Guest007
06-29 02:43 PM
I'm really hoping they'll catch up and we won't have to wait 4 months. My 6th year H1 is expiring this December and I need to get the I-140 approved so I can get H1 extension.
You dont need a approved 140 for filing H1 extension for 7th year.. Only advantage with approved 140 is you will get 3 yr extension instead of 1.
All you need for H1 extension for 7th year is that a labor cert be filed at starting of 6th year.
You dont need a approved 140 for filing H1 extension for 7th year.. Only advantage with approved 140 is you will get 3 yr extension instead of 1.
All you need for H1 extension for 7th year is that a labor cert be filed at starting of 6th year.
wallpaper Tattoo Designs Quotes
a_yaja
07-21 09:06 AM
SPONSOR: Senate Amendment 2339 Sen Cornyn, John [TX],
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
Enzi - Yea
Gregg - Yea
Smith - Yea
Sununu - Yea
Coleman - Yea
Voinovich - Nay
Everyone who cosponsored the amendment voted for the amendment except for Voinovich. Wonder why he cosponsored the amendment if he did not vote for it.
COSPONSORS(6):
Sen Enzi, Michael B. [WY]
Sen Gregg, Judd [NH]
Sen Smith, Gordon H. [OR]
Sen Sununu, John E. [NH]
Sen Coleman, Norm [MN]
Sen Voinovich, George V. [OH]
Enzi - Yea
Gregg - Yea
Smith - Yea
Sununu - Yea
Coleman - Yea
Voinovich - Nay
Everyone who cosponsored the amendment voted for the amendment except for Voinovich. Wonder why he cosponsored the amendment if he did not vote for it.
Junky
09-10 08:07 AM
Damn :mad:, I can't believe that USCIS will going to waste visa numbers again. Therefore friends please call congressmen to support HR5882.
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Data available in Mumbai consulate website
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 15 April 2002 15 April 2002
FX 1 May 2001 1 May 2001
F2A 1 January 2004 1 January 2004
F2B 15 December 1999 15 December 1999
F3 22 June 2000 22 June 2000
F4 22 May 1997 22 October 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 April 2003 Current
E3 1 July 2001 1 January 2005
EW 1 Janurary 2003 1 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-6906/ 202- 225-4236
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 (NOT IN FAVOR)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member new_horizon)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV members cnag & Prashant)
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member little_willy)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 (IN FAVOR - Reported by IV member punjabi77)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY SPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Data available in Mumbai consulate website
http://mumbai.usconsulate.gov/cut_off_dates.html
Category India Most Other Countries
F1 15 April 2002 15 April 2002
FX 1 May 2001 1 May 2001
F2A 1 January 2004 1 January 2004
F2B 15 December 1999 15 December 1999
F3 22 June 2000 22 June 2000
F4 22 May 1997 22 October 1997
E1 Current Current
E2 1 April 2003 Current
E3 1 July 2001 1 January 2005
EW 1 Janurary 2003 1 Janurary 2003
E4 Current Current
E4-Religious Current Current
2011 ack tattoo quotes.
santb1975
05-23 01:06 AM
Thankyou for your contribution
Receipt ID: 1X745313KW043800M
Receipt ID: 1X745313KW043800M
more...
scorion
01-06 12:07 PM
I don't think that was an issue ever. Also keep in mind the new PIM process which is now part of visa stamping might delay things if you go to get a visa stamped
Hi,
I talked to my lawyer and she didn't mention about any kind of delay so can you please give me some more details about this PIM and how does it affect the whole process and slow things down.
Thanks a lot in advanced
Hi,
I talked to my lawyer and she didn't mention about any kind of delay so can you please give me some more details about this PIM and how does it affect the whole process and slow things down.
Thanks a lot in advanced
diptam
09-01 06:46 PM
Unless economy is good those creations wont fly through. GC is a bif illusion :)
----
----
more...
gk_2000
08-24 01:35 AM
GK, All I can say about your disconnected arguments are one thing. Myself and Nathan are talking about fairness about the system and on how corporates exploit the loophole thereby exploiting the hardworking individuals like you and me. We never here scolded and ranted about the program and as a matter of fact we are having issues with the so called "LoopHole" But your arguments are going in a completely different direction. You can re-read all of our posts again and see where we mentioned anything about ranting against the program.
If you really want, you can make sense of the "disconnected" arguments, as they all address various points of your counter-arguments.
And again, we are unable to get enough members to fight for visa recapture or i-485 filing and you want to go about closing loopholes?
And BTW FYI, I never worked for TCS.
There was no way for me to know, but my "guess" is close enough, dont you think?
And to let you know, I did my Masters in Soft Engg from BITS and Bachelors in Technology. When I say I got paid 65k for the kind of service I did to the company(5 yrs ago) , itself says a lot of things on how companies exploit which has no relation to the number of yrs of experience and qualifications.
To remind you, this platform is for what purpose? This argument is tangential, as is the loophole one. We want to focus on what? I will let the below argument pass, after saying this much. But yes, I do emphasize with you on what happened. But I also have my share of tragedies
All that matters for those companies is whether client is made happy or not, irrespective of what you undergo. FYI I worked company starting with W (top 3 IT companies in India at that time) .
Let me explain you how this works.....Exactly as to how it happened in my case.
First you are given ransom salary offer say 30-40% more that what you might be earning and an immediate on-site offer within 12 months of joining the company. You feel pretty happy with all of those initially.
Later they send you onsite as promised on L1 by making you wait for 1 yr, (even when they can sponsor you H1) so person would be eligible on L1. Things will look good until now.
While sending you to onsite, no one will let you know what kind of salary you would be paid. Things will start to get interesting from the moment you land in US.
You are paid just a week of hotel stay(extended stay) and 1 week car rental(only if you have valid DL). You have to beg / borrow for a ride or take public commute if available.
After 2 days of settling you will be given a salary letter stating that your salary is 50k with a bonus of 5k.
This is the catch. The companies feel that sending a guy on site itself is a big deal. Logically you think that person earning more at offshore than the other person will also get paid more. Its not the case, everyone at onsite are paid the same, irrespective of what their salary is are offshore(only 2 salary ranges exist).And there is no offshore component, and the pathetic thing about it is, you are paid basic salary at offshore deducting from your onsite salary.
Also, just so you know, and onsite person playing a manager role is just an additional responsibility and not a dedicated role. So this is on top of your regular technical role.
And now comes your GC step. After you spend 5 yrs onsite, since you have to leave back after 6 yrs, the company will file in EB1-A and thereby getting your GC. After you get your GC, you are already out of touch from the rest of the world except from your daily offshore/onsite issues and so on and you would not be able to know as to what exactly you can do with your GC. All that happens is you will not be fit to work anywhere except the place you were working at. This has happened to many of my colleagues. I was lucky enough to get out of that chaos after my 1 yr at onsite. All I can say is I'm very much happy now with GC filed in EB2 and making much more that what I used to ...
BTW your comment on someone working for $1 or 30k is for their own noble cause and you cannot expect everyone to have that.
So can you force everyone to take higher pay? It's a matter between private persons, isn't it? I guess it is a bigger deal for small guys, as the labor market comes into play. No sense applying it to executives
And coming to a conclusion about someone who you do not know about is uncalled for...
If you really want, you can make sense of the "disconnected" arguments, as they all address various points of your counter-arguments.
And again, we are unable to get enough members to fight for visa recapture or i-485 filing and you want to go about closing loopholes?
And BTW FYI, I never worked for TCS.
There was no way for me to know, but my "guess" is close enough, dont you think?
And to let you know, I did my Masters in Soft Engg from BITS and Bachelors in Technology. When I say I got paid 65k for the kind of service I did to the company(5 yrs ago) , itself says a lot of things on how companies exploit which has no relation to the number of yrs of experience and qualifications.
To remind you, this platform is for what purpose? This argument is tangential, as is the loophole one. We want to focus on what? I will let the below argument pass, after saying this much. But yes, I do emphasize with you on what happened. But I also have my share of tragedies
All that matters for those companies is whether client is made happy or not, irrespective of what you undergo. FYI I worked company starting with W (top 3 IT companies in India at that time) .
Let me explain you how this works.....Exactly as to how it happened in my case.
First you are given ransom salary offer say 30-40% more that what you might be earning and an immediate on-site offer within 12 months of joining the company. You feel pretty happy with all of those initially.
Later they send you onsite as promised on L1 by making you wait for 1 yr, (even when they can sponsor you H1) so person would be eligible on L1. Things will look good until now.
While sending you to onsite, no one will let you know what kind of salary you would be paid. Things will start to get interesting from the moment you land in US.
You are paid just a week of hotel stay(extended stay) and 1 week car rental(only if you have valid DL). You have to beg / borrow for a ride or take public commute if available.
After 2 days of settling you will be given a salary letter stating that your salary is 50k with a bonus of 5k.
This is the catch. The companies feel that sending a guy on site itself is a big deal. Logically you think that person earning more at offshore than the other person will also get paid more. Its not the case, everyone at onsite are paid the same, irrespective of what their salary is are offshore(only 2 salary ranges exist).And there is no offshore component, and the pathetic thing about it is, you are paid basic salary at offshore deducting from your onsite salary.
Also, just so you know, and onsite person playing a manager role is just an additional responsibility and not a dedicated role. So this is on top of your regular technical role.
And now comes your GC step. After you spend 5 yrs onsite, since you have to leave back after 6 yrs, the company will file in EB1-A and thereby getting your GC. After you get your GC, you are already out of touch from the rest of the world except from your daily offshore/onsite issues and so on and you would not be able to know as to what exactly you can do with your GC. All that happens is you will not be fit to work anywhere except the place you were working at. This has happened to many of my colleagues. I was lucky enough to get out of that chaos after my 1 yr at onsite. All I can say is I'm very much happy now with GC filed in EB2 and making much more that what I used to ...
BTW your comment on someone working for $1 or 30k is for their own noble cause and you cannot expect everyone to have that.
So can you force everyone to take higher pay? It's a matter between private persons, isn't it? I guess it is a bigger deal for small guys, as the labor market comes into play. No sense applying it to executives
And coming to a conclusion about someone who you do not know about is uncalled for...
2010 tattoo tattoo quotes on
jung.lee
03-04 12:28 PM
Just FYI, on Form 1003 - Uniform Residential Loan Application:
https://www.efanniemae.com/sf/formsdocs/forms/pdf/sellingtrans/1003.pdf
It asks on page 4 of Section VIII. Declarations, questions (j) and (k) - are you a citizen or permanent resident?
https://www.efanniemae.com/sf/formsdocs/forms/pdf/sellingtrans/1003.pdf
It asks on page 4 of Section VIII. Declarations, questions (j) and (k) - are you a citizen or permanent resident?
more...
vikki76
07-18 12:06 PM
Hmm..didn't see any email for this action alert/Funding drive. I thought all IV action alerts were sent out as e-mails.
Franklin,can you please forward this to our Northern Calif chapter?
Franklin,can you please forward this to our Northern Calif chapter?
hair tattoo tattoo quotes on ribs
rkm
07-11 08:01 AM
Very Good News for EB2-I.
more...
tomatocup
07-20 12:47 PM
Core members may give us instructions on how to work out this important matter. Count me in if local assistance needed. Anybody else in DC area and willing to do something to help?
hot Lower Back Tattoo Quotes.
pappu
08-09 10:30 AM
I am a legal immigrant to United States and my permanent residency application is pending because of the backlogs in the current immigration system. T
JH
Thanks. I sent you a PM regarding this.
JH
Thanks. I sent you a PM regarding this.
more...
house ack tattoos quotes. ack
vin13
03-12 03:20 PM
With all due respect to the selfless hard work of IV core, I concur with ItIsNotFunny. There are many members who feel this way. IV core should be more open to members. I feel a cloud of secrecy always surrounding IV. Of course they cannot be public about all their activities, but more needs to be done on this front. You will see more members actively participating if core is more open.
I totally agree to this. Everytime i try to bring this point across all that is being asked is go contribue some money. I have contributed money before and i will contribute lot more if i know what it is getting used for.
There are several of my friends who are not actively looking at IV site. I am sure they will contribute money if they know the initiative IV is currently working on.
I totally agree to this. Everytime i try to bring this point across all that is being asked is go contribue some money. I have contributed money before and i will contribute lot more if i know what it is getting used for.
There are several of my friends who are not actively looking at IV site. I am sure they will contribute money if they know the initiative IV is currently working on.
tattoo Tattoo Quotes On Strength
JunRN
08-12 02:26 AM
With the current situation, I think it may take 2 to 3 months...
more...
pictures Hottest Tattoo Quotes
java_jaggu
06-02 08:33 PM
Canadian_Dream, I think your interpretation is wrong..
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
40 (2) PENDING AND APPROVED PETITIONS AND APPLICATIONS.�Petitions
41 for an employment-based visa filed for classification under
42 section 203(b)(1), (2), or (3) of the Immigration and Nationality
43 Act (as such provisions existed prior to the enactment of this
44 section) that were filed prior to the date of the introduction of
265
1 the [Insert title of Act] and were pending or approved at the
2 time of the effective date of this section, shall be treated as if
3 such provision remained effective and an approved petition may
4 serve as the basis for issuance of an immigrant visa. Aliens with
5 applications for a labor certification pursuant to section
6 212(a)(5)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act shall
7 preserve the immigrant visa priority date accorded by the date
8 of filing of such labor certification application.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think what AILA, our core group and other attorneys are trying to say is that as long as you filed before May 15, 2007 you will be fine regardless of whether your petition is pending or approved. There is no dispute about this point. Any applications that were filed after May 15, 2007 will become null and void the day this bill is signed by the president to make it a law. The 'effective date' ( Oct 1, 2008 ) does not apply for applications filed after May 15, 2007. I will be glad if you can prove me wrong :)
dresses ack tattoos quotes. girl
ags123
02-09 07:29 PM
The first bulletin with Eb1 and Eb2 spill over.
Last year:
Mar 2008- India Eb2 U
Apr 2008- India-Eb2 01 Dec 03
This year may be:
Mar 2009- India Eb2 15 Feb 04
Apr 2009- India Eb2 28 Feb 05 (My PD :))
Last year:
Mar 2008- India Eb2 U
Apr 2008- India-Eb2 01 Dec 03
This year may be:
Mar 2009- India Eb2 15 Feb 04
Apr 2009- India Eb2 28 Feb 05 (My PD :))
more...
makeup images ack tattoo quotes. ack
adhantari
07-06 03:52 PM
You morons, You have spent so much time in useless discussions and anti-immigrants are laughing at your foolishness. Its high time your greencards applications get a denial or RFE. You will come crying to IV to save your status. Or else you will be deported. That is all you can do. You guys have got sub labor or faked your resumes and now you want someone to be accountable to you. First learn to be accountable to yourself and your values.
Here is what antis are telling you aholes:
STFU you freeloaders
just frustered bcoz you are still stuck in Labor while mostly everybody filed their GC right...... I can understand...... but you should channel your frustration in good way.... may be try seeing a shrink...... I will pitch in $1 if you get shrink help......
Here is what antis are telling you aholes:
STFU you freeloaders
just frustered bcoz you are still stuck in Labor while mostly everybody filed their GC right...... I can understand...... but you should channel your frustration in good way.... may be try seeing a shrink...... I will pitch in $1 if you get shrink help......
girlfriend pictures lower ack tattoo
Jeniya2006feb27INDIA
11-07 01:33 AM
This is what i had read one of the blog sites i visit
The Bridge Amendment that we all had such high hopes for last week has failed to survive conference. This is an enormous setback to our effort.
All is not lost however, there is still a chance for the amendment to be offered in one of the forthcoming budget bills, including a likely omnibus at years end.
You Can check out the Site
http://hammondlawgroup.blogspot.com/
SA 3404 to HR 3043 is the one which is failed to survive the Senet
SA 3404 to HR 3043, seeks to amend the forthcoming Labor Health and Human Services appropriations bill, by recapturing 61,000 unused visas for Schedule A workers and their derivative family members.
And the Second one is
SA 3442, is also offered as an amendment to HR 3403. SA 3442 is a much more comprehensive amendment that seeks to recapture visas for not just Schedule A workers and their derivative family members, but also for conventional EB workers.
Hope i had answered your query
The Bridge Amendment that we all had such high hopes for last week has failed to survive conference. This is an enormous setback to our effort.
All is not lost however, there is still a chance for the amendment to be offered in one of the forthcoming budget bills, including a likely omnibus at years end.
You Can check out the Site
http://hammondlawgroup.blogspot.com/
SA 3404 to HR 3043 is the one which is failed to survive the Senet
SA 3404 to HR 3043, seeks to amend the forthcoming Labor Health and Human Services appropriations bill, by recapturing 61,000 unused visas for Schedule A workers and their derivative family members.
And the Second one is
SA 3442, is also offered as an amendment to HR 3403. SA 3442 is a much more comprehensive amendment that seeks to recapture visas for not just Schedule A workers and their derivative family members, but also for conventional EB workers.
Hope i had answered your query
hairstyles ack tattoo quotes.
JazzByTheBay
12-15 06:32 PM
Wishful thinking aside - realistically speaking, it's zilch. As USCIS seems to have predicted, even with spillover implemented the PD isn't moving to 2006 any time soon.
jazz
What are the chances for the PD moving to Mid 2007 by end of 2010 ? :(
jazz
What are the chances for the PD moving to Mid 2007 by end of 2010 ? :(
GC_for_andy
06-29 03:47 PM
I was kind of oblivious and busy in my work since I applied labor �and was thinking everything will fall in place gradually..
I registered to this site today and just read this forum.. ..and �..simply freaking out �
My attorney applied my Labor in Nov 2006 (according to him) in Atlanta and I still don�t have any response �no audit �.nothing �.it is just in process�can u believe it?
� can I do something from my end �
I hope 140 and 485 is still not in retrogression state �. Do u guys know how long it will continue to be in this state�
I registered to this site today and just read this forum.. ..and �..simply freaking out �
My attorney applied my Labor in Nov 2006 (according to him) in Atlanta and I still don�t have any response �no audit �.nothing �.it is just in process�can u believe it?
� can I do something from my end �
I hope 140 and 485 is still not in retrogression state �. Do u guys know how long it will continue to be in this state�
diptam
08-06 08:59 AM
I'm finding it hard in getting the 7001 from employer - they are saying that its not our pplicy to nag USCIS on matters like I-140 stuck for 16 months. Basically they are very happy that i'm stuck and they can continue siphoning fat chunk of my billing ..... but they never say it that way, always say nice and good things on my face.
what to do ? Shall i send only the letter to Ombudsman ? While working with Local congressman's office i sent a letter and they allowed me to sign consent form on behalf of my employer. I mean my employer was supposed to sign the consent form but CM's office knows employers will never sign so they got around it just to help me.
Can we do something like that here - sign on the 7001 and write "on behalf of the employer " ???
Raydon, thanks for expressing your situation. But I still feel we are not requesting TSC to expedite our cases. All we are asking his, please do justice to us and follow the FIFO for the I-140 petitions. TSC has been consistently approving cases filed in recently and just continuing to ignore our cases. If you can explain your attorney, I am sure he will understand. Or atleast have him, fill out form 7001 on your behalf and send his own letter explaining the situation to Ombudsman's office.
I understand that I-140 is employer petition, but it ulitmately belongs to you. So you need to do whatever you can do some how convince your employer or attorney to assist you one time. I-485 is your petition, and you do not need any consent, if you need to send a letter to Ombudsman's office. So please try your best and see if you can mail the form & letter to Ombudsman's office.
what to do ? Shall i send only the letter to Ombudsman ? While working with Local congressman's office i sent a letter and they allowed me to sign consent form on behalf of my employer. I mean my employer was supposed to sign the consent form but CM's office knows employers will never sign so they got around it just to help me.
Can we do something like that here - sign on the 7001 and write "on behalf of the employer " ???
Raydon, thanks for expressing your situation. But I still feel we are not requesting TSC to expedite our cases. All we are asking his, please do justice to us and follow the FIFO for the I-140 petitions. TSC has been consistently approving cases filed in recently and just continuing to ignore our cases. If you can explain your attorney, I am sure he will understand. Or atleast have him, fill out form 7001 on your behalf and send his own letter explaining the situation to Ombudsman's office.
I understand that I-140 is employer petition, but it ulitmately belongs to you. So you need to do whatever you can do some how convince your employer or attorney to assist you one time. I-485 is your petition, and you do not need any consent, if you need to send a letter to Ombudsman's office. So please try your best and see if you can mail the form & letter to Ombudsman's office.
No comments:
Post a Comment