wandmaker
08-26 08:39 AM
Hi,
I applied for H1B through a company for year 2010. I am currently on H4. As per this company, my application reached USCIS on April 7th. We have not got any receipt for this so far as per what the company says. My question is, is it possible that USCIS will take this long to issue the receipt number ? Is there a way to find out whether USCIS have received my application indeed. When I call the company who applied the H1, they keep saying we haven't heard back anything from USCIS. Can you help in answering my questions ?
Greatly appreciate your reponse.
Rgds,
Vani
Yes, It is possible - In fact, for one of my H1Bs, I never received the H1B receipt notice but received the approval notice on time.
For the best answer, you need to answer the below-
Did you pay the H1B fee?
To whom you have addressed the check to?
I applied for H1B through a company for year 2010. I am currently on H4. As per this company, my application reached USCIS on April 7th. We have not got any receipt for this so far as per what the company says. My question is, is it possible that USCIS will take this long to issue the receipt number ? Is there a way to find out whether USCIS have received my application indeed. When I call the company who applied the H1, they keep saying we haven't heard back anything from USCIS. Can you help in answering my questions ?
Greatly appreciate your reponse.
Rgds,
Vani
Yes, It is possible - In fact, for one of my H1Bs, I never received the H1B receipt notice but received the approval notice on time.
For the best answer, you need to answer the below-
Did you pay the H1B fee?
To whom you have addressed the check to?
wallpaper derrick rose girlfriend pregnant. is derrick rose girlfriend; is derrick rose girlfriend. Kane08. Apr 2, 10:43 PM. Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone;
sapking
12-21 12:09 AM
I think she should be apprised of pains in getting green cards for skilled workers from India, by ImmigrationVoice.
snathan
02-06 06:47 PM
Thanks a lot for heart warming response .
I greatly appreciate your comments .
Ask him to file a law suit and he will pay you whatever you earned from you. He is just threadening. Nothing else.
I greatly appreciate your comments .
Ask him to file a law suit and he will pay you whatever you earned from you. He is just threadening. Nothing else.
2011 Derrick Rose Girlfriend 2010
Ann Ruben
02-23 04:44 PM
Even though you entered under the VWP, and even though you remained here after your I-94 expired, you can file for AOS based on your marriage to a US Citizen.
Your wife is required to provide an affidavit of support. However, if her income and/or resources combined with your income/resources are insufficient, you can rely on a second affidavit from someone willing to be a "co-sponsor". The co-sponsor must be: a US Citizen or Permanent Resident, over 18 years old, and domiciled in the US.
Your wife is required to provide an affidavit of support. However, if her income and/or resources combined with your income/resources are insufficient, you can rely on a second affidavit from someone willing to be a "co-sponsor". The co-sponsor must be: a US Citizen or Permanent Resident, over 18 years old, and domiciled in the US.
more...
Roger Binny
08-11 06:48 AM
Answers in bold...
Gurus,
A very close friend of mine has filed EB3-I 485 with Sep 2003 PD. The job, at present, requires EB2 level qualifications, however, the employer is not too keen on sponsoring a change to EB2.
So, what options do we have ?
a) when is EB3-I Sep 2003 PD likely to be come current? 12m? 18m from now?
- As usual no one knows
b) can AC21 approach be used to port this to a EB2 category ?
- Can you be more elaborate on this
c) can his spouse separately file for EB2-I PERM, I140 and file for 485?
(I am assuming that EB2-I will be current approximately around this time next year).
- If he/she is working and qualifies for EB2-I, certainly one can apply during the I-485 stage i guess one can go for a cross charge-ability (not sure of the word) but yes i have seen posts where one can use the spouse's 485 priority dates.
Thanks.
Gurus,
A very close friend of mine has filed EB3-I 485 with Sep 2003 PD. The job, at present, requires EB2 level qualifications, however, the employer is not too keen on sponsoring a change to EB2.
So, what options do we have ?
a) when is EB3-I Sep 2003 PD likely to be come current? 12m? 18m from now?
- As usual no one knows
b) can AC21 approach be used to port this to a EB2 category ?
- Can you be more elaborate on this
c) can his spouse separately file for EB2-I PERM, I140 and file for 485?
(I am assuming that EB2-I will be current approximately around this time next year).
- If he/she is working and qualifies for EB2-I, certainly one can apply during the I-485 stage i guess one can go for a cross charge-ability (not sure of the word) but yes i have seen posts where one can use the spouse's 485 priority dates.
Thanks.
NWISE
03-31 02:59 PM
If there is a loophole and it is being exploited, plug the loophole, not scrap the program. If my head hurts, I don't cut off my head.
And loopholes will be exploited, if they exist. I would do it (and I'm sure majority of us would) if we could. Nothing illegal in that.
Kind of similar to how large corporates avoid paying taxes using every loophole and trick in the book even when they earn billions, while we end up paying tax on every dollar we earn.
P.S. I'm not saying falsifying documents is acceptable... that's illegal and that's an enforcement issue, not taking an advantage issue.
My 2 cents.
And loopholes will be exploited, if they exist. I would do it (and I'm sure majority of us would) if we could. Nothing illegal in that.
Kind of similar to how large corporates avoid paying taxes using every loophole and trick in the book even when they earn billions, while we end up paying tax on every dollar we earn.
P.S. I'm not saying falsifying documents is acceptable... that's illegal and that's an enforcement issue, not taking an advantage issue.
My 2 cents.
more...
vamsi_poondla
01-18 02:39 PM
All the best....Floridans....hope you will write the letters this weekend without fail..We need to do this simple thing to show our strength.
2010 derrick rose girlfriend
nk2006
07-05 12:58 PM
possible reasons
(i)USCIS dont want to see a large number applications - as Ombudsman report indicated their performance is measured based on how much time it took to process an application. If they accept 485 applications only to keep them longer it will skew their performance benchmarks to their disadvantage. (ii)Also they just dont want to work for the rest of this financial year. By making visas unavailable their work load might have come down dramatically.
(iii)Ego clashes between some higher ups between DOS and USCIS; OR the communication gap between these two orgs is just too much.
(iv) Too may anti-immigrant who wants to screw legal-immigrants at any given opportunity. This is possible too...on numbersusa website there are special instructions/appeals to USCIS staff to do a few things and also to get some info on H1b filings, I140 filings etc. Maybe these activist employees have grown in size with tacit support from higher ups.
Of course all of these are just speculations. BUT I still could not understand why USCIS went out of its way (processing 60k applicaitons in one month; 18k in one day is certainly going way toooooooo much out of their way based on their normal efficiency) to process. I am sure they might have approved many cases which they could not have done normally. Finding out this aspect should might yield a very good story for a journalist - we should highlight this aspect in our letters to media.
(i)USCIS dont want to see a large number applications - as Ombudsman report indicated their performance is measured based on how much time it took to process an application. If they accept 485 applications only to keep them longer it will skew their performance benchmarks to their disadvantage. (ii)Also they just dont want to work for the rest of this financial year. By making visas unavailable their work load might have come down dramatically.
(iii)Ego clashes between some higher ups between DOS and USCIS; OR the communication gap between these two orgs is just too much.
(iv) Too may anti-immigrant who wants to screw legal-immigrants at any given opportunity. This is possible too...on numbersusa website there are special instructions/appeals to USCIS staff to do a few things and also to get some info on H1b filings, I140 filings etc. Maybe these activist employees have grown in size with tacit support from higher ups.
Of course all of these are just speculations. BUT I still could not understand why USCIS went out of its way (processing 60k applicaitons in one month; 18k in one day is certainly going way toooooooo much out of their way based on their normal efficiency) to process. I am sure they might have approved many cases which they could not have done normally. Finding out this aspect should might yield a very good story for a journalist - we should highlight this aspect in our letters to media.
more...
GC4US
03-30 01:07 AM
Thank you guys for helping me.
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
Could you tell me please if it's ok to write where it's written "purpose of trip"........that I want to travel to visit my parents......is it ok with Uscis if I write that? Or what else should I write.
Thanks again!
hair Who is NBA Derrick Rose#39;s
HRPRO
02-24 08:41 AM
I am not sure if BS (3 yrs) + MCA is considered to be equivalent to MS or not. But if it is, then you can definitely file for EB2 (MS +0). However, your company will need to have a job that requires these qualifications.
Also, I am not sure why you couldn't use the experience gained with your employer. If the job description is at least 50% different than your EB3 job, you can certainly use the experience gained at your current employer.
I am also planning to file under EB2 using the experience gained with current employer. However, I have been concerned about possible audit. Nonetheless, when I asked the audit question (in a different thread), couple of folks shared their personal experience who had gotten approval (using experience gained at same employer) without any audit.
Has anyone seen a case where someone got audited for using the experience gained with the same employer? I think this will be a useful information for several others as well...
Sorry Bostongc
I am certain you cannot count expeience gained from your current employer even if you are applying for another position. All attorneys are aware of this and will advice you not to do.
Sorry for not being able to give an answer in the affirmative but that is the fact.
Also, I am not sure why you couldn't use the experience gained with your employer. If the job description is at least 50% different than your EB3 job, you can certainly use the experience gained at your current employer.
I am also planning to file under EB2 using the experience gained with current employer. However, I have been concerned about possible audit. Nonetheless, when I asked the audit question (in a different thread), couple of folks shared their personal experience who had gotten approval (using experience gained at same employer) without any audit.
Has anyone seen a case where someone got audited for using the experience gained with the same employer? I think this will be a useful information for several others as well...
Sorry Bostongc
I am certain you cannot count expeience gained from your current employer even if you are applying for another position. All attorneys are aware of this and will advice you not to do.
Sorry for not being able to give an answer in the affirmative but that is the fact.
more...
ssingh92
01-24 12:53 AM
Although reference in the text above refers to "receipt date shown on your receipt", I doubt if they really mean that. As per latest processing status, all cases with RD = July 2 should have been processed by now. Is that true? I doubt.
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
If I check my case online I see following
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
True Receipt Date (what service centers make reference to) perhaps is the date when they enter data in the system. In normal circumstances it should be same or close to RD printed on receipts. However, in July/Aug '07 filings several cases (including mine) were shuffled around for months, before they were entered in the system. I am a July2 filer, but my online status says "...case was received on Oct 11, 2007...". My ND is a few days later. Most likley, dates you see in your online status is what they refer to as Receive Date when publishing processing dates.
If I check my case online I see following
On July 24, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case. Please follow any instructions on this notice. We will notify you by mail ...
On Receipt Notice I-797C -Notice of Action I see following
Received Date : June 25, 2007
Notice Date : July 25, 2007
I dont know why online case status says that "On July 24, 2007, we received ...."
Do anyone of you see such date mismatch.
Thanks,
hot derrick rose girlfriend
thomachan72
11-08 03:03 PM
regarding carrying older LCAs;
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
more...
house derrick rose girlfriend pregnant. derrick rose girlfriend; derrick rose girlfriend. dba7dba. Apr 26, 03:13 PM. They will activate it for you in store so
Mohit_Malkani
10-08 11:13 AM
Sorry to hear about your situation.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
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 physically 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 ensure. 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.
Take a look at www.immigtation-law.com. Go to the nreaking news swction. They have a great piece on I140/I485 portability.
I have also pasted it here in case you dont get to the website
All the best.
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 physically 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 ensure. 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.
tattoo derrick rose girlfriend. who
martinvisalaw
03-17 11:50 AM
1. If my PD is current, Will I eligible to apply I-485 using Employer A I-140 approved? No, not legally. You cannot base the 485 on a job offer that no longer exists. If there is a chance that Co. A will rehire you in the same position, and they will provide a letter saying that, you could file. However, there really must be an intention to be in that position when the 485 is approved or you are committing fraud.
2. What are the documents needed from employer A, if I want apply I-485?
See previous answer.
3. All my friends telling me, I can apply I-485, Is it true?
See previous answer.
2. What are the documents needed from employer A, if I want apply I-485?
See previous answer.
3. All my friends telling me, I can apply I-485, Is it true?
See previous answer.
more...
pictures derrick rose girlfriend
gc_kaavaali
12-10 11:52 AM
In my view changing employer when you have pending 140 is risky...
any suggestions if 140 is not approved?
Filed in August 2007......doesn't look like there is much movement based on tracker!!!!
EAD in hand
any suggestions if 140 is not approved?
Filed in August 2007......doesn't look like there is much movement based on tracker!!!!
EAD in hand
dresses is derrick rose girlfriend
dilbert_cal
03-14 01:10 AM
I hope someone out there in a similar situation can help me out.
I have given my real estate agent several referrals and for each I receive a cash amount. I'm on an H1B visa, am I able to receive income from someone other than my employer?
I've searched the web and have been able to find out that this should be reported as taxable income, I'm just not sure if I can receive it due to my immigration status.
Any comments or tips are welcome.
You are supposed to report ALL income regardless of its legal validity or not. Having said that, legally you are not allowed to have any other income other than from your H1B sponsoring company. I dont know though how this compares to the other deals wherein you open a Bank A/c and get 200 bucks and others like that.
Another point you may want to find out more is if your real estate agent is showing the amount paid to you as an expense or not.
And finally, I hope whoever you referred did get a full disclosure from you that you might be compensated for the referral :-)
I have given my real estate agent several referrals and for each I receive a cash amount. I'm on an H1B visa, am I able to receive income from someone other than my employer?
I've searched the web and have been able to find out that this should be reported as taxable income, I'm just not sure if I can receive it due to my immigration status.
Any comments or tips are welcome.
You are supposed to report ALL income regardless of its legal validity or not. Having said that, legally you are not allowed to have any other income other than from your H1B sponsoring company. I dont know though how this compares to the other deals wherein you open a Bank A/c and get 200 bucks and others like that.
Another point you may want to find out more is if your real estate agent is showing the amount paid to you as an expense or not.
And finally, I hope whoever you referred did get a full disclosure from you that you might be compensated for the referral :-)
more...
makeup derrick rose girlfriend
english_august
07-06 08:14 AM
If somebody wants to create a seperate message, release it, I can dig it.
There you go:
http://desicritics.org/2007/07/06/004733.php
There you go:
http://desicritics.org/2007/07/06/004733.php
girlfriend derrick rose girlfriend miaka.
chi_shark
02-18 01:58 PM
That is possible. It is like working with any other company. This not exactly self-employment, we (myself +my wife) have created own corporation with my wife has president and me as employee (Both of us have EAD). So then start working for that company. No need to inform USCIS, it is like working with any other company. Again i am still working in same or simlar job description per Labor/I140. It is verymuch legal and we are paying taxes too!!! .
oh yeah! it is legal i know that... however, i consulted lawyers on this and they were of the opinion that it is best to have a straight case where you are working for a large us corp. essentially, uscis can question if the company has enough work to sustain employing a person on a "permanent basis". that "permanent basis" appears to be one of the criteria for approval of labor/perm, I140 etc... thats why my query to you. it seems ability to pay can also be a question, however, that is not supposed to be brought up during adjudication of 485... so you are safe there...
so, this is real cool... thanks for sharing your info...
oh yeah! it is legal i know that... however, i consulted lawyers on this and they were of the opinion that it is best to have a straight case where you are working for a large us corp. essentially, uscis can question if the company has enough work to sustain employing a person on a "permanent basis". that "permanent basis" appears to be one of the criteria for approval of labor/perm, I140 etc... thats why my query to you. it seems ability to pay can also be a question, however, that is not supposed to be brought up during adjudication of 485... so you are safe there...
so, this is real cool... thanks for sharing your info...
hairstyles who is derrick rose girlfriend
Munna Bhai
07-06 05:38 AM
I was in the same boat 2 years before , I opted for Kaiser and it costed about $200 per month.
What is Kaiser and how to get visitor medical insurance?
-M
What is Kaiser and how to get visitor medical insurance?
-M
vandanaverdia
09-11 11:59 AM
Guys, there is a fund drive for 30k in 8 days, please help us to achieve the goal and contribute. 18k more to go.
Help IV help you...
Come to DC....
Help IV help you...
Come to DC....
ImmigrationAnswerMan
06-30 12:09 PM
Apollon:
As you pointed out in your original posting, to qualify as the equivalent of a masters degree, thereby allowing you to apply in the EB2 category, the 5 years experience must be gained after the BA. So your experience gained prior to getting the BA does get credited toward the BA+5.
Experience gained with your current employer can be used if another employer is sponsoring you. You do not have to be working for the new sponsor for them to sponsor you, since the PERM and I-140 are for prospective employment.
You said that this was for an engineering position. Not all engineering positions require a masters degree. In order to qualify under the EB2 category, the employee must have a masters or the equivalent, AND the position must have an actual minimum requirement of a masters or the equivalent. So just because you have a BA+5 does not necessarily qualify you for the EB2 category.
As you pointed out in your original posting, to qualify as the equivalent of a masters degree, thereby allowing you to apply in the EB2 category, the 5 years experience must be gained after the BA. So your experience gained prior to getting the BA does get credited toward the BA+5.
Experience gained with your current employer can be used if another employer is sponsoring you. You do not have to be working for the new sponsor for them to sponsor you, since the PERM and I-140 are for prospective employment.
You said that this was for an engineering position. Not all engineering positions require a masters degree. In order to qualify under the EB2 category, the employee must have a masters or the equivalent, AND the position must have an actual minimum requirement of a masters or the equivalent. So just because you have a BA+5 does not necessarily qualify you for the EB2 category.
No comments:
Post a Comment