immigrationvoice1
12-09 10:00 PM
I know many people who're going for part-time MBA, including myself. A good way of making best out of a stagnant career phase while waiting for GC.
Please post the URL of the school you are attending.
Thanks,
Please post the URL of the school you are attending.
Thanks,
wallpaper Alan Cumming, Dianna Agron
Pineapple
10-10 12:02 PM
Anyone?
GCAmigo
12-08 08:18 AM
everything is behind closed doors.. just wait for the updates form the core team..
2011 Star Dianna Agron Joins
scho69
01-02 11:45 AM
Is it BA with Mathematics (honors) or BSC. in Mathematics (honors). or does it say General?
more...
walking_dude
11-27 09:25 PM
Let us do E-mail all our friends. We need all the support we can gather.
gc4me
07-05 08:45 PM
I have sent a request 5 months back to FOIA to get my I-140 copy. No luck yet.
I'm not sure if you can do a PD transfer just based on receipt #. You may try the FOIA route - but please be aware that it will take about a year plus to get a copy of your 140. Now depending on your PD, you can take a guess and go ahead - either do FOIA and get a copy OR just wait until PD is current for you again.
I'm not sure if you can do a PD transfer just based on receipt #. You may try the FOIA route - but please be aware that it will take about a year plus to get a copy of your 140. Now depending on your PD, you can take a guess and go ahead - either do FOIA and get a copy OR just wait until PD is current for you again.
more...
kookoo
08-03 06:17 PM
What the chances are of an inquiry between the USCIS and my Previous Employer?
:confused:
:confused:
2010 Star Dianna Agron Joins
FrankZulu
08-12 04:26 PM
As my priority date is current I contacted my local congressman's office for help with my I-485. NSC replied back to the office (see reply below) saying my background checks are still on. But the officer at the infopass appointment said my backgrounds checks are complete. I don't know whom to believe.
Is this some kind of standard reply that USCIS is giving for Congressman's or Senators case status inquiry?
Good morning XXXXXXXXXXX,
Re: I-485s <Applicant Name>
I have conversed with those in charge of these cases.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is
committed to adjudicating immigration benefits in a timely, efficient
manner that ensures public safety and national security.
Toward that end, USCIS requires extensive background checks for every
application or petition it adjudicates. While background checks for
most applications or petitions are completed quickly, a small percentage
of cases involve unresolved background check issues that result in
adjudication delays.
Background checks involve more than just the initial submission of and
response related to biographical information and fingerprints. When
checks and/or a review of an administrative record reveal an issue
potentially impacting an applicant's eligibility for the requested
immigration benefit, further inquiry is needed. The inquiry may include
an additional interview and/or the need to contact another agency for
updates or more comprehensive information. If it is determined that an
outside agency possesses relevant information about a case, USCIS
requests such information for review. Upon gathering and assessing all
available information, USCIS then adjudicates the application as
expeditiously as possible.
We have checked into your constituent's case and have been assured that
the agency is aware of your inquiry, and is monitoring progress related
to it. However, unresolved issues in your constituent's case require
thorough review before a decision can be rendered. Unfortunately, we
cannot speculate as to when this review process will be completed.
We realize that your constituent may feel frustrated by delays related
to his or her case. As an agency, we must weigh individual
inconvenience against the broader concerns of public safety and national
security.
We hope this information and assurance are helpful. If we may be of
assistance in the future, please let us know.
I hope this information is helpful to you. At this time I am closing the
inquiry on this matter.
Thank you,
<Officer Name>
Immigration Services Officer
NSC Congressional Unit
I have tried multiple sources and following is the response:
* SR (july 19th): No response Yet
* IO Inquiry (2nd Level, multiple times): You are pre-adjudicated. Officer will review/in review.
* Congressmen: I am in the queue to be processed (File will be picked through electronic sweep :confused:).
* Senator: Background check being conducted. (No written response yet, just was updated on phone by the senators office).
* InfoPass (3 months back): Your application is pre-adju. and will be approved once visa is available.
To all who have experienced something similar, how can I confirm if my application is really going through background check??? Or should I give it more time?
Is this some kind of standard reply that USCIS is giving for Congressman's or Senators case status inquiry?
Good morning XXXXXXXXXXX,
Re: I-485s <Applicant Name>
I have conversed with those in charge of these cases.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is
committed to adjudicating immigration benefits in a timely, efficient
manner that ensures public safety and national security.
Toward that end, USCIS requires extensive background checks for every
application or petition it adjudicates. While background checks for
most applications or petitions are completed quickly, a small percentage
of cases involve unresolved background check issues that result in
adjudication delays.
Background checks involve more than just the initial submission of and
response related to biographical information and fingerprints. When
checks and/or a review of an administrative record reveal an issue
potentially impacting an applicant's eligibility for the requested
immigration benefit, further inquiry is needed. The inquiry may include
an additional interview and/or the need to contact another agency for
updates or more comprehensive information. If it is determined that an
outside agency possesses relevant information about a case, USCIS
requests such information for review. Upon gathering and assessing all
available information, USCIS then adjudicates the application as
expeditiously as possible.
We have checked into your constituent's case and have been assured that
the agency is aware of your inquiry, and is monitoring progress related
to it. However, unresolved issues in your constituent's case require
thorough review before a decision can be rendered. Unfortunately, we
cannot speculate as to when this review process will be completed.
We realize that your constituent may feel frustrated by delays related
to his or her case. As an agency, we must weigh individual
inconvenience against the broader concerns of public safety and national
security.
We hope this information and assurance are helpful. If we may be of
assistance in the future, please let us know.
I hope this information is helpful to you. At this time I am closing the
inquiry on this matter.
Thank you,
<Officer Name>
Immigration Services Officer
NSC Congressional Unit
I have tried multiple sources and following is the response:
* SR (july 19th): No response Yet
* IO Inquiry (2nd Level, multiple times): You are pre-adjudicated. Officer will review/in review.
* Congressmen: I am in the queue to be processed (File will be picked through electronic sweep :confused:).
* Senator: Background check being conducted. (No written response yet, just was updated on phone by the senators office).
* InfoPass (3 months back): Your application is pre-adju. and will be approved once visa is available.
To all who have experienced something similar, how can I confirm if my application is really going through background check??? Or should I give it more time?
more...
Ann Ruben
05-15 04:38 PM
no worries. my response should have been more precise.
hair Dianna Agron Hairstyles
aph0025
11-12 12:24 PM
it depends on USCIS officer. i had a good lawer when I applied for h1b transfer. i got stuck for one 15 days paycheck. eventually it is cleared after submitting the paper work. having good lawer is not enough. depends on your luck or USCIS officer also
Thanks for your input. So, the pay stub that you submitted, was it from your previous employer, or the one you got your visa transferred to? Hey, if you don't mind, can I have your lawyer�s contact details?
Thanks for your input. So, the pay stub that you submitted, was it from your previous employer, or the one you got your visa transferred to? Hey, if you don't mind, can I have your lawyer�s contact details?
more...
buddhaas
02-02 03:57 PM
Why Is H-1B A Dirty Word?
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
H-1B workers certainly seem to be under fire these days on many fronts. A new memo issued by USCIS on the employer-employee relationship imposes new extra-regulatory regulations on the types of activities in which H-1B workers can engage as well as the types of enterprises that can petition for H-1B workers. The memo targets the consulting industry directly, deftly slips in a new concept that seems to prohibit H-1B petitions for employer-owners of businesses, and will surely constitute an open invitation to the Service Centers to hit H-1B petitioners with a new slew of kitchen-sink RFE's. On another front, USCIS continues to make unannounced H-1B site visits, often repeatedly to the same employer. Apart from the "in-terrorem" impact of such visits, I personally cannot see the utility of three different visits to the same employer, particularly after the first one or two visits show that the employer is fully compliant.
But USCIS isn't the only agency that is rigorously targeting H-1B's. An AILA member recently reported that CBP pulled newly-arrived Indian nationals holding H-1B visas out of an immigration inspection line and reportedly placed them in Expedited Removal. The legal basis of those actions is still unclear. However, the tactic is too close to racial profiling for my own comfort.
Finally, recent H-1B "skirmishes" include various U.S. consular posts in India issuing "pink letters" that are, simply put, consular "RFE's" appearing to question the bona fides of the H-1B and requesting information on a host of truly repetitive and/or irrelevant topics. Much of the information that is routinely requested on a pink letter is already in the copy of the H-1B visa petition. Some of the letters request payroll information for all employees of the sponsoring company, a ridiculous request in most instances, particularly for major multi-national companies. One of the most frustrating actions we are seeing from consular officers in this context is the checking off or highlighting of every single category of additional information on the form letter, whether directly applicable or not, in effect a "paper wall" that must be overcome before an applicant can have the H-1B visa issued. Very discouraging to both employer and employee.
How have we come to a point in time where the H-1B category in and of itself is so disdained and mistrusted? Of course I'm aware that instances of fraud have cast this category in a bad light. But I think that vehemence of the administrative attack on the H-1B category is so disproportionate to the actual statistics about fraud. And interestingly, the disproportionate heavy-handed administrative reaction comes not from the agency specifically tasked with H-1B enforcement—the Department of Labor—but from CIS, CBP and State. Sometimes I just have to shake my head and ask myself what makes people so darn angry about a visa category that, at bottom, is designed to bring in relatively tiny number of really smart people to work in U.S. businesses of any size. It has to be a reaction against something else.
Yes, a great number of IT consultants come to the US on H-1B's. It is important to remember that so many of these individuals are extremely well-educated, capable people, working in an industry in which there are a large number of high profile players. And arguably, the high profile consulting companies have the most at stake if they do not focus on compliance, as they are the easiest enforcement target and they need their business model to work in the U.S. in order to survive. Some people may not like the business model, although arguably IT consulting companies provide needed services that allow US businesses, such as banks and insurance companies to focus on their own core strengths. Like it or not, though, this business model is perfectly legal under current law, and the agencies that enforce our immigration laws have no business trying to eviscerate it by policy or a pattern of discretionary actions.
It is true that some IT consulting companies' practices have been the focus of fraud investigations. But DOL has stringent rules in place to deal with the bad guys. Benching H-1B workers without pay, paying below the prevailing wage, sending H-1B workers on long-term assignments to a site not covered by an LCA—these are the practices we most often hear about, and every single one of these is a violation of an existing regulation that could be enforced by the Department of Labor. When an employer violates wage and hour rules, DOL investigates the practices and enforces the regulations against that employer. But no one shuts down an entire industry as a result.
And the IT consulting industry is not the only user of the H-1B visa. Let's not forget how many other critical fields use H-1B workers. In my own career alone, I have seen H-1B petitions for nanoscientists, ornithologists, CEO's of significant not for profit organizations, teachers, applied mathematicians, risk analysts, professionals involved in pharmaceutical research and development, automotive designers, international legal experts, film editors, microimaging engineers. H-1B's are valuable to small and large businesses alike, arguably even more to that emerging business that needs one key expert to develop a new product or service and get the business off the ground.
The assault on H-1B's is not only offensive, it's dangerous. Here's why:
* H-1B's create jobs—statistics show that 5 jobs are created in the U.S. for every H-1B worker hired. An administrative clamp-down in the program will hinder this job creation. And think about the valuable sharing of skills and expertise between H-1B workers and U.S. workers—this is lost when companies are discouraged from using the program.
* The anti-H-1B assault dissuades large businesses from conducting research and development in the US, and encourages the relocation of those facilities in jurisdictions that are friendlier to foreign professionals.
* The anti-H-1B assault chills the formation of small businesses in the US, particularly in emerging technologies. This will most certainly be one of the long-term results of USCIS' most recent memo.
* The attack on H-1B's offends our friends and allies in the world. An example: Earlier this year India –one of the U.S.'s closest allies --announced new visa restrictions on foreign nationals working there. Surely the treatment of Indian national H-1B workers at the hands of our agencies involved in the immigration process would not have escaped the attention of the Indian government as they issued their own restrictions.
* The increasing challenges in the H-1B program may have the effect of encouraging foreign students who were educated in the U.S. to seek permanent positions elsewhere.
Whatever the cause of the visceral reaction against H-1B workers might be—whether it stems from a fear that fraud will become more widespread or whether it is simply a broader reaction against foreign workers that often raises its head during any down economy –I sincerely hope that the agencies are able to gain some perspective on the program that allows them to treat legitimate H-1B employers and employees with the respect they deserve and to effectively enforce against those who are non-compliant, rather than casting a wide net and treating all H-1B users as abusers.
source link : http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-is-h-1b-dirty-word.html#comment-form
hot made by Glee#39;s Diana Agron
sertasheep
06-17 10:32 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/16/AR2007061601360.html?hpid=topnews
Needless to say, one can register and post their comments there. Feel free to share your stories related to the above article.
Needless to say, one can register and post their comments there. Feel free to share your stories related to the above article.
more...
house Dianna Agron.
p.guptapost
11-06 05:54 PM
2 K number comes from I485 inventory report from USCIS. It shows 2K visas filed overall in 2009 till Aug.
tattoo Dianna Agron.
xgoogle
08-20 01:48 PM
I just called USCIS and according to the person I spoke with, it takes approximately 30 days from the date of approval of primary applicant for approval of dependents.
I doubt if that is the case. I know people where the whole family got it.
Also check out this other thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=279578&posted=1#post279578
I doubt if that is the case. I know people where the whole family got it.
Also check out this other thread:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=279578&posted=1#post279578
more...
pictures Dianna Agron becomes the first
fromnaija
11-30 11:19 AM
I don't think you are correct. Portability applies after 6 months of I140 approval. But you can not use AC21 for job profile / labor zone change. So, I don't recommend you changing job title.
You are wrong! Portability applies after 485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
You are wrong! Portability applies after 485 has been pending for more than 180 days.
dresses Burlesque. The Hunters
snhn
07-14 09:51 AM
suppose this SKIll bill is passed, probablly not this year since election are aboutto happen. what are the chances that EB3 worldwidw will become current when SKILL BILL goes into affect. I am sure there are majority of people here are Eb3 category.
What if someone is got a few monts left before they finsih the Masters, but their process in in EB3. Can they take advantage of this bill. Obviouslly one has to finish the degree first.
thaughts?
What if someone is got a few monts left before they finsih the Masters, but their process in in EB3. Can they take advantage of this bill. Obviouslly one has to finish the degree first.
thaughts?
more...
makeup #39;Glee#39; Star Dianna Agron Joins
ssa
10-30 12:40 PM
In my case - which is little different than you since I'm actually transferring my job to a different subsidiary of the same employer with employer's blessing - attorney advised to file AC21 even though I had just received my GC. It sounds counter-intuitive but his logic behind it was as follows: USCIS will surely reject AC21 letter stating the candidate has already received GC. You can then keep this response in your file and use it to defend your case if there is any problem down the road (for example, during your citizenship processing) since you had informed USCIS and they themselves said it's not necessary. In case they do not reject your AC21 request you will still be fine since it means you invoked AC21 even though you got your GC so it should still be okay to switch before 6 months.
As always this is one attorney's personal opinion/strategy so please consult your own attorney before doing anything.
As always this is one attorney's personal opinion/strategy so please consult your own attorney before doing anything.
girlfriend Dianna Agron is known to most
santb1975
02-15 11:45 AM
After a friendly bump to No.Cal
hairstyles Eric Dane | Dianna Agron
snathan
08-18 05:05 PM
If she is here on H4 and while she was here her H1B got approved then there is no problem. As H1B is not VISA and its intent to hire. Infact if she wanted to to Join work on H1B, she will need to apply status change application for H4 to H1B.
This is wrong...once the H1B approved the status automatically changed. If you are not paid in H1B, you are out of status. The only way to correc the status is getting paid, pay the tax and get W-2 as like anyother person.
H1B is not a vsia intend to hire. As you are not able to find a suitable american for the job, you are hiring a foreigner with speciallity skills. Means already you have a job for the person you are sponsoring.
This is wrong...once the H1B approved the status automatically changed. If you are not paid in H1B, you are out of status. The only way to correc the status is getting paid, pay the tax and get W-2 as like anyother person.
H1B is not a vsia intend to hire. As you are not able to find a suitable american for the job, you are hiring a foreigner with speciallity skills. Means already you have a job for the person you are sponsoring.
snathan
05-20 06:19 PM
Not favoring Wipro or quitting person here. General comment..
we need to be careful and review all aspect of issues with mgr and HR before leaving service companies. If we really want to come and work in US then come as independent companies on H1. People keep quite and say 'yes' for everything until H1 is filed in offshore and once a high paid offer comes then leaving and start saying 'sue' this company etc.
they pay fees for H1/air-fares/insurances for commitment for onsite work for some period. If person A goes out, they have to invest same amount of $ on new person B to get there and loosing credit at client also. Are these factors not overhead to these kind of companies?
Becoming so much emotional for money matters is quite common. Be practical and think wisely and negotiate peacefully with HR/MGR. Sending mails with lot of anger and threats to companies etc really don't much help in practical life and things go worse. this kind of stories is not first time and has been going for many years, think it from both sides.
Be practical, thinking peacefully. All the best.
They are not doing any charity for the employees...they want profit and cares only about their interest and so the employee. Whats wrong with that...
we need to be careful and review all aspect of issues with mgr and HR before leaving service companies. If we really want to come and work in US then come as independent companies on H1. People keep quite and say 'yes' for everything until H1 is filed in offshore and once a high paid offer comes then leaving and start saying 'sue' this company etc.
they pay fees for H1/air-fares/insurances for commitment for onsite work for some period. If person A goes out, they have to invest same amount of $ on new person B to get there and loosing credit at client also. Are these factors not overhead to these kind of companies?
Becoming so much emotional for money matters is quite common. Be practical and think wisely and negotiate peacefully with HR/MGR. Sending mails with lot of anger and threats to companies etc really don't much help in practical life and things go worse. this kind of stories is not first time and has been going for many years, think it from both sides.
Be practical, thinking peacefully. All the best.
They are not doing any charity for the employees...they want profit and cares only about their interest and so the employee. Whats wrong with that...
sammyb
11-16 04:21 PM
Oh, I nearly forgot, AND pigs must fly!
yes thats true .... but I guess only pig is not enough ... we need the whole animal kingdon fly before ....:D
yes thats true .... but I guess only pig is not enough ... we need the whole animal kingdon fly before ....:D
No comments:
Post a Comment