Lasantha
02-18 12:07 PM
I don't think you are missing anything. I don't think the congress will pass a bill to recapture EB visas out of the blue like that. It will take lots of effort from the pro-immigrant community and will face a great deal of opposition like it did in the past from the anti lobby. It won't be handed to us in a plate just like that.
Haven't heard of recapturing H1 visas. With high demand for H1s I doubt if there will be any unused visas to be recaptured. Even if there are any then can the congress recapture them? Even if they did why would they recapture unused EB visas along with unused H1 visas? . Am I missing something here?..
Haven't heard of recapturing H1 visas. With high demand for H1s I doubt if there will be any unused visas to be recaptured. Even if there are any then can the congress recapture them? Even if they did why would they recapture unused EB visas along with unused H1 visas? . Am I missing something here?..
wallpaper love and asketball quotes.
vshar
07-31 09:16 PM
I wish they will have online chat with IO who is assigned to ones file( not CSR) so no more RFEs etc.
salai007
07-17 06:09 PM
Thanks to Rep Lofgren.
I will be sending a Thank card to her soon.
I will be sending a Thank card to her soon.
2011 Love And Basketball Quotes
perm2gc
08-08 07:56 PM
I spoke with the lawyer. She asked me to get an affidavit stating the arrest reason and also what happened. She will send this as soon she gets my receipt number.
I am not having any case/docket number since this happened 4 years back.
Lawyer is saying this should be ok and this falls under misdemeanor.
Any suggestion?
you are ok.try to conatct the court clerk and give them your details or goto the police station and they will give your case number or if they have online system..just search in the system
I am not having any case/docket number since this happened 4 years back.
Lawyer is saying this should be ok and this falls under misdemeanor.
Any suggestion?
you are ok.try to conatct the court clerk and give them your details or goto the police station and they will give your case number or if they have online system..just search in the system
more...
hasil
09-28 05:54 PM
From my experience, Crows are black everywhere. Unless you join non-desi company. it is hard to find desi company who keeps everything in black n white.
Best bet is to try to workout something with you present company.
Best bet is to try to workout something with you present company.
sgurram
04-26 12:48 AM
I realized that even I missed filling that field out. I filed my online application on 3/28/2010. Except for some last updates, I have not received any RFE yet regarding the missing field. The online system doesn't seem to validate that field.
sparky_jones: can you give us your write up to USCIS regarding this missing field information. What was in the letter regarding this field. I plan on sending a letter to them providing this information.
sparky_jones: can you give us your write up to USCIS regarding this missing field information. What was in the letter regarding this field. I plan on sending a letter to them providing this information.
more...
eastindia
05-14 02:57 PM
Any idea what Tech firms are doing to help CIR?
2010 girlfriend Love And Basketball
same_old_guy
06-26 02:20 PM
Could you please point out the section where it says dual intent for H1 will be removed ?
more...
txh1b
04-15 10:51 AM
Loooong road ahead! Good luck. Hope it gets approved as it might be tough to get a labor approved in this economy.
hair Love And Basketball Quotes:
vivek_k
03-09 02:22 PM
Even though this is the wrong thread, can somebody please recommend a good attorney in Oklahoma City Area. I need to hire a different one since the one I am with currently is not good.
I would appreciate if somebody would point me to the right direction.
I would appreciate if somebody would point me to the right direction.
more...
raydon
10-08 08:47 PM
India is in the process of having social security agreements with France and Germany.
http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20080930/874/twl-india-france-ink-social-security-pac.html
http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20081008/812/tnl-india-germany-sign-social-security-a_1.html
Don't know about anything with the US happening anytime soon. But it would definitely help those who worked here contributed to the one-way SSA pool and left before 10 years.They never got to have the social security benefits. If work visas are made available relatively easily and job openings go up in these countries, people would prefer going to these countries rather than to the US.
http://in.news.yahoo.com/139/20080930/874/twl-india-france-ink-social-security-pac.html
http://in.news.yahoo.com/43/20081008/812/tnl-india-germany-sign-social-security-a_1.html
Don't know about anything with the US happening anytime soon. But it would definitely help those who worked here contributed to the one-way SSA pool and left before 10 years.They never got to have the social security benefits. If work visas are made available relatively easily and job openings go up in these countries, people would prefer going to these countries rather than to the US.
hot Love And Basketball Quotes
sdeshpan
07-21 03:13 PM
Has your experience via Delhi been any different (better/worse) than Bombay...mostly in terms of harassment by customs officials etc?
more...
house love and asketball quotes.
tonyHK12
04-27 01:05 PM
The antis regularly say that unathorized immigrants get a range of public benefits but don't pay any taxes. Not so. They're paying $8.4 billion a year in sales taxes and $1.2 billion in income taxes. And they don't get most public benefits. They get public schools for their kids and emergency rooms can't turn them away. That's pretty much it. In the mean time, a company that earned $14 billion in profits last year paid zero taxes.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/04/unauthorized-immigrants-paid-11-billion-in-taxes-last-year-ge-paid-non.html)
$1.5 Billion in income taxes, is the amount the 64,000 new H1bs pay every year and I assume a similar or larger sales tax.
Ok lets average $11 billion into 22 million illegals - A whopping contribution of $50 per head in income tax per year
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the legal employment immigration queue
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/04/unauthorized-immigrants-paid-11-billion-in-taxes-last-year-ge-paid-non.html)
$1.5 Billion in income taxes, is the amount the 64,000 new H1bs pay every year and I assume a similar or larger sales tax.
Ok lets average $11 billion into 22 million illegals - A whopping contribution of $50 per head in income tax per year
I'm not even thinking of the remaining 500,000+ people in the legal employment immigration queue
tattoo Love And Basketball Quotes:
cox
October 23rd, 2005, 06:10 PM
I haven't heard from her recently, so I sent her a message this AM...
more...
pictures love and asketball quotes.
ChainReaction
06-18 12:41 PM
yes you can. As per AC 21 once you have counted towards h1b number in last 6 year you are not counted again. So assuming your original h1 wasn't though non profit orgainzation, you can apply for new h1. If you have your I 140 approved you get 3 years h1. PM me if you need more info. I have done it.
and btw, h1b premium processing takes 15 days, so don't panic.
I asked my lawyer somewhat similar question regarding my wife. The question i asked was what if i stay on H1b and she uses her EAD and for some reason my 485 get rejected can she move back to H4 status?
The lawyer said as long as the I-94 is valid on her H4 she can else she will have to leave the country and apply at her home country . He did also mentioned something regarding time is counted as being out of status from the day a person uses EAD, don't remember whether the clock starts ticking passed the I-94 validity period or otherwise.
and btw, h1b premium processing takes 15 days, so don't panic.
I asked my lawyer somewhat similar question regarding my wife. The question i asked was what if i stay on H1b and she uses her EAD and for some reason my 485 get rejected can she move back to H4 status?
The lawyer said as long as the I-94 is valid on her H4 she can else she will have to leave the country and apply at her home country . He did also mentioned something regarding time is counted as being out of status from the day a person uses EAD, don't remember whether the clock starts ticking passed the I-94 validity period or otherwise.
dresses Love And Basketball Quotes
bindas74
02-05 12:33 PM
As per my understanding, since you filed for 485 before August 17, 2007 you have to pay renewal fees for EAD/AP. ONLY if you have filed for 485 after August 17 2007 you don't have to pay renewal fees for EAD/AP.
What matters here is when you filed your 485. It does not matter when you applied for EAD/AP as these are based on your 485.
Hi Prasadn,
Thanks for the reply. That sucks if I have to pay again::((
I read somewhere that if we apply with the latest fees, we dont have to pay again.
Can any one else please confirm?
Regards
What matters here is when you filed your 485. It does not matter when you applied for EAD/AP as these are based on your 485.
Hi Prasadn,
Thanks for the reply. That sucks if I have to pay again::((
I read somewhere that if we apply with the latest fees, we dont have to pay again.
Can any one else please confirm?
Regards
more...
makeup Love And Basketball Quotes
waitingGC
03-21 10:58 AM
My wife will apply for H1 this April. I also have some questions:
1. can she transfer her H1 to another company before she starts to work for the company which sponsors her H1B?
2. if she does not want to join the sponsoring company, can she transfer back to H4 after getting H1B approval but before Oct. 1st? Under this circumstance, is she subject to H1 quota in the future?
1. can she transfer her H1 to another company before she starts to work for the company which sponsors her H1B?
2. if she does not want to join the sponsoring company, can she transfer back to H4 after getting H1B approval but before Oct. 1st? Under this circumstance, is she subject to H1 quota in the future?
girlfriend love and asketball quotes.
mbawa2574
02-10 10:28 AM
Hello Pappu
I have emailed a draft to the chapter leader and have cc'ed the email address below. I have asked a former editor of one of the big dailies to review it and to suggest if other outlets can run with the piece.
BR
Please PM me and I can give out the details.
THX
I have emailed a draft to the chapter leader and have cc'ed the email address below. I have asked a former editor of one of the big dailies to review it and to suggest if other outlets can run with the piece.
BR
Please PM me and I can give out the details.
THX
hairstyles love and asketball quotes.
learning01
02-25 05:03 PM
This is the most compelling piece I read about why this country should do more for scientists and engineers who are on temporary work visas. Read it till the end and enjoy.
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
learning01
From Yale Global Online:
Amid the Bush Administration's efforts to create a guest-worker program for undocumented immigrants, Nobel laureate economist Gary Becker argues that the US must do more to welcome skilled legal immigrants too. The US currently offers only 140,000 green cards each year, preventing many valuable scientists and engineers from gaining permanent residency. Instead, they are made to stay in the US on temporary visas�which discourage them from assimilating into American society, and of which there are not nearly enough. It is far better, argues Becker, to fold the visa program into a much larger green card quota for skilled immigrants. While such a program would force more competition on American scientists and engineers, it would allow the economy as a whole to take advantage of the valuable skills of new workers who would have a lasting stake in America's success. Skilled immigrants will find work elsewhere if we do not let them work here�but they want, first and foremost, to work in the US. Becker argues that the US should let them do so. � YaleGlobal
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
Gary S. Becker
The Wall Street Journal, 1 December 2005
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
URL:
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6583
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
Rights:
Copyright � 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Related Articles:
America Should Open Its Doors Wide to Foreign Talent
Some Lost Jobs Never Leave Home
Bush's Proposal for Immigration Reform Misses the Point
Workers Falling Behind in Mexico
hpandey
10-06 11:51 AM
Not exactly, http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21871
Bingo !! We would never be lucky enough to get rid of the GCTEST headache :D
Bingo !! We would never be lucky enough to get rid of the GCTEST headache :D
cinqsit
11-24 06:07 PM
I have seen people get a copy of their approved I-140 using FOIA Freedom of Information Act Request, where the employer was giving them a hard time and not sharing their I-140 info. So there are ways you can get a copy of the approved I-140 provided of course everything is in order. (previous poster has also posted information of getting duplicate I-140)
This is kind of similar - you should contact a good lawyer and try and get that I-140 copy
if you current lawyer is unhelpful just get advice and help from some other immigration lawyer - you are in the home stretch dont give up - try and provide USCIS whatever they want. (though technically they should have information about the approved I-140 - so I dont get why they are requesting a original copy from you!)
Also you mention
"In late 2008, with the help of a congressman, my new attorney was able to figure out that USCIS has lost my original I-140 application (filed at Nebraska center) and USCIS has issued the same I-140 receipt no. to somebody else. Then USCIS auto-created a new I-140 and gave me SRC receipt no. with filing date as Jan 2008 and as electronically filed by my previous attorney."
Do you have any documentation abou this ? a letter from Congressman etc? This is really weird never heard anything like this before.
You should collect all such documents (contact the congressman again if need be to get a letter or something in writing) then contact
a good immigration lawyer.
Good luck!
This is kind of similar - you should contact a good lawyer and try and get that I-140 copy
if you current lawyer is unhelpful just get advice and help from some other immigration lawyer - you are in the home stretch dont give up - try and provide USCIS whatever they want. (though technically they should have information about the approved I-140 - so I dont get why they are requesting a original copy from you!)
Also you mention
"In late 2008, with the help of a congressman, my new attorney was able to figure out that USCIS has lost my original I-140 application (filed at Nebraska center) and USCIS has issued the same I-140 receipt no. to somebody else. Then USCIS auto-created a new I-140 and gave me SRC receipt no. with filing date as Jan 2008 and as electronically filed by my previous attorney."
Do you have any documentation abou this ? a letter from Congressman etc? This is really weird never heard anything like this before.
You should collect all such documents (contact the congressman again if need be to get a letter or something in writing) then contact
a good immigration lawyer.
Good luck!
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento