pictures of psychiatrists
larmani
08-13 11:35 PM
I am also in the same boat.
I have an earlier approved I-140 from my previous company (PD : 30 Nov 2005). In addition, I also have an approved I-140 from my current company (PD: 27 March 2007). However, my latest I-140 still shows the priority
date of 27 March, 2007. As My old priority date is current, my attorney sent a letter to TSC requesting for recapture of my previous priority date. But, TSC sent a reply back saying that we should contact National
Service Center. HUG..!!
Did any one in the similar situation? How did you resolve?
Appreciate your help.
I have an earlier approved I-140 from my previous company (PD : 30 Nov 2005). In addition, I also have an approved I-140 from my current company (PD: 27 March 2007). However, my latest I-140 still shows the priority
date of 27 March, 2007. As My old priority date is current, my attorney sent a letter to TSC requesting for recapture of my previous priority date. But, TSC sent a reply back saying that we should contact National
Service Center. HUG..!!
Did any one in the similar situation? How did you resolve?
Appreciate your help.
qplearn
10-02 03:06 PM
Hi All
Thanks for a great forum. I am EB3 India (PD Dec 02) with 140 approved June this year. Rumor has it that the small firm I work for, is going to be acquired by a much larger firm with thousands of employees globally. I am concerned about my ongoing GC process. First question
Q1. What happens to my GC process?
Considering the behemoth like size of the company that is going to acquire us I am quite sure that the GC process of the few employees from my present employer will take a back seat.
Q2. What are the things I can do proactively.
I have read on various threads that it is possible to join other employers and port the PD to them. But considering the fact that company that started the GC process is no longer there, how would this porting of PD with new labor, 140 etc would occur...
I would appreciate if someone can provide answers to my questions. Thanks for taking the time to read this.
After your I-140 is approved, according to my lawyer, the PD is yours to keep. Even if they withdraw your I-140, you get to keep your PD.
I talked to my lawyer in the morning today, and this is precisely what he told me.
Thanks for a great forum. I am EB3 India (PD Dec 02) with 140 approved June this year. Rumor has it that the small firm I work for, is going to be acquired by a much larger firm with thousands of employees globally. I am concerned about my ongoing GC process. First question
Q1. What happens to my GC process?
Considering the behemoth like size of the company that is going to acquire us I am quite sure that the GC process of the few employees from my present employer will take a back seat.
Q2. What are the things I can do proactively.
I have read on various threads that it is possible to join other employers and port the PD to them. But considering the fact that company that started the GC process is no longer there, how would this porting of PD with new labor, 140 etc would occur...
I would appreciate if someone can provide answers to my questions. Thanks for taking the time to read this.
After your I-140 is approved, according to my lawyer, the PD is yours to keep. Even if they withdraw your I-140, you get to keep your PD.
I talked to my lawyer in the morning today, and this is precisely what he told me.
bheemi
07-05 03:30 PM
dont worry about it all.Because i did same thing exactly like you..And i got h1b ext twice after that and got h1b stamped twice and travelled out of the country 3 times after that..nobody questions about it all..
They only see whether you are out of status more than 180 days..it is legal also to work for 2 employers with 2 petetions..so dont worry about it at all...
They only see whether you are out of status more than 180 days..it is legal also to work for 2 employers with 2 petetions..so dont worry about it at all...
menezeswayne
12-11 03:05 PM
Is upgrading to premium actually an upgrade of the existing case or is it just a new application filed under premium?
more...
mantagon
12-17 11:45 AM
I had gone to India via Munich in Dec 2006 with H1-B extension approved (VISA on passport had expired) without a Transit VISA and had no problems. Hope this helps!
ameryki
05-02 12:08 AM
my 2 cents...once past 180 days of your 485 filing with an approved 140 already anything is fair game. I am in my 4th promotion compared to what was on my labor...you got to take risks in life mate.
more...
txh1b
08-20 06:27 PM
Does she have a 485 pending as well?
gc28262
07-30 07:07 AM
Success Story: Showing a Valid Employer-Employee Relationship (http://shusterman.com/newsletterusimmigrationaugust2010.html#5)
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
more...
Enebreus
01-20 10:13 AM
I thought it was kind of inherent in a programming competition. If he would allow external libraries, the contests could become jigsaw puzzle contests where the person who could find the best open source libraries, and piece them together properly could beat someone who made something completely from scratch.
I appreciate where you're coming from.
When I interpreted the rules/intent of the competition I didn't see anything wrong with using Box2D.
I think I made something awesome no matter what happens. I'm happy with the final product and everything I've learned making it. I'd just hate to see it disqualified because someone assumed I'd know not to use external libraries or external audio.
ps: can you post your code? and btw... i like what you did with your swarming code :)
You can grab the earlier version of the Swarming code from my blog here:
http://blog.organa.ca/?p=34
I share the code for most of my projects so feel free to browse around.
In order to share the current version I'd have to do a lot of cleaning up... for example I wrote 5 different ways of handling broad level hit detection. At this point I would have to rewrite it to make it sharable.
I appreciate where you're coming from.
When I interpreted the rules/intent of the competition I didn't see anything wrong with using Box2D.
I think I made something awesome no matter what happens. I'm happy with the final product and everything I've learned making it. I'd just hate to see it disqualified because someone assumed I'd know not to use external libraries or external audio.
ps: can you post your code? and btw... i like what you did with your swarming code :)
You can grab the earlier version of the Swarming code from my blog here:
http://blog.organa.ca/?p=34
I share the code for most of my projects so feel free to browse around.
In order to share the current version I'd have to do a lot of cleaning up... for example I wrote 5 different ways of handling broad level hit detection. At this point I would have to rewrite it to make it sharable.
indianabacklog
06-10 01:45 PM
Thanks for encouragement,
It's always scary the first time. : )
Re. Check caching - just FYI, now-a-days, they copy the check, convert it to EFT and destroy the original so getting case number from copy may not work.
Also do I write A# on back of photos or something else? Any idea if there are restrictions for using pen or pencil or such?
thanks again,
NS
I did not get the case number from the hard copy but the electronic copy which I can access from my online account information.
I did write my husbands A# on the back of the photo in pencil if I remember rightly but just so that it did not push through the imprint on the photo itself.
Believe in yourself. I filed both mine and my spouse's adjustment of status packet myself and we have our green cards without any requests for evidence. If you have read the instructions and followed them, filled all the blank spaces in on the form and supplied all the other documents etc that are needed you are doing fine. If the USCIS needs anything else they will ask for it.
It's always scary the first time. : )
Re. Check caching - just FYI, now-a-days, they copy the check, convert it to EFT and destroy the original so getting case number from copy may not work.
Also do I write A# on back of photos or something else? Any idea if there are restrictions for using pen or pencil or such?
thanks again,
NS
I did not get the case number from the hard copy but the electronic copy which I can access from my online account information.
I did write my husbands A# on the back of the photo in pencil if I remember rightly but just so that it did not push through the imprint on the photo itself.
Believe in yourself. I filed both mine and my spouse's adjustment of status packet myself and we have our green cards without any requests for evidence. If you have read the instructions and followed them, filled all the blank spaces in on the form and supplied all the other documents etc that are needed you are doing fine. If the USCIS needs anything else they will ask for it.
more...
BharatPremi
11-30 06:16 PM
You need to invoke IV-21 :D
Good One...:D.. Then I will have to wait for 6 months from today...:D
Good One...:D.. Then I will have to wait for 6 months from today...:D
paulkurni
06-17 05:33 PM
paulkurni, please join your state chapter. Even before Obama's mention in the Cairo speech, IV Core has been trying to do whatever you have mentioned.
We need members to collectively participate in their state chapters which can provide the thrust needed to perform a collective action country-wide as mentioned by you.
Please excuse my ignorance as I joined IV recently. Please tell me how do I join state chapter. I reside in DC metro suburbs.
I am glad that we are at least thinking in this direction. Please let me know how can I contribute. Have we formed any regional leaders who can perhaps guide us. If so, I would like to get in touch with the ones in my area. Any other information I need to know.
We need members to collectively participate in their state chapters which can provide the thrust needed to perform a collective action country-wide as mentioned by you.
Please excuse my ignorance as I joined IV recently. Please tell me how do I join state chapter. I reside in DC metro suburbs.
I am glad that we are at least thinking in this direction. Please let me know how can I contribute. Have we formed any regional leaders who can perhaps guide us. If so, I would like to get in touch with the ones in my area. Any other information I need to know.
more...
gparr
October 24th, 2004, 06:12 PM
I visited the family farm again and did a series of shots of some of the deteriorated fence. Below are the four best of the effort. I would appreciate some feedback, particularly about composition.
Thanks,
Gary
Farm fence 1
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencerails.jpg
Farm fence 2
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencerail2.jpg
Farm fence 3
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencepoles.jpg
Farm fence 4
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencecorner.jpg
Thanks,
Gary
Farm fence 1
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencerails.jpg
Farm fence 2
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencerail2.jpg
Farm fence 3
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencepoles.jpg
Farm fence 4
http://www.dphoto.us/forumphotos/data/500/153fencecorner.jpg
senram
01-21 05:26 PM
But it works little bit different. The green card process is not purely based on merrit. But college admission is based on merrit in USA. But green card
process is done by the requirement and eligiblity. For example for an Engineer position the requirement is BE and 5 years of experience and they are
selecting based on Experience. Similarly for QA or Analyst position the requirement is similar but they do not need Aptitude similar to Hardcore Engineer position. So in
this case after labor is cleared everyone of them is needed for USA irespective of which country he belongs to. So because of Country quota USA or US companies were not all
impacted. But because of overcrowding of Indians and Chinese are impacted. Best way to say is because of country some one is cutting the line in the queue. But skill wise
every one who cleared labor are eqully important based on the requirements. So quality of persons selected were not impacted by country quota. But it is discriminatory. But
this kind of discrimination is in most or all of the countries in the world. Can anyone fight reservation in India and win? Atleast here we have provision to fight by advocacy
and lobbying whether winning or not. But in our own country we cannot do anything about discrimination.
The country quota extends to all the nations and is not specific to few countries (India, China....) UK, Germany, France have country limits too, its just that their countries are not oversubscribed like India, China...
Country quota has no place in employment based green card system. The skill set that I have and that my employer seeks has nothing to do with the country that I was born in!
process is done by the requirement and eligiblity. For example for an Engineer position the requirement is BE and 5 years of experience and they are
selecting based on Experience. Similarly for QA or Analyst position the requirement is similar but they do not need Aptitude similar to Hardcore Engineer position. So in
this case after labor is cleared everyone of them is needed for USA irespective of which country he belongs to. So because of Country quota USA or US companies were not all
impacted. But because of overcrowding of Indians and Chinese are impacted. Best way to say is because of country some one is cutting the line in the queue. But skill wise
every one who cleared labor are eqully important based on the requirements. So quality of persons selected were not impacted by country quota. But it is discriminatory. But
this kind of discrimination is in most or all of the countries in the world. Can anyone fight reservation in India and win? Atleast here we have provision to fight by advocacy
and lobbying whether winning or not. But in our own country we cannot do anything about discrimination.
The country quota extends to all the nations and is not specific to few countries (India, China....) UK, Germany, France have country limits too, its just that their countries are not oversubscribed like India, China...
Country quota has no place in employment based green card system. The skill set that I have and that my employer seeks has nothing to do with the country that I was born in!
more...
rkm
07-17 06:34 PM
Thanks again for all the IV support....Great news...
Thank you very much Pappu, Logic Life and IV core members..
Your great effort brought us this great news and relief
Thank you very much Pappu, Logic Life and IV core members..
Your great effort brought us this great news and relief
Steve Mitchell
November 21st, 2005, 06:09 PM
The shots can be sharpened much better which would make all of them even more appealing.
more...
srikondoji
07-27 03:26 PM
What you said is true.
Even though receipts are generated based on received date, I assume they will process by priority date , if not what is use of priority date after filing I-485?
Gurus, any body know how USCIS will process 485 applications?
Even though receipts are generated based on received date, I assume they will process by priority date , if not what is use of priority date after filing I-485?
Gurus, any body know how USCIS will process 485 applications?
TomPlate
12-03 10:01 AM
I asked an other question which is more related to this and somebody deleted. Please answer these as it is really hard.
Here is my question,
1. After 180 days I would like to change job.
2. My I140 approved in feb 2006.
3. Company needs to file I140 amendment because my company was acquired by a giant company and they will do end of Apr 2008.
4. Can I quit before Apr 2008 will it have any issues in my Green card process.
Here is my question,
1. After 180 days I would like to change job.
2. My I140 approved in feb 2006.
3. Company needs to file I140 amendment because my company was acquired by a giant company and they will do end of Apr 2008.
4. Can I quit before Apr 2008 will it have any issues in my Green card process.
desidude
07-22 09:47 AM
My attorney asked me to put A# as N/A. I assume, N/A is applicable to all h1b holders. Make sure, you write the correct I-94#, otherwise they might reject/send back your application because of improper information. I think, it is not appropriate to give A# from your OPT card.
Hello,
I have a couple of questions here:
1) The last digit of the I-94# number is not very clear(Not sure if it is a 3 or 8). What do I write in the 485? Is there any way to find the correct one?
2) I filed the I140 without providing the A#. I understand that when I dont provide one, a new one is generated. And the A# is usually used to link the 485 with the 140. Now when I apply for 485, if I give the A# from my OPT EAD, will it be a problem because a new number will be already generated for I140? Should I write the A# in 485 or just leave it??
Thanks in advance for all the replies.
Hello,
I have a couple of questions here:
1) The last digit of the I-94# number is not very clear(Not sure if it is a 3 or 8). What do I write in the 485? Is there any way to find the correct one?
2) I filed the I140 without providing the A#. I understand that when I dont provide one, a new one is generated. And the A# is usually used to link the 485 with the 140. Now when I apply for 485, if I give the A# from my OPT EAD, will it be a problem because a new number will be already generated for I140? Should I write the A# in 485 or just leave it??
Thanks in advance for all the replies.
clockwork
07-18 05:41 PM
just emailed... it should have 4 pdf files.
Done buddy. Please look at my previous post. Thanks for sharing info. :)
Done buddy. Please look at my previous post. Thanks for sharing info. :)
Green Card Aspirant
03-24 07:23 PM
I too fall in the same boat. I see one of them responding for this post that we can apply for premium processing. If we apply for premium processing before 6 months , does it raise any questions at USCIS ... why this guy is applying for premium processing ?? Are we eligible to apply H1 B Extension with premium processing before 6 months of H1 B Expiry ??
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
