and I-485 concurrently and proves its ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary at I-140 stage.
2) I-140 gets approved and I-485 is pending for more than 180 days.
3) The employee quits employer A and remains idle (or) becomes self employed (or) joins employer B in a different position.
4) During the I-485 adjudication he provides an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A and says that he intends to work with employer C after I-485 approval.
5) I-485 gets approved.
Here is the flaw. USCIS doesn’t check if employer C has the ability to pay the proffered wage to the beneficiary. All it asks for is an offer letter with wage, duties and annual salary.
What if company C is running in loss and not in a position to pay the proffered wage.
Why should USCIS make a big deal out of ability to pay when it’s not checked across all employers where the beneficiary intends to work?
more...
maverick13
04-19 07:18 PM
My H1B was filed with job title "RF Engineer" which comes under "Electrical Engineering" in 2004. My first 3-year term on H1 expires this year end and employer needs to file for renewal for next 3-year term.
My LC as well as 140 were applied and are approved for the position of "Electronics Engineer" which is my current position.
Essentially Electronics Engineer position is a superset of RF Engineer/Electrical Engineer positions, job duties are pretty much the same.
So now when I apply for my H1B renewal/extension does employer have to write the current position (Electronics engr) or the position on which H1B was filed first (RF engr)?
Any inputs appeciated...
My LC as well as 140 were applied and are approved for the position of "Electronics Engineer" which is my current position.
Essentially Electronics Engineer position is a superset of RF Engineer/Electrical Engineer positions, job duties are pretty much the same.
So now when I apply for my H1B renewal/extension does employer have to write the current position (Electronics engr) or the position on which H1B was filed first (RF engr)?
Any inputs appeciated...
gc_chahiye
07-12 11:59 AM
you wont be subject to cap if you jump to H4 and jump back to H1 since you were on cap subject H1 within the past 365 days. However if your spouse jumps to H4, she can only jump back to a non-cap H1. If she wants to work for a for-profit, she has to go through teh H1 cap.
Basically the fact that your H4 was based off a non-cap H1 has no bearing on your own H1 status and cap limits and returning to H1 again.
If you are on 7th year and you get layed off, you can only get the H4->H1 done if you still have that I-140 approved. If in the process of laying you off your employer also cancels teh I-140 you cant come back to H1. You need to wait outside teh US a year and you'll be subject to cap again.
one more thing: I am not sure how long you can stay on H4 and come back to H1 without being subject to cap. (is it 1 year or 6 years)
Basically the fact that your H4 was based off a non-cap H1 has no bearing on your own H1 status and cap limits and returning to H1 again.
If you are on 7th year and you get layed off, you can only get the H4->H1 done if you still have that I-140 approved. If in the process of laying you off your employer also cancels teh I-140 you cant come back to H1. You need to wait outside teh US a year and you'll be subject to cap again.
one more thing: I am not sure how long you can stay on H4 and come back to H1 without being subject to cap. (is it 1 year or 6 years)
more...
gc_on_demand
09-06 12:04 PM
Congratulation to all EB2 who are getting their approvals. Have a wonderful post-GC life :)
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
When will, we EB3s (India), see some light at the end of the tunnel.
Looks like (in my case) after waiting for more than 5 years it will still take 3-4 years. I am mad :mad:
If you can try for it that will make your GC faster.
2010 ell amp; nikki running scared
asanghi
08-31 12:21 PM
Before voting, I saw the poll results, it said total number of votes = 9345. Then I voted "yes". The total no of votes still stands at 9345.
more...
ppt.b
09-11 10:08 AM
Our checks were cashed on 09/04 and our lawyer has still not received our recipts.However we received FP yesterday by mail and our appointment date is 09/25.
We are waiting for our receipts and EAD.
So expect your FP notices anytime.
My 485 application was filed on July 1st, 2007. Yesterday I received an email from my lawyer indicating that they have received the receipts for 485, 765 & 131 for all the applicants in my family.
I understand that it takes 3 to 4 weeks after receiving the receipt notices to hear about the fingerprinting appointment.
1. Considering the number of AOS applications filed in July, when can I expect the fingerprinting appointment?
2. Also how will that correspondence occur: mail or telephone ? Will I hear about this directly or will my lawyer hear about it?
3. Can few of you who have received the appointment for fingerprinting after filing AOS application in May 07 - Aug 07 timeframe post some details:
a) When did you receive the AOS receipts?
b) When did you hear about the fingerprinting and how?
c) When are you expecting EAD or if you have received it, how long did it take? I am aware that it takes 90 to 120 days from the date of filing and this was answered in one of my questions posted on this forum but wanted to know these stats in the current conditions.
Thanks,
We are waiting for our receipts and EAD.
So expect your FP notices anytime.
My 485 application was filed on July 1st, 2007. Yesterday I received an email from my lawyer indicating that they have received the receipts for 485, 765 & 131 for all the applicants in my family.
I understand that it takes 3 to 4 weeks after receiving the receipt notices to hear about the fingerprinting appointment.
1. Considering the number of AOS applications filed in July, when can I expect the fingerprinting appointment?
2. Also how will that correspondence occur: mail or telephone ? Will I hear about this directly or will my lawyer hear about it?
3. Can few of you who have received the appointment for fingerprinting after filing AOS application in May 07 - Aug 07 timeframe post some details:
a) When did you receive the AOS receipts?
b) When did you hear about the fingerprinting and how?
c) When are you expecting EAD or if you have received it, how long did it take? I am aware that it takes 90 to 120 days from the date of filing and this was answered in one of my questions posted on this forum but wanted to know these stats in the current conditions.
Thanks,
hair ell amp; nikki running scared
manja
01-18 01:09 PM
Check out this website. It has all the information we all want:
http://www.visataxes.com/
http://www.visataxes.com/
more...
immi_grant
06-25 03:36 PM
Thanks to all who responded so far !!
I saw the denial letter and here is the gist of it from what I understood :
Got an RFE asking for client letter (since when my case was filed in Jan 2010, I was working for the client). From then onward I am off and on with the same client depending on their schedules / needs.
So when we got the RFE, I was not working for the client. My attorney replied to the RFE stating that I completed my project before time and now internally working on product development (which we do ) and produced the time sheets and everything for the internal project as well as for the client till the date of completion.
My case got denied reasons pertaining that USCIS asked for client letter, but you (petetioner) submitted papers that he is not working for the client anymore and now working for an internal project. OK. But where is the client letter that we asked for ? Since you didn't produce that, we are denying the case.
I saw the denial letter and here is the gist of it from what I understood :
Got an RFE asking for client letter (since when my case was filed in Jan 2010, I was working for the client). From then onward I am off and on with the same client depending on their schedules / needs.
So when we got the RFE, I was not working for the client. My attorney replied to the RFE stating that I completed my project before time and now internally working on product development (which we do ) and produced the time sheets and everything for the internal project as well as for the client till the date of completion.
My case got denied reasons pertaining that USCIS asked for client letter, but you (petetioner) submitted papers that he is not working for the client anymore and now working for an internal project. OK. But where is the client letter that we asked for ? Since you didn't produce that, we are denying the case.
hot ell amp; nikki running scared
ssnd03
03-04 02:57 PM
Finally some sanity on FBI Namecheck from the DHS head honcho Michael Chertoff. He is now saying things which everybody has been screaming for the last three four years. I have highlighted those. But it does take that long for wheels to turn even in the most liberal democracy.
Question: Mr. Secretary, you had, at the very beginning, laid out some great progress that's been made in terms of preventing bad people from getting in. And part of the Homeland Security mission, which is a challenging one, is that while you are responsible for protecting against bad things, you're also responsible for facilitating good things. And be that the flow of people, in this case, USCIS is responsible for that for the department. They've begun a $3.5 billion transformation. And I'm hoping you could speak to that in two ways. What's your concept of success in that, in terms of the national security part of it, the operational excellence part of it, and customer service part of it?
Secretary Chertoff: Three -- two main things. One is, we have to move from a paper-based system to a totally electronically-based system. We still have too much paper, and it's hard to track, it's hard to manage, and it takes a lot of time.
The second piece is, I want to rebuild -- re-engineer the system in a couple of ways. One is, and the most urgent, is to deal with the background check problem. It just takes way too long for the Bureau to complete background checks for a small but a significant number of people. The majority of people -- you know, if the name doesn't pop up on anything in the -- it's pretty quick. But for a small number -- but still significant, and certainly to the individual, significant -- if their name crops up and it's an older case, and it's in a file somewhere, someone has got to hunt it down. And to be perfectly honest, that is not a top priority job for an agent, is to go through an old paper record sitting in a warehouse.
Looking forward as we go electronically, and as the Bureau goes electronically, that problem will diminish. But looking backwards we have to re-engineer the system to be a little tougher. And one of the things we did, for example, with the green cards was we said, for background checks that took longer than six months, we would give you a green card, and then if it turned out the background check later revealed a problem, we would take the green card away.
Now why did we do that -- because I got criticized, �Oh, you're sacrificing national security.� Here's why. First of all, if you haven't been -- if it's going to take longer than six months, it's clear that you're not on a Terrorist Watch List, you haven't been convicted of a crime, you haven't been indicted for a crime. In other words, most of the major things you would worry about -- it's a very easy thing to determine whether you've had a problem or not. What you're not going to get in that six months is the guy whose name came up in a file somewhere. And the vast majority of those are benign mentions.
Secondly, you're here. If you're going to do something bad, you're still here legally. The green card -- it's not like we're bringing you in from overseas. So if you think about it logically, the risk of giving you the green card with the understanding that it can be pulled away if something turns up, it's a minimal risk. It's a minimal, marginal risk. Whereas the customer service value of giving someone the green card is high. That's an example of trying to be more cost-benefit in the system.
See
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24818
Question: Mr. Secretary, you had, at the very beginning, laid out some great progress that's been made in terms of preventing bad people from getting in. And part of the Homeland Security mission, which is a challenging one, is that while you are responsible for protecting against bad things, you're also responsible for facilitating good things. And be that the flow of people, in this case, USCIS is responsible for that for the department. They've begun a $3.5 billion transformation. And I'm hoping you could speak to that in two ways. What's your concept of success in that, in terms of the national security part of it, the operational excellence part of it, and customer service part of it?
Secretary Chertoff: Three -- two main things. One is, we have to move from a paper-based system to a totally electronically-based system. We still have too much paper, and it's hard to track, it's hard to manage, and it takes a lot of time.
The second piece is, I want to rebuild -- re-engineer the system in a couple of ways. One is, and the most urgent, is to deal with the background check problem. It just takes way too long for the Bureau to complete background checks for a small but a significant number of people. The majority of people -- you know, if the name doesn't pop up on anything in the -- it's pretty quick. But for a small number -- but still significant, and certainly to the individual, significant -- if their name crops up and it's an older case, and it's in a file somewhere, someone has got to hunt it down. And to be perfectly honest, that is not a top priority job for an agent, is to go through an old paper record sitting in a warehouse.
Looking forward as we go electronically, and as the Bureau goes electronically, that problem will diminish. But looking backwards we have to re-engineer the system to be a little tougher. And one of the things we did, for example, with the green cards was we said, for background checks that took longer than six months, we would give you a green card, and then if it turned out the background check later revealed a problem, we would take the green card away.
Now why did we do that -- because I got criticized, �Oh, you're sacrificing national security.� Here's why. First of all, if you haven't been -- if it's going to take longer than six months, it's clear that you're not on a Terrorist Watch List, you haven't been convicted of a crime, you haven't been indicted for a crime. In other words, most of the major things you would worry about -- it's a very easy thing to determine whether you've had a problem or not. What you're not going to get in that six months is the guy whose name came up in a file somewhere. And the vast majority of those are benign mentions.
Secondly, you're here. If you're going to do something bad, you're still here legally. The green card -- it's not like we're bringing you in from overseas. So if you think about it logically, the risk of giving you the green card with the understanding that it can be pulled away if something turns up, it's a minimal risk. It's a minimal, marginal risk. Whereas the customer service value of giving someone the green card is high. That's an example of trying to be more cost-benefit in the system.
See
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24818
more...
house hairstyles ell nikki running
vinabath
07-31 11:05 AM
Damn.. with this fear of what might happen to our I485s, it becomes almost natural to everyone not to use their EAD and maintain their H1 status. It sucks not to be able to enjoy the benefits even when we have it!! or am I overreacting? :)
You are not. EAD is basically for spouse. Primary applicant need to be careful on using EAD.
You are not. EAD is basically for spouse. Primary applicant need to be careful on using EAD.
tattoo ell amp; nikki running scared
rb_248
07-27 07:13 AM
I tested it. It works great. Admins must consider creating a link for this on the main page of IV. Good job.
more...
pictures ell amp; nikki running scared
lecter
January 6th, 2005, 07:40 PM
Now I am Jealous......... you guys make it look easy, and I have no clue on how you get the color into the B&W like you do..........................
Simple technique:-
Add a duplicate layer
Desaturate the top layer, make it the shade you like etc etc
select the eraser tool
make sure it's flowing 100% and you're viewing the picture at 100%
erase the area you want coloured and the colour from the bottom layer will come through.
flatten
bingo!!!
Simple technique:-
Add a duplicate layer
Desaturate the top layer, make it the shade you like etc etc
select the eraser tool
make sure it's flowing 100% and you're viewing the picture at 100%
erase the area you want coloured and the colour from the bottom layer will come through.
flatten
bingo!!!
dresses Searched for #39;Azerbaijan
tulips
05-25 08:51 AM
Thank you for your reply! He has been out for 9 months now but visited in between. He used H4 to come back and did not get new AP. We did file taxes. How do I know if the application is still valid and it's okay to use EAD?
more...
makeup house ell amp; nikki running
Munna Bhai
07-12 09:08 AM
hello, any inputs
girlfriend ell amp; nikki running scared
hsm2007
09-20 08:58 PM
Yes I am going to consult either Murthy or Rajeev. But my problem is that my company which is a big corporate will only give a EVL based on the format that the company's attorney prepare. So even though I can consult Murthy but no way I will be able to use their advice as my current employer will only do what their attorney tells them.
I am in a fix as to what to do? My current employer is a big corporate and don't work with personal attorneys. And HR policies are also very stringent.
Even if I want I can't use Murthy/Rajeev/Ron to respond to this RFE.
So confused what to do
I am in a fix as to what to do? My current employer is a big corporate and don't work with personal attorneys. And HR policies are also very stringent.
Even if I want I can't use Murthy/Rajeev/Ron to respond to this RFE.
So confused what to do
hairstyles ell amp; nikki running scared
GCNaseeb
08-08 03:55 PM
Can you direct me to the link you just mentioned for pay stub requirment for at least 180 days after filing AOS?
I think the requirement is there should be a job offer at the time of filing of AOS. Here's an extract from a law firm:
" If you are able to file the adjustment of status, there does need to be a valid job offer underlying the case at the time of the filing. You do not have to be working for the employer full time, but there does have to be a valid job offer for the position described in the labor certification".
Its always safe to have paystubs for atlease 180 days after your 485 receipt date. If they call you for an interview at local office during adjudication, which may happen after anywhere from weeks, months, or years, there are chances that you may be asked to produce paystubs starting from month before interview date all the way back to your first H1 entry into US.
Please do not open new threads for these question for which there are several thread opened and are being discussed thru. Why don't you ask this question on one of those post?
I think the requirement is there should be a job offer at the time of filing of AOS. Here's an extract from a law firm:
" If you are able to file the adjustment of status, there does need to be a valid job offer underlying the case at the time of the filing. You do not have to be working for the employer full time, but there does have to be a valid job offer for the position described in the labor certification".
Its always safe to have paystubs for atlease 180 days after your 485 receipt date. If they call you for an interview at local office during adjudication, which may happen after anywhere from weeks, months, or years, there are chances that you may be asked to produce paystubs starting from month before interview date all the way back to your first H1 entry into US.
Please do not open new threads for these question for which there are several thread opened and are being discussed thru. Why don't you ask this question on one of those post?
velan
05-26 06:17 AM
We should say thanks to IV core team, senators who understand our pains and helped to achieve this level and finally to QGA for the guidance given to IV core team.
godbless
06-16 01:21 PM
My sister in law is currently working using her ead - opt while she is in possession of her ead from I485 filing as well. The attorney told her that she should use her f1 based ead till it expires and then start using the I 485 based afterwards.
No comments:
Post a Comment