punjabi
10-23 03:50 PM
If you get laid off, find a company at a rate that will meet your minimum LCA wages requirement for H1B (W2) or EAD (I will approximate the wages mentioned in labor document). I think you have 30 days of buffer, but I will find something right away.
There is a chance that i might get laid off. I have a pending I485 filed on July 2. My I-140 was approved in June 06. Would like to know if i get laid off within how many days do i have to find a job.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
There is a chance that i might get laid off. I have a pending I485 filed on July 2. My I-140 was approved in June 06. Would like to know if i get laid off within how many days do i have to find a job.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
tnite
10-15 02:02 PM
Sorry Gurus, Couldn't figure out how to start a new thread. So posting here,
My spouse is on H4, Now she wants to use EAD and work.She wants to work part time, She has found a job as well, but the employer is sayng she can do parttime only for few months, after that she has to do full time or find a job somewhere else. Now if she cannot find another parttime job after few months, and has to stop working , will it affect her status?
Thankx in advance.
Once she goes from H4 to AOS(using EAD), it doesnt matter .she can work partime, FT or not work at all.
My spouse is on H4, Now she wants to use EAD and work.She wants to work part time, She has found a job as well, but the employer is sayng she can do parttime only for few months, after that she has to do full time or find a job somewhere else. Now if she cannot find another parttime job after few months, and has to stop working , will it affect her status?
Thankx in advance.
Once she goes from H4 to AOS(using EAD), it doesnt matter .she can work partime, FT or not work at all.
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
tuhin
07-16 01:36 PM
Thanks deecha.. I will keep the gang in loop... The future role will be of a chief architect. So I believe it is aligned with my current labor application. But can I even move using an EAD (hence dropping my H1) and then file my EB2 in the new company? The reason I am confused is, we used an H1 b visa to file the labor, not sure if a labor can be filed using an EAD.
more...
GCDelay
11-30 03:43 PM
xxx
zigma
04-06 07:21 AM
With this bill, if the thought is that about half of the illegals (<5yrs) will have to leave the country and return, and that too without any guarantees, they are not going to do it unless the consequences are drastic. Some, even then may decide that staying illegally is a better option than going back.
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
IMHO, this bill amounts to saying,
1. Let's legalize some of the illegals
2. Let's push the the rest of the problem away for another 10-12 years
3. A compromise
But the question that arises is that, what prevents people who have been here legally (>5yrs) from applying for GC thorugh this method?
more...
miguy
06-16 12:18 PM
Once you file for 485/AP/EAD, I guess the rule is that you cannot switch jobs for 6 months.....
1. can we choose the start date of our EAD or does USCIS decide that date?
2. can you have separate start dates for you and your wife's EAD?
3. does the new job have to be exactly the same title or can it be a new title? e.g. if your current role is a software engineer, can the new one be a Project manager?
thanks
1. can we choose the start date of our EAD or does USCIS decide that date?
2. can you have separate start dates for you and your wife's EAD?
3. does the new job have to be exactly the same title or can it be a new title? e.g. if your current role is a software engineer, can the new one be a Project manager?
thanks
hariswaminathan
01-10 04:46 PM
I prefer your theory to Infopass officer. Sincerely hope you are right because Name check is not where i want to be stuck in.
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
more...
justin150377
07-17 02:20 PM
Screw Murthy !!! I have never seen him picking up any good news.
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
Murthy is a she...and I would but I'm not single. ;)
bheemi123
03-31 10:42 AM
Yahoooooooooooooo......We (Me and my wife) received welcome notice today . Our 485 is approved on 25 th March.
no updates online just received postal mail from USCIS today .
I guess end of long wait , been in country from 2001 .
I wish you all the best and hang in there if your PD is current you can expect the notice any time so keep checking your postal mail box .
FYI - I dont know if my back ground check is clear or not , I guess it is .
can you please let us know which service center you filed and what was your notice date in i485 recipt notice
no updates online just received postal mail from USCIS today .
I guess end of long wait , been in country from 2001 .
I wish you all the best and hang in there if your PD is current you can expect the notice any time so keep checking your postal mail box .
FYI - I dont know if my back ground check is clear or not , I guess it is .
can you please let us know which service center you filed and what was your notice date in i485 recipt notice
more...
pointlesswait
02-13 01:10 PM
> American Dream or Pipe Dream!!!
;-)
;-)
LookingForGC
01-26 10:26 PM
Congrats! Enjoy the freedom.
more...
WillIBLucky
11-17 11:54 AM
Yes, 2007 will be the best chance we would have. After that its all political stunt as we saw this year before elections.
I sincerely hope I am wrong in this assumption.
I sincerely hope I am wrong in this assumption.
tempgc
09-24 01:25 PM
Source OH law firm (immigration-law.com)
No one should be surprised by the Los Angeles Times report that the USCIS is "considering" but not yet decided fee increases. As we reported earlier, the State Department is already seeking OMB approval for its consular and embassy services fee increase. Report says that the USCIS recorded a short fall of $118 million this fiscal year. One of the key reasons for the fund problem is cited reduced number of new case filings. Since the USCIS relies on the fee-income for its finance, it presents a problem. Another reason which is not discussed in the report may include its need for money to support ongoing reengineering project named business transformation program. This program is primarily funded by the premium processing service fee fund. Obviously, the PPS fund is suffering as well, particularly considering a drastic decrease of new employment-based cases. Another reason the report cited is need to funds to deal with potential increase in workload which are likely generated by the Comprehensive Immigration Reform, should the CIR be successfully enacted next year. However, this reason for fee increase may be considered too premature, considering the fact that the CIR may not be accomplished even in 2010. The most probable year for a successful CIR legislation is currently considered year 2011. Let's see what happens.
No one should be surprised by the Los Angeles Times report that the USCIS is "considering" but not yet decided fee increases. As we reported earlier, the State Department is already seeking OMB approval for its consular and embassy services fee increase. Report says that the USCIS recorded a short fall of $118 million this fiscal year. One of the key reasons for the fund problem is cited reduced number of new case filings. Since the USCIS relies on the fee-income for its finance, it presents a problem. Another reason which is not discussed in the report may include its need for money to support ongoing reengineering project named business transformation program. This program is primarily funded by the premium processing service fee fund. Obviously, the PPS fund is suffering as well, particularly considering a drastic decrease of new employment-based cases. Another reason the report cited is need to funds to deal with potential increase in workload which are likely generated by the Comprehensive Immigration Reform, should the CIR be successfully enacted next year. However, this reason for fee increase may be considered too premature, considering the fact that the CIR may not be accomplished even in 2010. The most probable year for a successful CIR legislation is currently considered year 2011. Let's see what happens.
more...
raamskl
07-07 12:40 PM
Done..
Good luck to ur son.
Good luck to ur son.
desi3933
06-23 12:38 PM
Port 2003 PD at the time of filing 2nd I-140, keep copies of old labor + 140 and new approved labor and a cover letter should specify that the beneficiary for both is the same ie YOU and you are not doing labor subsititution. I have been successful porting my pd from 03- the only difference was that my job classification was the same and salary for 2nd job was more
A
This is correct.
However, it does not matter if it is labor substitution (you can still do PD porting). Job Description changes do not matter.
The only requirement is the other I-140 must be approved and active
and it must belong to same beneficiary.
Not a legal advice.
A
This is correct.
However, it does not matter if it is labor substitution (you can still do PD porting). Job Description changes do not matter.
The only requirement is the other I-140 must be approved and active
and it must belong to same beneficiary.
Not a legal advice.
more...
gotgc?
02-03 05:04 PM
I have used my Canadian PR card for transit thru the UK while on AP. It was quite some time back though. The gate agent took a while to go thru my docs, but was satisfied and was allowed to board both ways. The verification obviously took a bit longer on the way back to the US, but nothing unusual. If I remember well, I did carry a copy of the transit rules with me in case there was any issue. My guess is you should be fine.
Thanks for your reply...judt wanted to make sure, did you travel to and from USA? Where did they check your documents?when you mention gate agent, which gate agent it is? is it your departure airport staff or London Immigration? On the way back who did check these documents? I am planning to take the transit rules with me as well...please let me know
Thanks for your reply...judt wanted to make sure, did you travel to and from USA? Where did they check your documents?when you mention gate agent, which gate agent it is? is it your departure airport staff or London Immigration? On the way back who did check these documents? I am planning to take the transit rules with me as well...please let me know
kumar1
07-29 10:37 AM
d
immuser
10-19 04:00 PM
if you want to pay $100, it is easy. lesser amount is very difficult. I went through pain of using my banks online bill pay. It took me an hour to set it up. And couple of days back I received an email saying the bill has been returned - probably because it is more than 90 days!
I lost valuable time , IV lost some donation.
I am not sure why paying less than $100 has been made so difficult.
I lost valuable time , IV lost some donation.
I am not sure why paying less than $100 has been made so difficult.
nonimmi
09-08 08:34 AM
Ohio Bans Outsourcing - Another blow for Indian Software companies � OnlySoftwareBlog (http://onlysoftwareblog.com/2010/09/ohio-bans-outsourcing-%E2%80%93-another-blow-for-indian-software-companies/)
hiralal
05-13 07:06 AM
I agree with the above ..I guess they come up with visa usage statistics and that will give us an idea ..btw ..unemployment will not come down for years and because of recent swine flu ..CIR will have more opposition .. right wing republicans will call for more deportation rather than more open borders !!!
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario