kiran_k02
12-05 05:20 PM
I also got an RFE for photographs. Can I respond with Certified mail? Or should I use FedEx? Can you please tell me how did you send it?
Sorry for not responding to you earlier. You must have already responded by now. Just for the benefit of everybody who wants to respond to their RFEs.
I used priority USPS mail with delivery confirmation. The USPS service agent allayed my fears about delivery confirmation to PO BOX, he said they will scan the BAR CODE on the mail-envelope when they drop it in the PO BOX and it does not require any signature from any USCIS agent. He even said you can request for signature confirmation on PO BOX, I don't know how far he is right on that.
I mailed my photos with the Gold sheet which came along RFE, I mailed on Wednesday Nov 26th, 08, due to Thanksgiving Holiday it reached USCIS Texas Center on Sat Nov 29th, 08. I tracked my mail through USPS website.
My Case status was changed from RFE to Response to RFE received on Wednesday Dec 3rd, 08.
Just for your information, I got RFE on EAD for Identification Document before I received RFE on AP. That time I mailed my documents in ordinary post and I got my EAD in three weeks after RFE response. I don't recommend this approach as you cannot track the package.
Sorry for not responding to you earlier. You must have already responded by now. Just for the benefit of everybody who wants to respond to their RFEs.
I used priority USPS mail with delivery confirmation. The USPS service agent allayed my fears about delivery confirmation to PO BOX, he said they will scan the BAR CODE on the mail-envelope when they drop it in the PO BOX and it does not require any signature from any USCIS agent. He even said you can request for signature confirmation on PO BOX, I don't know how far he is right on that.
I mailed my photos with the Gold sheet which came along RFE, I mailed on Wednesday Nov 26th, 08, due to Thanksgiving Holiday it reached USCIS Texas Center on Sat Nov 29th, 08. I tracked my mail through USPS website.
My Case status was changed from RFE to Response to RFE received on Wednesday Dec 3rd, 08.
Just for your information, I got RFE on EAD for Identification Document before I received RFE on AP. That time I mailed my documents in ordinary post and I got my EAD in three weeks after RFE response. I don't recommend this approach as you cannot track the package.
wallpaper 2005 Ford Mustang GT - Men
qualified_trash
08-30 11:38 AM
yes there is. CALL YOUR LAWYER
vxb2004
11-25 01:24 PM
Thank you very much for all your inputs. I hope everything goes well.
2011 2007 ford mustang gt black.
kshitijnt
07-03 03:44 PM
agree with amsgc regarding H1 "transfer"
AFAIK,
1] One can enter US on a valid visa stamp in the passport based on a previous employer if you have a valid current status with the new employer. It looks like you are not there yet because your new H1 has not been approved yet. A reciept notice is not enough to enter.
2] You are currently working for Employer B and you do not have an employer-employee relationship with A anymore. So it maybe considered "lying" to the USCIS/ICE/Border Patrol if you attempt to enter US claiming that you work for "A".
3] Going out of the US while H1 application is pending automatically invalidates the application.
Talk to a lawyer before you go.
Who told you that you can not return when H1 transfer is pending? As long as H1B with company B was filed prior to canceling H1 from company A and H1B from company B is a bonafide job that assures H1b status, you can enter with the receipt notice itself, no need to wait for approval.
AFAIK,
1] One can enter US on a valid visa stamp in the passport based on a previous employer if you have a valid current status with the new employer. It looks like you are not there yet because your new H1 has not been approved yet. A reciept notice is not enough to enter.
2] You are currently working for Employer B and you do not have an employer-employee relationship with A anymore. So it maybe considered "lying" to the USCIS/ICE/Border Patrol if you attempt to enter US claiming that you work for "A".
3] Going out of the US while H1 application is pending automatically invalidates the application.
Talk to a lawyer before you go.
Who told you that you can not return when H1 transfer is pending? As long as H1B with company B was filed prior to canceling H1 from company A and H1B from company B is a bonafide job that assures H1b status, you can enter with the receipt notice itself, no need to wait for approval.
more...
sathyaraj
11-15 04:25 PM
This may seem as easy as it sounds, but could you get into trouble. Along with EVL USCIS also asks for pay stubs and W2s for RFE. This is to asses your intentions of continuing the job as mentioned in ur labour. Eventhough GC is for future employer. if USCIS finds out that you are not working in a job which matches the job description, it could create problems.
Use EAD to join the company but during I-485 process if they ask for EVL keep a back up company which can give EVL with Labor job description. Hope this helps.
Use EAD to join the company but during I-485 process if they ask for EVL keep a back up company which can give EVL with Labor job description. Hope this helps.
waitnwatch
05-24 12:18 AM
Mercies,
This is a house member. They will speak a lot of things. Plus, there is 435 of them. In the course of debate a lot of opinions will come across. I dont know if this guy from Indiana is on the conference, but the only person that really matters from the house side is Sensenbrenner. He will be on the conference. And all the provisions that are friendly to illegals will be thrown out of the bill during conference.
Frankly, the amendments like orange card amendment of Feinstein was a waste of time. First of all it didnt even pass the senate, but had it been passed, provisions like Orange card would be something that Sensenbrenner would ask the Senators to leave it outside the door before walking to the table in conf committee.
Cool down yaar. Let's wait for tommorow to see and hope that Frist and Reid dont start another pillow fight over the number of amendments.
You're right on logiclife .... our first concern is whether frist and reid start fighting again. one baby step at a time.....
One good thing I have noticed....I donot know why but Tancredo is not screaming as much from the rooftops right now. I guess he may have realized that the house just overdid things a bit and tipped the balance.
This is a house member. They will speak a lot of things. Plus, there is 435 of them. In the course of debate a lot of opinions will come across. I dont know if this guy from Indiana is on the conference, but the only person that really matters from the house side is Sensenbrenner. He will be on the conference. And all the provisions that are friendly to illegals will be thrown out of the bill during conference.
Frankly, the amendments like orange card amendment of Feinstein was a waste of time. First of all it didnt even pass the senate, but had it been passed, provisions like Orange card would be something that Sensenbrenner would ask the Senators to leave it outside the door before walking to the table in conf committee.
Cool down yaar. Let's wait for tommorow to see and hope that Frist and Reid dont start another pillow fight over the number of amendments.
You're right on logiclife .... our first concern is whether frist and reid start fighting again. one baby step at a time.....
One good thing I have noticed....I donot know why but Tancredo is not screaming as much from the rooftops right now. I guess he may have realized that the house just overdid things a bit and tipped the balance.
more...
Pria
01-06 04:25 PM
Thanks so much for taking time to respond. I have e-filed my application and am sending all supporting documents today. It appears that the processing time is about 90 days, so I might not be able to leave in Feb afterall. But at least I will have my Travel document ready for any future travel plans.
Best,
Pria
Best,
Pria
2010 2005 Ford Mustang GT 2
tinuverma
03-18 11:45 AM
I am on H1 (8th year - not using EAD which I have) right now and a citizen friend of mine wants me to be involved with his website company. Business would involve subscription based access to website. He has hinted that one thing he is willing to consider is awarding me some percentage share in the company in return for my services as his website is not yet profitable.
If I would like to take that, what is the way to go?
1. Specifically, can someone tell me what I should do - LLC, something else...?
2. How would I pay myself from this without breaking H1-B laws?
3. If tomorrow I wanna close this company as I dont want to keep it for any reason, is there anything I need to be concerned with? Or it's as easy to close as a simple status update, call, etc?
Thanks
T
If I would like to take that, what is the way to go?
1. Specifically, can someone tell me what I should do - LLC, something else...?
2. How would I pay myself from this without breaking H1-B laws?
3. If tomorrow I wanna close this company as I dont want to keep it for any reason, is there anything I need to be concerned with? Or it's as easy to close as a simple status update, call, etc?
Thanks
T
more...
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
hair 2005 Ford Mustang GT Coupe
krishmunn
09-21 07:11 AM
First thing you need to do is setup a 30 min - 1 hour appointment with an experienced Attorney (Khanna/ Murthy/ Ron) You can have a telephonic discussion. Do not think about money and go for the best.
During discussion bring up the topic of new employment (C) as well .
If you have the format from your current company attorney , show it to them .
It might be simpler then you are thinking.
During discussion bring up the topic of new employment (C) as well .
If you have the format from your current company attorney , show it to them .
It might be simpler then you are thinking.
more...
shana04
08-15 05:29 PM
Congrats on your green. You have done so much for IV and community and it is great to know that your levels of commitment is still the same
Is your Name check and FP cleared?
Is your Name check and FP cleared?
hot Ford Mustang Black Mustang
JunRN
08-11 06:00 PM
True. But USCIS doesn't care anymore because I-140 is already approved. The ability to pay is for I-140, not for AOS. There is no point for USCIS to get the ability to pay for AC21 cases because the adjudication is based on the approved I-140. If you will read the USCIS guidelines on this, it explains the reasons why.
more...
house 2007 ford mustang gt black.
learning01
03-28 01:33 PM
Straight I 485, EAD and AP filing, then aim for 6 months.
Let us form a group who are pushing to introduce Ammendment for Filling I485, AP &EAD when I140 approved/pending for 6 months, eventhough Cut-off dates are not reached for EB category immigration. Please discuss here weather any work being done to introduce this ammendment with present Comprehencive Bill.
Let us form a group who are pushing to introduce Ammendment for Filling I485, AP &EAD when I140 approved/pending for 6 months, eventhough Cut-off dates are not reached for EB category immigration. Please discuss here weather any work being done to introduce this ammendment with present Comprehencive Bill.
tattoo Ford Mustang GT
vkmurthy260
06-20 11:11 PM
According to my attorney i have to go out of the country and come back to get a new I 94 , He also said for trips to mexico less than 30 days you dont get a new I 94 is that true , i dont want to file a extension bcos i cant afford attorney fees now. Anyone got a new I 94 when entering from Mexico.
Thanks
Kris.
Thanks
Kris.
more...
pictures of my 2005 Ford Mustang GT
ags123
07-26 11:44 AM
Yes it can be done for 180 days after approval given that marriage occured before approval.
My confusion is with the lockboxes.
The application says file at chicago lockbox
The lawyer says Nebraska Service Centre.
Anyone who has recently done this please let me know.
Thanks
A
My confusion is with the lockboxes.
The application says file at chicago lockbox
The lawyer says Nebraska Service Centre.
Anyone who has recently done this please let me know.
Thanks
A
dresses 2005 Ford Mustang GT - Men
Waitnwait
12-20 08:58 PM
I just read at TOI that Dr Manmohan Singh's daughter Amrit Singh is a staff attorney at ACLU.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/PMs_daughter_puts_White_House_in_the_dock/articleshow/2639327.cms
Can she be of any help to IV's Agenda. Has IV core considered contacting her.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/PMs_daughter_puts_White_House_in_the_dock/articleshow/2639327.cms
Can she be of any help to IV's Agenda. Has IV core considered contacting her.
more...
makeup Black 2005 Ford Mustang GT
Munna Bhai
02-08 11:59 AM
You want to keep your 140 intact for 2 reasons:
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
Thanks, please let everyone know if by changing lawyers is there anyway of protecting I-140 from being revoked?? or is there any other way out??
1. To port the priority date for future use in a subsequent Greencard petition.
2. To get more H1 extensions based on this 140, until you have another labor and 140 going on with new employer.
First, about 1:
There is a lot of information on this thread about priority date transfers (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=912)from old approved 140 to a new 140. Read that thread and you will learn all you want to learn and all the information out there in the immigration world about PD transfer from one 140 to another 140.
In a nutshell:
Its a grey area of the law. If your 140 is never revoked, you would be fine and able to port your priority date. If it is revoked for fraud and willful misrepresentation, then you cannot port that PD under any circumstances. If 140 is revoked by employer then it falls into grey area. USCIS adjudicator's field manual says that you can still port your PD. The code of federal regulations says that you cannot. Currently USCIS is porting priority dates even if employer has revoked that 140, and they are following the AFM(adjudicator's field manual). However that can change in future. Legislation trumps regulation and regulation trumps the adjudicator's field manual. For now, things are great as AFM is being followed.
About 2:
If you have an H1 approved for 3 years after 140 approval, and you transfer jobs to a new employer and get another H1. You should be fine. If your previous employer cancels your I-140 after you leave and go to another employer, then USCIS will not go back and cancel your H1 because it was based on an approved 140 that is now revoked. This is what is happening as of now. At the time of H1 transfer to your new employer, your 140 should be in good status and you should have a photocopy of your approved 140. Once your H1 transfer is done (probably will have same end-date as the current 3-year H1 from your current employer), if the 140 is revoked AFTER that, then you should be fine. I am saying this based on advice from a very good lawyer.
Now, in far future, USCIS may decide to go and look for H1s that were approved based on approved 140 and then if that 140 is revoked, then they would go and cancel that H1 also. Its very very unlikely that they would do that even in future. They dont have that kind of resources to keep track of H1s based on 140 approvals and then go back and cancel them whenever some disappointed employer revokes 140.
About preventing 140 from being revoked:
I do not think that by changing lawyers, you can stop the previous 140 from being revoked. Your previous employer, for any reason, can get that 140 revoked with any lawyer they choose, regardless of who your current lawyer is. Lawyers are tied to clients, not petitions and cases. However, if someone knows more about this, please post here.
Thanks, please let everyone know if by changing lawyers is there anyway of protecting I-140 from being revoked?? or is there any other way out??
girlfriend 2010 Ford Mustang GT - Black
gcdreamer05
03-13 10:11 AM
congrats man , have fun put up a big party rock and roll and jump man jump....... after so many years u got ur green..........
hairstyles 2005 Black Ford Mustang GT
deekay
06-21 11:21 AM
I came back to US on Mar 30 2008 using advance parole. The officer wrote on I-94 , paroled until Mar 29, 2008 (I am assuming its an oversight).
I didnt detect the oversight till yesterday. What my current status and what actions should I take to rectify the error.
I am still working for my employer that sponsored the H1B which is valid till Feb 2009
Thanks
I didnt detect the oversight till yesterday. What my current status and what actions should I take to rectify the error.
I am still working for my employer that sponsored the H1B which is valid till Feb 2009
Thanks
howzatt
08-21 12:05 PM
bumping up??
Sanojkumar,
Please stop spamming all threads with this question. Please search at the very least wait for a reasonable amount of time to bump it.
Sanojkumar,
Please stop spamming all threads with this question. Please search at the very least wait for a reasonable amount of time to bump it.
shahuja
02-06 09:02 PM
hello ..EVERYBODY..need help..
this is the email came from my lawyer today..for the inquiry they did with the consulate regarding my visa.
Hi Shweta,
We understand how frustrating this is for you. We received a response to our inquiry with the consulate. It seems the application is being kept pending for additional administrative processing. The stated reason for the review falls within the law under Section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Under these circumstances, we typically see that the government issues a notice to the applicant wherein additional information is often requested. Kindly advise if you have received any notification from the consulate on this issue.
Best regards,
IS ADMIN PROC DIFFERENT FROM ADD ADMIN PROC ???
also the same day i called DOS and they told me case was approved already in jan..so that means that now more processing needs to be done ??
ADVICE ??
this is the email came from my lawyer today..for the inquiry they did with the consulate regarding my visa.
Hi Shweta,
We understand how frustrating this is for you. We received a response to our inquiry with the consulate. It seems the application is being kept pending for additional administrative processing. The stated reason for the review falls within the law under Section 221(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Under these circumstances, we typically see that the government issues a notice to the applicant wherein additional information is often requested. Kindly advise if you have received any notification from the consulate on this issue.
Best regards,
IS ADMIN PROC DIFFERENT FROM ADD ADMIN PROC ???
also the same day i called DOS and they told me case was approved already in jan..so that means that now more processing needs to be done ??
ADVICE ??
No comments:
Post a Comment