krishmunn
08-12 12:15 PM
and expoilted the employees to the maximum extent. In one another post - VLDRao was saying these companies does the tax filing on behalf the emoloyee, get the refund and again claim that tax in india using double taxation aoivdance treaty.
True. But why then does an employee want to join such company ? It is not that you are not aware of all these before you step to this country through Infy or TCS ?
True. But why then does an employee want to join such company ? It is not that you are not aware of all these before you step to this country through Infy or TCS ?
wallpaper and Alexander Ovechkin
kshitijnt
06-26 12:15 AM
.
BTW I’ve got a Home Theater at my apartment and my current status is H1B with pending I-140 + I-485 :)
So did you buy home theatre after filing 485 or before? Btw, I dont believe there is any relationship to income wrt visa status.
BTW I’ve got a Home Theater at my apartment and my current status is H1B with pending I-140 + I-485 :)
So did you buy home theatre after filing 485 or before? Btw, I dont believe there is any relationship to income wrt visa status.
geesee
07-18 04:21 PM
Made my first (small) contribution of $100 today !!
Google order no. - 952531454379821
Many thanks to all of IV members !!!
Google order no. - 952531454379821
Many thanks to all of IV members !!!
2011 Luke Richardson SHOT on Ty
somegchuh
01-03 04:16 PM
It really depends on who you ask. But my point is if you decide to stay in US in the long run, aren't immigrant divided between their kids and their parents?
I dont think one is necessarily doing kids a dis-service by electing to go back. On the contrary, kids experience tremendous personal growth through interaction with extended family which is not possible in a foreign land.
qualified_trash,
In your case I think the decision is very clear cut. Also, it works really well for you, in the sense that you are not "divided". If your parent and siblings have already left the country you have no reason to go back ever.
yes they are indeed. I took care of this as my sisters and parents have immigrated to New Zealand, work and live happily there and will be covered by a great social security system.
also, they do not need a visa to visit me after they get their citizenship (in the next year or so) and I will not need one to visit them after I get mine in the next decade or so.......... :-))
I dont think one is necessarily doing kids a dis-service by electing to go back. On the contrary, kids experience tremendous personal growth through interaction with extended family which is not possible in a foreign land.
qualified_trash,
In your case I think the decision is very clear cut. Also, it works really well for you, in the sense that you are not "divided". If your parent and siblings have already left the country you have no reason to go back ever.
yes they are indeed. I took care of this as my sisters and parents have immigrated to New Zealand, work and live happily there and will be covered by a great social security system.
also, they do not need a visa to visit me after they get their citizenship (in the next year or so) and I will not need one to visit them after I get mine in the next decade or so.......... :-))
more...
addsf345
11-20 03:38 PM
Some benefits can be revoked automatically (I-140, I-485), some can be revoked only after determination is made by USCIS and a beneficiary is notified and has an opportunity to respond. EAD is one of the latter.
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
See e.g., 8 CFR Part 205 titled "Revocation of approval of petitions". It has two sections: 205.1 Automatic revocation and 205.2 Revocation on notice.
http://frwebgate4.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/PDFgate.cgi?WAISdocID=203798478322+8+2+0&WAISaction=retrieve
EAD is not listed in Sec. 205.1. Moreover, 8 CFR �274a.12(c) specifically lists reasons for automatic revocation. I-485 denial is not listed as such a reason. Therefore, EAD remains valid even after I-485 denial untill it expires or until USCIS director revokes it. I do not see any basis for a different legal interpretation.
See also this court of appeals (8th Cir.) decision where the court says that automatic revocation occurs only if a specific condition specified in the laws and regs is met:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3/399/399.F3d.891.04-1132.html
"The district court thought that her adoptive father's petition for immediate relative status was automatically revoked when Taylor reached age 21, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3)(i)(F), but the record does not appear to support that conclusion. The automatic revocation occurs only if the alien reaches age 21 before commencing her journey to the United States (which Taylor did not) or if the alien reaches age 21 before a decision on a pending application for adjustment of status becomes final (and there is no evidence in the record that Taylor ever applied for adjustment of status). See 8 C.F.R. � 205.1(a)(3). Thus, it is possible that the petition for immediate relative status was not revoked when Taylor reached age 21, but rather � if the 1984 visa petition was "currently valid" as of her 21st birthday � automatically converted to an approved petition for classification as an unmarried daughter of a citizen of the United States, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. � 204.2(i)(2). See 8 U.S.C. � 1153(a)(1). In that case, Taylor may have been legally present throughout her time in the United States."
Thank you 'lazycis' for reconfirming this. Just 2 weeks back I used to think that keep working on H1B is lot safer than using EAD :o
GCapplicant
08-04 12:19 PM
I'm telling them my condition, and I know there are lot of people in the same boat. Again you need to talk to the lawyer about GC cost. Emplyee can bear all the GC related cost.
EAD/AP 360*2 + 305*3(Spouse + son) is almost 2K.
If your facts are different put that in writing and send it to them. Please stop telling me my facts. Also I have no idea why you are on this thread, please ignore this thread if it doesn't apply to you...
Desi3933
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substiution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
EAD/AP 360*2 + 305*3(Spouse + son) is almost 2K.
If your facts are different put that in writing and send it to them. Please stop telling me my facts. Also I have no idea why you are on this thread, please ignore this thread if it doesn't apply to you...
Desi3933
I don't understand why you are picking up on facts and faults on other post.What mirage is saying is true.I know 3 families stuck up in this GC process...all true cases.
There are some lucky people who have bought old labor substiution ;)who came to US in 2004 and got their GC's cleared and are very :D.
Some really who have come here to study...living in US for past 10 years genuine appliers are really stuck in this.They have all applied their labor and got them cleared only dec 2006.
people who are interested can send those letters if not ignore the thread.
If you are EB2 good for you...Its not that easy to change jobs having families..and when you are satisfied with the employer ,why would they change.
Everyone here want GC to stay in this country.And we all are here to find solutions thru IV - active participation is better.
Pani's letter is not that bad...if you dont like alter what you want to express and send it.People can write what they are facing only.
this is not an argument...just felt bad when you were point blankly picking on them.
I dont undestand :confused:
But one thing I understand there are many , in general like to irritate and hurt other's sentiments and thoughts and pinpoint only faults.
Becoz of this lack of unity only ,most of us face problems.
more...
Jaime
07-20 11:41 AM
Guys, don't be disappointed about the Cornyn amendment failing! Here's why:
There is a lot of noise already (thanks to IV generating it) about the injustices that we legals face, and the urgent need to reform the legal GC path. I am thinking that senators have heard our friend Zoe and are now realizing that such reform is needed and are now trying to determine how to best use or spin such a potential reform in their party's favor. Therefore, even people like Clinton voted no, because if the Cornyn amendment had passed it would have denied them the visibility and publicity that a well-organized and publicized bill would generate. Clinton has spoken in our favor before, and I think that she voted nay now in order to later be part of a more visible (and politically-rewarding) solution for us.
What we REALLY NEED TO DO right now is support IV as much as we can, and continue to create noise and get our VOICE be heard, but we need to act as a group, as a team. Work together, be heard everywhere. Enough already with us being quiet, keeping our heads down while paying taxes and taking all the abuse! We will continue to be great citizens, meet all our duties and obligations, but this time we will ALSO BE HEARD! Let's go! We're strong! We can do this!!!!!
There is a lot of noise already (thanks to IV generating it) about the injustices that we legals face, and the urgent need to reform the legal GC path. I am thinking that senators have heard our friend Zoe and are now realizing that such reform is needed and are now trying to determine how to best use or spin such a potential reform in their party's favor. Therefore, even people like Clinton voted no, because if the Cornyn amendment had passed it would have denied them the visibility and publicity that a well-organized and publicized bill would generate. Clinton has spoken in our favor before, and I think that she voted nay now in order to later be part of a more visible (and politically-rewarding) solution for us.
What we REALLY NEED TO DO right now is support IV as much as we can, and continue to create noise and get our VOICE be heard, but we need to act as a group, as a team. Work together, be heard everywhere. Enough already with us being quiet, keeping our heads down while paying taxes and taking all the abuse! We will continue to be great citizens, meet all our duties and obligations, but this time we will ALSO BE HEARD! Let's go! We're strong! We can do this!!!!!
2010 Alex Ovechkin fires slap sh
Humhongekamyab
02-18 03:49 PM
pardon my ignorance. But since you already applied for 485, it means you will get GC in april 2009(if pd becomes dec 2005) ?
Yes and No. If the PD stays at (let's say) December 15, 2005 and during that time the officer is able to review my file and request a visa number from the DOS then I will get the green card BUT if during this process the PD moves back (let's say December 14, 2005) then I will have to wait for it to be current again for me (i.e. December 15, 2005).
Yes and No. If the PD stays at (let's say) December 15, 2005 and during that time the officer is able to review my file and request a visa number from the DOS then I will get the green card BUT if during this process the PD moves back (let's say December 14, 2005) then I will have to wait for it to be current again for me (i.e. December 15, 2005).
more...
hazishak
07-18 07:22 PM
what happens when dates retrogress? If my PD is 2000 Jan (assume) and some one else has 2001 Jan (assume) with RDs July/2007 and Mar/2007 respectively and in August 2007 PD cut off date went back to 2000 Feb (assume) then does it mean that 2000 Jan PD is ineligible to get the adjudication before the guy with PD 2001 Jan because the RD is later for this case? Again if the answer to this question is yes then ,when the PD is set at 2000 Feb why are they accepting new AOS apps which satisfy this PD cutoff date because if they process by RD(at all times) they are not likely to consider these for adjudication anyway? Is it just for our benifit that we can get an EAD? If I go down this path I donot understand the purpose of the whole PD in this process.
The thing I am trying to understand is 'if PD is not significant in AOS why is it there at all in the visa bulletin'. If RD overrides the PD at the AOS stage then instead of specifying a PD in the Visa bulletin they can just say that
"We are accepting new AOS applications" and then adjudicate them in the order of the RD.
These are all just my thoughts and am trying to put them together. I may very well be wrong in my basic understanding of this process. Thank you for your previous reply. That was helpful.
In your case you will get the percedence over the 2000 PD. His is PD is not curent at time of processing. If the cut off date is after 2001 which means both are cuurent then the later guy will take precedence since his RD is earlier than your's.
The thing I am trying to understand is 'if PD is not significant in AOS why is it there at all in the visa bulletin'. If RD overrides the PD at the AOS stage then instead of specifying a PD in the Visa bulletin they can just say that
"We are accepting new AOS applications" and then adjudicate them in the order of the RD.
These are all just my thoughts and am trying to put them together. I may very well be wrong in my basic understanding of this process. Thank you for your previous reply. That was helpful.
In your case you will get the percedence over the 2000 PD. His is PD is not curent at time of processing. If the cut off date is after 2001 which means both are cuurent then the later guy will take precedence since his RD is earlier than your's.
hair Alex Ovechkin vs Pittsburgh
BharatPremi
07-05 05:22 PM
I called my congressmans office and made them aware of the issue. He is Gary Miller 42nd district of CA.
O.K. I got your senator and your state. That is good. I have also played my part and have done that infact yesterday. Thanks. In the process I also learned that , Calling to out of state senators would not be entertained..
As lon as we are playing parts at our state level... that's good enough
O.K. I got your senator and your state. That is good. I have also played my part and have done that infact yesterday. Thanks. In the process I also learned that , Calling to out of state senators would not be entertained..
As lon as we are playing parts at our state level... that's good enough
more...
Keeme
03-04 12:46 PM
Forgot to mention, my attorney did state that their office received an approval 2 weeks back whose priority date was not even close to current. She did not share the specifics.
I just checked my online status and it doesnt have any updates since 2007, states its received and pending... Not sure how current is the online info.
I also learned from my attorny office that a case with out having PD current was approved. Will get specifics today on that case.
I just checked my online status and it doesnt have any updates since 2007, states its received and pending... Not sure how current is the online info.
I also learned from my attorny office that a case with out having PD current was approved. Will get specifics today on that case.
hot slapshot-myers
plreddy
07-14 02:43 PM
Bank Of America Bill Pay Confirmation Number: 7YB5R-TV1TL for $ 5.00.
more...
house Alex Ovechkin#39;s shadow looms
Robert Kumar
03-14 05:51 PM
In the last 1 months, how mcuh time is it taking for just the labor to be cleared. Not the pre-labor work. Just labor.
Thank you,.
Thank you,.
tattoo Alex Ovechkin and Jana
Munna Bhai
02-08 04:00 PM
Online status certified...filed in Nov 2004...but no hard-copy yet..so that to do next??
more...
pictures Alexander Ovechkin#39;s latest
Milind123
09-13 12:17 PM
mohitb272, wolfsappi, kanaihya and of course sam
Thank you for your contribution. kanaihya no contribution is small. I consider it a very big contribution because you made it in spite of having a big debt.
We need one more newbee to squeeze the trigger so I can have the pleasure of taking the last shot in this round. :cool:
Thank you for your contribution. kanaihya no contribution is small. I consider it a very big contribution because you made it in spite of having a big debt.
We need one more newbee to squeeze the trigger so I can have the pleasure of taking the last shot in this round. :cool:
dresses Unleash a shot so deadly
User00
01-10 10:11 AM
Some good ideas and thoughts here. Here's my 2c :)
One thing that no one has pointed out and I wonder if people even care about it, but to me its a BIG issue.
All our hard earned $$$$ going into the Social Security and Medicare pool. Has anyone even thought about this ? If you look at your figure closely, it is the amount of money that an average american family saves over 1 year.
I personally feel that it is too big a contribution to let it to waste and for me getting a green card would make me eligible to get all the benefits that I deserve and have rightly earned.
Peace
One thing that no one has pointed out and I wonder if people even care about it, but to me its a BIG issue.
All our hard earned $$$$ going into the Social Security and Medicare pool. Has anyone even thought about this ? If you look at your figure closely, it is the amount of money that an average american family saves over 1 year.
I personally feel that it is too big a contribution to let it to waste and for me getting a green card would make me eligible to get all the benefits that I deserve and have rightly earned.
Peace
more...
makeup Nicklas Backstrom SHOT on
gimmeliberty
07-24 11:39 AM
From what I understand many 485 applications(not all)received in accordance to the June bulletin MAY have been preassigned a visa number(from the leftover 60,000 visas) NOT an approval.Although they are not supposed to pre assign numbers without name checks etc, is'nt it obvious that they might have done that??. They have a lot of cases to approve until Sept 30(from that 60,000 number)
But how cud they accept and process the application if his date was not current in june ??
But how cud they accept and process the application if his date was not current in june ??
girlfriend Alex Ovechkin (Red or White)
GCBy3000
07-06 05:23 PM
I am not seeing this in mathew Oh site. Where did you get this from?
From OH mathew
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/06/2007: Revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin
The State Department has just released new July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than "Update." It appears that this is intended to make it official July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than previous release which was "update" in anticipation of the ALF class action lawsuit. One of the claims which have been addressed by various sources, INCLUDING THIS WEBSITE, was whether "update" can be considered a revised Visa Bulletin for the purpose of the regulations of DOS and USCIS. If it is not, the USCIS would have no authority to reject the I-485 applications in July.
There is still confusion as to which one is considered July Visa Bulletin which is provided in the DOS and USCIS regulations as they have released three versions: (1) Visa Bulletin released in June; (2) Update of July Visa Bulletin; and (3) July Visa Bulletin which has just been released today. This can affect the definition of "class" of the class action and latter two releases can fall under the two different classes. I wonder why the DOS is adding further confusion to the nation which is already in a state of extreme confusion and in despair because of their previous action.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
From OH mathew
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
07/06/2007: Revised July 2007 Visa Bulletin
The State Department has just released new July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than "Update." It appears that this is intended to make it official July 2007 Visa Bulletin rather than previous release which was "update" in anticipation of the ALF class action lawsuit. One of the claims which have been addressed by various sources, INCLUDING THIS WEBSITE, was whether "update" can be considered a revised Visa Bulletin for the purpose of the regulations of DOS and USCIS. If it is not, the USCIS would have no authority to reject the I-485 applications in July.
There is still confusion as to which one is considered July Visa Bulletin which is provided in the DOS and USCIS regulations as they have released three versions: (1) Visa Bulletin released in June; (2) Update of July Visa Bulletin; and (3) July Visa Bulletin which has just been released today. This can affect the definition of "class" of the class action and latter two releases can fall under the two different classes. I wonder why the DOS is adding further confusion to the nation which is already in a state of extreme confusion and in despair because of their previous action.
http://www.immigration-law.com/
hairstyles Ovechkin gets emotional after
sanju_dba
08-12 02:40 PM
if the 2k fee is passed over to H1 employee, then , her/his quality of life is further compromised to degrad ( in this economy as pay hike is tough ). That means more cheap labor and more competition to locals ( if thats how senator see h1 are low paid than locals )
kevinkris
09-11 08:09 PM
I am IN.
Flowers are fine.
But may be we should send only few calculators and backward running clocks.
Say, for example 1000 flowers and only 100 calculators and clocks.
What you say?
Flowers are fine.
But may be we should send only few calculators and backward running clocks.
Say, for example 1000 flowers and only 100 calculators and clocks.
What you say?
kinvin
02-12 02:46 PM
Hi GCWaitforever,
I am wondering that did they have to do the advertisements for the Non-RIR case of yours.
In TR cases the advts were done later, but now after a "half-a-decade" wait does the Dept of Labor still want the advts for Backlogged cases.
Thanks,
I am wondering that did they have to do the advertisements for the Non-RIR case of yours.
In TR cases the advts were done later, but now after a "half-a-decade" wait does the Dept of Labor still want the advts for Backlogged cases.
Thanks,
No comments:
Post a Comment