coopheal
12-04 08:58 AM
Bump
ultimo
10-02 12:06 PM
PD is important . inorder to use the visa numbers the applicant whose FP & name check is cleared but Pd is not current but other applicant whose Pd is current but name check is not cleared The person who cleared will get the priority instead of PD . one of my friend got like this . so its cat & mouse game anyone can get it
ns33
03-18 04:22 PM
Answers below:
1. Technically there is no Salary restriction. As stated above it is a grey area. But, if the job duties are the same and the salary difference is too big (no one knows how much is acceptable without raising questions), then it brings into question if you are still performing the same duties. But basically, you have to make equal to or more than the LC.
2. I have used AC21 before. Have not done EAD renewal yet.
Have a question about point1. Most of larger corp employees who have been in the wait cycle 6-8 years, entered in this coprs at rather lower salaries compared to current day standards. Once inside, pending GC process, you do not get too much of raise or adjustments (2-5% - more of inflation adjustments every 1.5-2 years or so).
Going out of these positions, within similar technical positions, even at lower - rather conservative end of the current pay scale (on AC21-EAD) it is very easy to reach bracket closer to 40-50% higher. Converting to full time consultants, even in tighter market due to current economy; would actually mean closer to 60-70% difference. How do we handle this? Staying within large corp on FT basis does not make sense financially after all these years. Espcially when EB3 category PD doesn't show any sign of life.
If you have a good suggestion/solution please PM me.
Thanks
NS
PS. this entire rant is about people who have been in the same FT position without promotions and very minimal pay adjustments in large corporations - probably outside west cost. So please keep any and all flaming at my post in the context.
1. Technically there is no Salary restriction. As stated above it is a grey area. But, if the job duties are the same and the salary difference is too big (no one knows how much is acceptable without raising questions), then it brings into question if you are still performing the same duties. But basically, you have to make equal to or more than the LC.
2. I have used AC21 before. Have not done EAD renewal yet.
Have a question about point1. Most of larger corp employees who have been in the wait cycle 6-8 years, entered in this coprs at rather lower salaries compared to current day standards. Once inside, pending GC process, you do not get too much of raise or adjustments (2-5% - more of inflation adjustments every 1.5-2 years or so).
Going out of these positions, within similar technical positions, even at lower - rather conservative end of the current pay scale (on AC21-EAD) it is very easy to reach bracket closer to 40-50% higher. Converting to full time consultants, even in tighter market due to current economy; would actually mean closer to 60-70% difference. How do we handle this? Staying within large corp on FT basis does not make sense financially after all these years. Espcially when EB3 category PD doesn't show any sign of life.
If you have a good suggestion/solution please PM me.
Thanks
NS
PS. this entire rant is about people who have been in the same FT position without promotions and very minimal pay adjustments in large corporations - probably outside west cost. So please keep any and all flaming at my post in the context.
YesGC_NoGC
06-20 09:35 AM
Thanks
I will see if they agree to that or I will skip this opportunity and look for something else.
What is they give me similar title as in labor and add those duties that are in labor in addition to what is listed on the position? Would that be favourable case for AC21? or still there is big Risk?
I was looking at the SOC code for System Analyst and that's what it says.Also the code it shows is 15-1051 where as the labor shows 030-167014 - Not sure if these codes changed over the period of time.
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
If I were you, I would look for opportunities that fall in line with your GC labor. System Analyst and Project Manager don't really go well together, leave alone the SOC codes. Your PD also seems to be quite close (relatively speaking).
If anything try to negotiate your external title with your prospective employer.
Good luck, can understand your frustration.
I will see if they agree to that or I will skip this opportunity and look for something else.
What is they give me similar title as in labor and add those duties that are in labor in addition to what is listed on the position? Would that be favourable case for AC21? or still there is big Risk?
I was looking at the SOC code for System Analyst and that's what it says.Also the code it shows is 15-1051 where as the labor shows 030-167014 - Not sure if these codes changed over the period of time.
Analyze science, engineering, business, and all other data processing problems for application to electronic data processing systems. Analyze user requirements, procedures, and problems to automate or improve existing systems and review computer system capabilities, workflow, and scheduling limitations. May analyze or recommend commercially available software. Exclude persons working primarily as "Engineers" (17-2011 through 17-2199), "Mathematicians" (15-2021), or "Scientists" (19-1011 through 19-3099). May supervise computer programmers.
If I were you, I would look for opportunities that fall in line with your GC labor. System Analyst and Project Manager don't really go well together, leave alone the SOC codes. Your PD also seems to be quite close (relatively speaking).
If anything try to negotiate your external title with your prospective employer.
Good luck, can understand your frustration.
more...
john2255
07-21 08:31 AM
What you should do immediately.
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
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]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
If anyone lives in these Senators' jurisdictions, please call their offices and thank them for sponsoring the amendment, and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
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]
If anyone lives in Senators' jurisdictions who voted yes, please call their offices and thank them for understanding our problems and encourage them to keep pushing for this amendment.
If you live in the jurisdiction of those who voted against the amendment, please call them and encourage them of the urgent need for similar amendments. Telephone is the best way to make your voice heard. Here is the link to the Senators' phone numbers and contact info.
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
See comments for the roll call of votes (the YEAS were the people who helped us, the NAYS were the people who hurt us).
http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00266
Grouped by Home State
Alabama: (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Yea
Alaska: Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Stevens (R-AK), Yea
Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Arkansas: Lincoln (D-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay
California: Boxer (D-CA), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Nay
Colorado: Allard (R-CO), Yea Salazar (D-CO), Nay
Connecticut: Dodd (D-CT), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea
Delaware: Biden (D-DE), Nay Carper (D-DE), Nay
Florida: Martinez (R-FL), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay
Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Yea
Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Nay
Idaho: Craig (R-ID), Yea Crapo (R-ID), Yea
Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Obama (D-IL), Not Voting
Indiana: Bayh (D-IN), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Yea
Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Yea Harkin (D-IA), Nay
Kansas: Brownback (R-KS), Not Voting Roberts (R-KS), Yea
Kentucky: Bunning (R-KY), Yea McConnell (R-KY), Yea
Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Yea
Maine: Collins (R-ME), Yea Snowe (R-ME), Yea
Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Nay Mikulski (D-MD), Nay
Massachusetts: Kennedy (D-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Nay
Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay
Minnesota: Coleman (R-MN), Yea Klobuchar (D-MN), Yea
Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Yea Lott (R-MS), Not Voting
Missouri: Bond (R-MO), Yea McCaskill (D-MO), Nay
Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Yea Tester (D-MT), Nay
Nebraska: Hagel (R-NE), Yea Nelson (D-NE), Yea
Nevada: Ensign (R-NV), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay
New Hampshire: Gregg (R-NH), Yea Sununu (R-NH), Yea
New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay
New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Domenici (R-NM), Yea
New York: Clinton (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Yea
North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Yea Dole (R-NC), Yea
North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Dorgan (D-ND), Nay
Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Voinovich (R-OH), Nay
Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Yea Inhofe (R-OK), Yea
Oregon: Smith (R-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea
Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Specter (R-PA), Yea
Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Nay
South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Yea Graham (R-SC), Yea
South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Not Voting Thune (R-SD), Yea
Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Yea Corker (R-TN), Yea
Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Yea Hutchison (R-TX), Yea
Utah: Bennett (R-UT), Yea Hatch (R-UT), Yea
Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Nay
Virginia: Warner (R-VA), Yea Webb (D-VA), Nay
Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea
West Virginia: Byrd (D-WV), Not Voting Rockefeller (D-WV), Nay
Wisconsin: Feingold (D-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay
Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Yea Enzi (R-WY), Yea
abhijitp
01-29 01:11 PM
you are awesome
NP, thanks for bumping this up.... I won't be spending any more time "bumping up" as guys who live and work around Fremont have heard this loud & clear by now...
Fremont BART station, 5 pm to 7 pm every weekday beginning today... BE THERE!!!
NP, thanks for bumping this up.... I won't be spending any more time "bumping up" as guys who live and work around Fremont have heard this loud & clear by now...
Fremont BART station, 5 pm to 7 pm every weekday beginning today... BE THERE!!!
more...
priderock
03-27 09:55 AM
It is truly amazing how people give advise on legally sensitive issues without verifying the facts. People go to the lengths of suggesting work off the books in an open forum (Admin was right to cut him/her off right away).
It is always good idea to consult a lawyer on these matters. You may be breaking the law unwittingly.
AFAIK (I am not a lawyer, consult a lawyer) , you can't work even for free if that job is NOT usually done for free. For example you can't work as a developer for a software development company for free.You may call it volunteer work but it has to be truly volunteer work, meaning others also do this work as volunteers.
It is always good idea to consult a lawyer on these matters. You may be breaking the law unwittingly.
AFAIK (I am not a lawyer, consult a lawyer) , you can't work even for free if that job is NOT usually done for free. For example you can't work as a developer for a software development company for free.You may call it volunteer work but it has to be truly volunteer work, meaning others also do this work as volunteers.
mdforgc
04-07 08:46 PM
Guys
I think this is the time we have to work on the house conference committee members to the best. This is where we are gonna have probs. Core guys-- Can we step up some campaign for this- what is QGAs take on this? Dont mak eit public if it is sensitive.
I think this is the time we have to work on the house conference committee members to the best. This is where we are gonna have probs. Core guys-- Can we step up some campaign for this- what is QGAs take on this? Dont mak eit public if it is sensitive.
more...
Sunx_2004
08-01 11:17 AM
Her H1 is valid from Oct. onward, You can still file her status as H4. Apply for EAD and AP also. Hope this help.
Cheers
My wife's current H4 is valid till Nov. She got her H1 also approved from Oct'2007. She checked the status this morning only on USCIS.
I'm applying for I-485 and adding her as spouse. Should I file for her advance parole and put her status as H4 in it? What happens to to her H1 approval, if advanced parole gets approved also. Will she loose her H1 status?
any ideas??
Cheers
My wife's current H4 is valid till Nov. She got her H1 also approved from Oct'2007. She checked the status this morning only on USCIS.
I'm applying for I-485 and adding her as spouse. Should I file for her advance parole and put her status as H4 in it? What happens to to her H1 approval, if advanced parole gets approved also. Will she loose her H1 status?
any ideas??
gc03
08-15 03:35 PM
Hello GCwaitforever,
This should be a solution to the problem. Submit the approved EB-3 I-140 petition with EB-2 I-140 petition.
"The TSC recommended submitting copies of the approved I-140 with the later-filed I-140 petition."
Could you explain more? How above works?
This should be a solution to the problem. Submit the approved EB-3 I-140 petition with EB-2 I-140 petition.
"The TSC recommended submitting copies of the approved I-140 with the later-filed I-140 petition."
Could you explain more? How above works?
more...
Green_Print
08-01 01:10 PM
I would say some imagination fused with wishful thinking :D
Is it just your imagination or did you base this on any source.
Is it just your imagination or did you base this on any source.
kicca
01-31 05:29 PM
^^^
more...
chanduv23
03-27 09:52 AM
My wife is currently on a H1b doing her residency. When she was on h4, she wanted to do research or observership on a voluntary basis so that she can get some good letters and also have her name on papers and journals.
She got into a research position as a "research volunteer" at Emory University in Atlanta and was an unpaid volunteer. After getting into that position she figured out that the department was actually advertising for that position for a "research assistant" position - which is a salaried position but they could not really find people to fill that position and because they found her promising and did not want to lose her, they offered her a research position.
Without her knowledge she was a regular worker and was dumped with regular work like a paid employee (though she was not paid). They stressed her out and not flexible with hours and never allowed her to study for USMLE etc... and were expecting her to continue that way for 3 months she worked and worked. So I interfered and stopped her from going there, and we wrote a strong letter to the Head of Cardiology at Emory, who got pissed off because she was not aware that the position was not being paid and the department did not officially want to acknowledge that they did it. So they called her to the department and "WARNED" her not to have any kind of communication and not to step into the department or talk to anyone for any reason. We got pissed and we strongly requested for a "Research Experience Letter" which they told they will mail us. We never recieved any mail for 3 months and then one day we called heer superior doctor and blasted her on phone and she in turn blasted us saying we must not call her. Then after a few weeks, we emailed the department politely asking for a experience letter and pleaded them and used a lot of sugar coated words with a lot of A** Ki***" and finally we got a decent letter. Then after a few weeks, the department sent her an email asking her if she still wants her name to be on a paper she worked on, she replied she wanted to. Then they responded that it is not possible to have her name as she was never working there and in future there must not be any communication from us.
The reason I wrote all this is : Most of you people seem to be desperate to work around the system for your benefit. As people do it, it becomes a mess.
Ours was a genuine case and see how an organization like Emory can do whatever they want for their advantage.
So it all depends on the kind of people you deal with - if you want to work on h4 just for sake of experience - expect the unexpected.
Most skilled immigrants are capable of doing great work if allowed to do but we are unable to do it , and organizations that break rules (Desi consultants or Microsoft or Emory or anyone for that sake) - will have only one motive - to exploit your skill and get the work done. In case of any issues, they will "scapegoat you" and make themselves look clean. So think twice before get attracted to breaking rules.
She got into a research position as a "research volunteer" at Emory University in Atlanta and was an unpaid volunteer. After getting into that position she figured out that the department was actually advertising for that position for a "research assistant" position - which is a salaried position but they could not really find people to fill that position and because they found her promising and did not want to lose her, they offered her a research position.
Without her knowledge she was a regular worker and was dumped with regular work like a paid employee (though she was not paid). They stressed her out and not flexible with hours and never allowed her to study for USMLE etc... and were expecting her to continue that way for 3 months she worked and worked. So I interfered and stopped her from going there, and we wrote a strong letter to the Head of Cardiology at Emory, who got pissed off because she was not aware that the position was not being paid and the department did not officially want to acknowledge that they did it. So they called her to the department and "WARNED" her not to have any kind of communication and not to step into the department or talk to anyone for any reason. We got pissed and we strongly requested for a "Research Experience Letter" which they told they will mail us. We never recieved any mail for 3 months and then one day we called heer superior doctor and blasted her on phone and she in turn blasted us saying we must not call her. Then after a few weeks, we emailed the department politely asking for a experience letter and pleaded them and used a lot of sugar coated words with a lot of A** Ki***" and finally we got a decent letter. Then after a few weeks, the department sent her an email asking her if she still wants her name to be on a paper she worked on, she replied she wanted to. Then they responded that it is not possible to have her name as she was never working there and in future there must not be any communication from us.
The reason I wrote all this is : Most of you people seem to be desperate to work around the system for your benefit. As people do it, it becomes a mess.
Ours was a genuine case and see how an organization like Emory can do whatever they want for their advantage.
So it all depends on the kind of people you deal with - if you want to work on h4 just for sake of experience - expect the unexpected.
Most skilled immigrants are capable of doing great work if allowed to do but we are unable to do it , and organizations that break rules (Desi consultants or Microsoft or Emory or anyone for that sake) - will have only one motive - to exploit your skill and get the work done. In case of any issues, they will "scapegoat you" and make themselves look clean. So think twice before get attracted to breaking rules.
EB3June03
06-18 01:08 PM
From:- http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dq/pdf/civil_surgeon_ltr.pdf
Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons
A new TB classification (Class B: Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment) should be used for all applicants who are recent arrivals to the United States (less than 5 years) from countries with a high TB prevalence, with a Mantoux TST reaction of 10 mm or greater of induration, and no evidence of TB disease. See Section V of the TB Technical Instructions for other conditions for which referral for evaluation for treatment of latent TB infection is recommended. The civil surgeon should pro-actively contact the TB Control Program of the local health department to identify specific sources of treatment for latent TB infection and make the appropriate referral.
What if the applicant is NOT a recent arrival in US and does NOT have any evidence of TB disease? I hope there is another category for that (which might be exempt from treatment).
Technical Instructions for Civil Surgeons
A new TB classification (Class B: Latent TB Infection Needing Evaluation for Treatment) should be used for all applicants who are recent arrivals to the United States (less than 5 years) from countries with a high TB prevalence, with a Mantoux TST reaction of 10 mm or greater of induration, and no evidence of TB disease. See Section V of the TB Technical Instructions for other conditions for which referral for evaluation for treatment of latent TB infection is recommended. The civil surgeon should pro-actively contact the TB Control Program of the local health department to identify specific sources of treatment for latent TB infection and make the appropriate referral.
What if the applicant is NOT a recent arrival in US and does NOT have any evidence of TB disease? I hope there is another category for that (which might be exempt from treatment).
more...
vdlrao
08-15 04:45 AM
No I havent got my GC yet.
kondur_007
10-30 12:17 PM
Thanks for your reply it was helpful.
BUt can any one tell me do we have to be on payroll for at least 6 months after you get Gc or can we on and off payroll and still be with the same employer for what ever length of time we stick to the same employer who filed GC..
Srh1: Please read my comments in the above two threads (thread links posted by bluez). I tried to summarize everything there.
As far as your above question is concerned: You will be just fine even if you are on and off the payroll (especially if the empolyer does not have the project for some time...meaning that on and off was triggerred by the employer); because it still shows YOUR intention to stay with the employer.
Feel free to ask any further questions (after going through above two threads) if you need any further info...I am not a lawyer but I will be happy to share what I know.
Good Luck.
BUt can any one tell me do we have to be on payroll for at least 6 months after you get Gc or can we on and off payroll and still be with the same employer for what ever length of time we stick to the same employer who filed GC..
Srh1: Please read my comments in the above two threads (thread links posted by bluez). I tried to summarize everything there.
As far as your above question is concerned: You will be just fine even if you are on and off the payroll (especially if the empolyer does not have the project for some time...meaning that on and off was triggerred by the employer); because it still shows YOUR intention to stay with the employer.
Feel free to ask any further questions (after going through above two threads) if you need any further info...I am not a lawyer but I will be happy to share what I know.
Good Luck.
more...
PHANI_TAVVALA
12-02 10:08 PM
Thanks for your advice guys, I have found a university which allows people to go on CPT from 1st semester itself. They charge $3000 for this arrangement (along with $2400 for 6 credit hours) and their MBA/MS program is weekend only classes. I expect to convert to F1 and work with my present employer on CPT upon the my H1B expiration in Sept' 09 (I don't want to recapture the 2 months in Indian vacation). Classes start in 1st week of Oct 2009. The worst part is my course load will be really heavy as I have to continue with my regular M.B.A coursework in my present university.
abhijitp
02-15 10:49 AM
^^
dale
09-24 03:32 AM
hey thanks everyone for the great comments about my stamps (the 3 vector ones including the green swan stamp) - i completely forgot about them (haven't been on here for a while) so i didn't even get to vote. ah well, thanks anyway everyone!
_dale
_dale
vik352
12-03 01:51 PM
Anyone?
SAPGURU
07-11 03:12 PM
Gurus,
Here is my situation.
Labor filed with company A in April 2006 and I-140 EB2 approved in May 2007. Could not file I-485 last year due to personal reasons.
Changed the Job to company B in Sep 2007.Company B filed PERM EB2 in Feb 2008 and got approved in Aril 2008. I-140 filed in June 2008 with priority date recapture request and still pending.
My 6th year of H1B is expiring in March 2009.
My question is, can I file my I-485 based on my previously approved EB2 I140.
What should be best approach for me? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Here is my situation.
Labor filed with company A in April 2006 and I-140 EB2 approved in May 2007. Could not file I-485 last year due to personal reasons.
Changed the Job to company B in Sep 2007.Company B filed PERM EB2 in Feb 2008 and got approved in Aril 2008. I-140 filed in June 2008 with priority date recapture request and still pending.
My 6th year of H1B is expiring in March 2009.
My question is, can I file my I-485 based on my previously approved EB2 I140.
What should be best approach for me? Any help will be greatly appreciated.
No comments:
Post a Comment