akilaakka
10-05 08:04 AM
Recently a friend of mine hot has GC approved. He is EB2, PD Dec 2005.
Nothing makes sense.
Thanks
Senthil
Nothing makes sense.
Thanks
Senthil
wallpaper f18 Super Hornet
aristotle
01-31 01:27 PM
Revoking the previously approved I140 doesn't invalidate the H1 extension/transfer. But to get further extensions/transfers, you need A) labor pending for one year OR B) approved I140 from the new employer.
kumarc123
08-13 02:09 PM
after rolling out the sept visa ... rao saab aaram kar rahe hain...
kindly not "DISTUB"
:D:D:D
(translation : __mr rao is resting__)
Come on guys, give him a break.
His analysis was accurate, if any of you came across the September 08 bulletin, EB2 advanced by two months. Which equates to what vldrao analyzed in the past, the use of 20,000 visas in September.
We all IV members stand united and lets not adverse someone on the basis of his righteousness. Even if a IV member is wrong, let's all correct him.
Thanks
kindly not "DISTUB"
:D:D:D
(translation : __mr rao is resting__)
Come on guys, give him a break.
His analysis was accurate, if any of you came across the September 08 bulletin, EB2 advanced by two months. Which equates to what vldrao analyzed in the past, the use of 20,000 visas in September.
We all IV members stand united and lets not adverse someone on the basis of his righteousness. Even if a IV member is wrong, let's all correct him.
Thanks
2011 Boeing F-18F Super Hornet
waitingnwaiting
11-29 02:43 PM
Any news on this?Will they give EAD?
Please ask the lawyer who said that and let us know if this is happening.
Please ask the lawyer who said that and let us know if this is happening.
more...
roseball
10-07 06:30 PM
I would really love to hear comments from ppl who can relate to this possibly with some first-hand experience in going through this stage!
My labor cert was filed just this February (been about 8 months now). The application was put in as EB2 with the minimum requirements being - Masters + 3 yrs, or alternatively, a Bachelors + 5 yrs.
Now the law firm has contacted my manager asking her to prepare a "Business Necessity Statement" for a "POSSIBLE" audit! (note the word "possible", its not really an audit yet). They want my manager to explain why a Masters and 3 years is better than a Bachelors + 5 yrs for this job, and stuff like that.
Preparing a business necessity statement if there was really an audit is understandable, but this request from the law firm makes it look like they're more than certain that there will be an audit on my application. Have things gotten that bad really? Or is our law firm just pre-emptively preparing for the worst? Just to let you know, there are other ppl at my office with my similar job profile, whose labor cert has also been applied for as an EB3 (requiring only a Bachelors and work experience).
How scared should I be realistically about the possibility of an audit? And how realistic is it in this day and age to actually get an approved labor cert after responding to a business necessity audit.
Also, here's an excerpt from the email that the law firm sent to my manager. Can anyone of you suggest what kind of "additional documentation" they are talking about including with all the explanation for business necessity?
"All business necessity arguments must be evidenced via supporting documentation. Please note that the DOL prefers �independent� forms of documentation to statements from or information created by <companyname>. Make sure to be reasonably specific and identify the sources and bases for your assertions in the context of <companyname>'s business. Independent documentation that contains financial justification(s) to substantiate the business necessity argument will be particularly helpful."
The main issue with your PERM is to justify why your job required EB-2 qualifications as a requirement while others in your company with similar job profiles were only eligible under EB-3. That should be your main focus in preparing any documentation incase your case gets audited.
My labor cert was filed just this February (been about 8 months now). The application was put in as EB2 with the minimum requirements being - Masters + 3 yrs, or alternatively, a Bachelors + 5 yrs.
Now the law firm has contacted my manager asking her to prepare a "Business Necessity Statement" for a "POSSIBLE" audit! (note the word "possible", its not really an audit yet). They want my manager to explain why a Masters and 3 years is better than a Bachelors + 5 yrs for this job, and stuff like that.
Preparing a business necessity statement if there was really an audit is understandable, but this request from the law firm makes it look like they're more than certain that there will be an audit on my application. Have things gotten that bad really? Or is our law firm just pre-emptively preparing for the worst? Just to let you know, there are other ppl at my office with my similar job profile, whose labor cert has also been applied for as an EB3 (requiring only a Bachelors and work experience).
How scared should I be realistically about the possibility of an audit? And how realistic is it in this day and age to actually get an approved labor cert after responding to a business necessity audit.
Also, here's an excerpt from the email that the law firm sent to my manager. Can anyone of you suggest what kind of "additional documentation" they are talking about including with all the explanation for business necessity?
"All business necessity arguments must be evidenced via supporting documentation. Please note that the DOL prefers �independent� forms of documentation to statements from or information created by <companyname>. Make sure to be reasonably specific and identify the sources and bases for your assertions in the context of <companyname>'s business. Independent documentation that contains financial justification(s) to substantiate the business necessity argument will be particularly helpful."
The main issue with your PERM is to justify why your job required EB-2 qualifications as a requirement while others in your company with similar job profiles were only eligible under EB-3. That should be your main focus in preparing any documentation incase your case gets audited.
MatsP
June 7th, 2005, 02:21 AM
These are all good suggestions and translate well from my film days. I also read that, whereas in b&w the adage was expose for the shadows and develop (or print) for highlights, in digital it is the reverse - expose to preserve detail in the highlights and then use your curves in RAW to fix the shadows where you want them. So I'll have to put all that to work this week / weekend. If the flowers stay around, that is.
Yeah, that seems like a reasonable approach. The b&w film is probably much more tolerant to overexposure than the sensor, same as colour film, you can overexpose several stops, and as long as you compensate in the printing phase. Not so with digital cameras, they can tolerate only a very mild case of overexposure. In RAW it's a little bit more tolerant than if you use JPG in the camera, but only because the most fine details in the highlight is lost when converting from internal RAW pixels to 8-bit pixels for the JPG. Also consider that the lost information is actually just the last few bits, so when multiplied up to show a decent image, you'd still get a pretty sketchy result.
I'd also like to concur with Josh about the sensitivity: the range that the sensor can accept intense light is pretty much the same for all DSLR's for the same generation. You'll just have to live with it, compensate for it and wait for the next generation of sensors that are more tolerant... ;-)
--
Mats
Yeah, that seems like a reasonable approach. The b&w film is probably much more tolerant to overexposure than the sensor, same as colour film, you can overexpose several stops, and as long as you compensate in the printing phase. Not so with digital cameras, they can tolerate only a very mild case of overexposure. In RAW it's a little bit more tolerant than if you use JPG in the camera, but only because the most fine details in the highlight is lost when converting from internal RAW pixels to 8-bit pixels for the JPG. Also consider that the lost information is actually just the last few bits, so when multiplied up to show a decent image, you'd still get a pretty sketchy result.
I'd also like to concur with Josh about the sensitivity: the range that the sensor can accept intense light is pretty much the same for all DSLR's for the same generation. You'll just have to live with it, compensate for it and wait for the next generation of sensors that are more tolerant... ;-)
--
Mats
more...
houston2005
08-21 11:26 AM
It is my turn to receive the "Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident" today. My depenedents are yet to receive this mail. This forum, Immigration-law, Immigration portal by Rajiv Khanna and many other immigration lawyers' websites like Murthy's etc were very useful to understand the immigration laws.
I did everything myself (EB2-NIW - India) - I140, I485, AP and EAD and my PD (I140 RD) and I485 RD are 08-30-2005.
I did make a one time conribution of $100.00 to IV.
Thanks a lot. All the best to all.
Congrats.
Which service center did you applied to. I have similar PD (8/22/05) and EB2 NIW at TSC.
I did everything myself (EB2-NIW - India) - I140, I485, AP and EAD and my PD (I140 RD) and I485 RD are 08-30-2005.
I did make a one time conribution of $100.00 to IV.
Thanks a lot. All the best to all.
Congrats.
Which service center did you applied to. I have similar PD (8/22/05) and EB2 NIW at TSC.
2010 Hornet 8, Super Hornet
MetteBB
06-06 02:30 PM
Yeah that green one with the bird is posted twice... giving the greater twice the chance to win :lol: cool if he get's both first and second place :D
hehehe
/mette
hehehe
/mette
more...
makemygc
07-20 03:28 PM
I sent in form G-325 for both me and my wife along with my I-485 instead of the G-325A as required on I-485 instructions by oversight. What do you guys recommend I do? Should I send in a new application or just send in the G-325A form with a letter stating the issue? Please help.
Yes, it's definitely a issue. Talk to your lawyer immediately.
Even though the form looks similar, G-325A requires 4 copies where G-325 has only 2 copies. I was almost about to make the same mistake.
Yes, it's definitely a issue. Talk to your lawyer immediately.
Even though the form looks similar, G-325A requires 4 copies where G-325 has only 2 copies. I was almost about to make the same mistake.
hair Super Hornets, Capt.
dpsg
04-08 11:02 AM
As always appreciate your efforts.
more...
Googler
06-18 08:23 PM
Instead in CIR Section 531 (COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS) takes away the right for courts to rule on writs of mandamus filings:
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
please please stop reading the old bill
the new one is on the iv home page
or in thomas look at sa.1150 under the s.1358 bill
Thanks for pointing that out Paskal. I stand corrected.
S.A. 1150 Section 216 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:2:./temp/~r110MkRgxl:e138316:) says:
SEC. 216. STREAMLINED PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND CHECKS CONDUCTED FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS.
(a) INFORMATION SHARING; INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--Section 105 (8 U.S.C. 1105) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General shall establish an interagency task force to resolve cases in which an application or petition for an immigration benefit conferred under this Act has been delayed due to an outstanding background check investigation for more than 2 years after the date on which such application or petition was initially filed.
``(2) MEMBERSHIP.--The interagency task force established under paragraph (1) shall include representatives from Federal agencies with immigration, law enforcement, or national security responsibilities under this Act.''.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year, 2008 through 2012 for enhancements to existing systems for conducting background and security checks necessary to support immigration security and orderly processing of applications.
(c) REPORT ON BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on the background and security checks conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on behalf of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
(2) CONTENT.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) a description of the background and security check program;
(B) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays associated with different types of immigration applications;
(C) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays by applicant country of origin; and
(D) the steps that the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking to expedite background and security checks that have been pending for more than 180 days.
Doesn't promise any results and it is not clear if this extra appropriations will be used for the much ballyhooed transformation that Michael Cannon says might kick in in 2010, or for clearing the current backlog BUT is much better than trying to take away the right to file mandamus suits. Also leads us to believe that 180 days is the acceptable amount of time for a namecheck.
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
please please stop reading the old bill
the new one is on the iv home page
or in thomas look at sa.1150 under the s.1358 bill
Thanks for pointing that out Paskal. I stand corrected.
S.A. 1150 Section 216 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r110:2:./temp/~r110MkRgxl:e138316:) says:
SEC. 216. STREAMLINED PROCESSING OF BACKGROUND CHECKS CONDUCTED FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS.
(a) INFORMATION SHARING; INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--Section 105 (8 U.S.C. 1105) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) INTERAGENCY TASK FORCE.--
``(1) IN GENERAL.--The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General shall establish an interagency task force to resolve cases in which an application or petition for an immigration benefit conferred under this Act has been delayed due to an outstanding background check investigation for more than 2 years after the date on which such application or petition was initially filed.
``(2) MEMBERSHIP.--The interagency task force established under paragraph (1) shall include representatives from Federal agencies with immigration, law enforcement, or national security responsibilities under this Act.''.
(b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--There are authorized to be appropriated to the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year, 2008 through 2012 for enhancements to existing systems for conducting background and security checks necessary to support immigration security and orderly processing of applications.
(c) REPORT ON BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives a report on the background and security checks conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation on behalf of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.
(2) CONTENT.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include--
(A) a description of the background and security check program;
(B) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays associated with different types of immigration applications;
(C) a statistical breakdown of the background and security check delays by applicant country of origin; and
(D) the steps that the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is taking to expedite background and security checks that have been pending for more than 180 days.
Doesn't promise any results and it is not clear if this extra appropriations will be used for the much ballyhooed transformation that Michael Cannon says might kick in in 2010, or for clearing the current backlog BUT is much better than trying to take away the right to file mandamus suits. Also leads us to believe that 180 days is the acceptable amount of time for a namecheck.
hot superhornet
p.guptapost
11-06 05:54 PM
2 K number comes from I485 inventory report from USCIS. It shows 2K visas filed overall in 2009 till Aug.
more...
house F/A-18E/F Super Hornet
techbuyer77
07-20 07:13 AM
lawyer sent 3 tax returns no paystubs
tattoo superhornet
Siddharta
09-26 04:26 PM
My sincere advice, DO not even think about it ..
So you recommend I stay in the similar position (and company) till 2015. Greattttttttt.....
So you recommend I stay in the similar position (and company) till 2015. Greattttttttt.....
more...
pictures Hasegawa 1/48 F-18F Super
needhelp!
09-28 05:31 PM
I thought you were calling me :) Sorry no answer here.
dresses Boeing F-18F Super Hornet
invincibleasian
01-31 03:18 PM
As per the law, your H1B will still be valid even in if I-140 is revoked. However, the only flip side is one will lose the old priority date.
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
You cannot lose priority date after i140 is approved unless revoked for fraud!
For sure, this is exactly outlined in the law. I have known some cases who are working successfully and legally on H1Bs even after their I-140s revoked (by the way one of them is in 8th year of H1B)
Im 100% sure about what i said. For better clarification, one can contact murthy.com or rajiv.s.khanna
You cannot lose priority date after i140 is approved unless revoked for fraud!
more...
makeup Hasegawa 1/48 F-18F Super
InTheMoment
12-10 02:33 PM
I read somewhere that CBP officers are instructed to make a photocopy themselves if 2 originals are not given.
The photocopying is best left to them as the one you make has potential of having been tampered.
Some one few days ago posted that the she was was adviced by the lawyer to hand over Photocopies of AP and keep the original for herself.
So do you have to give them the original or have them take a photocopy of it and give you back the original ?
The photocopying is best left to them as the one you make has potential of having been tampered.
Some one few days ago posted that the she was was adviced by the lawyer to hand over Photocopies of AP and keep the original for herself.
So do you have to give them the original or have them take a photocopy of it and give you back the original ?
girlfriend F/A-18F Super Hornet
hemasar
05-05 08:29 AM
Hi,
What is the e-Mail address for PBEC to apply for screenshot of proof of pending LC? What are the details I have to send them?
What is the e-Mail address for PBEC to apply for screenshot of proof of pending LC? What are the details I have to send them?
hairstyles Source:
gc_chahiye
11-13 12:11 PM
after 180 days it doesn't make a difference whether i-140 is approved or not, one can change job..
i am not a lawyer
provided they find that your I-140 was "approvable" at that 180 day mark. If at that point they feel it was not (or worse try to issue an RFE to your old employer) you could be in trouble. Safest to wait for approval.
i am not a lawyer
provided they find that your I-140 was "approvable" at that 180 day mark. If at that point they feel it was not (or worse try to issue an RFE to your old employer) you could be in trouble. Safest to wait for approval.
Pagal
04-21 07:21 PM
Hello,
Welcome to Houston! There are many options for living ... though traditionally Indians have preferred Sugarland, other neighborhoods (e.g. Pearland, Katy) are nice as well ... my recommendation would be to rent an apartment in Riveroaks area first (very nice neighborhood) while you look around ...
Welcome to Houston! There are many options for living ... though traditionally Indians have preferred Sugarland, other neighborhoods (e.g. Pearland, Katy) are nice as well ... my recommendation would be to rent an apartment in Riveroaks area first (very nice neighborhood) while you look around ...
sunny1000
07-19 02:41 PM
It was a false positive and your x-ray confirmed it. Your doctor would have given the appropriate determination in the I-693 sealed envelope. If you still get a RFE, follow the instructions and go to the USCIS approved doctor near you.
No comments:
Post a Comment