edaltsis
11-12 11:58 AM
From the day you file your case you are legal to work with your new employer until its approval or denial. When you file your case (filed in normal processing without including paystub) sometimes they just approve it and sometimes they ask for a current paystub for evidence to close the case as approved. As you start working for your new company you would get a pay stub which can be used for the query.
wallpaper Cintia Dicker and Las Vegas
vin13
09-30 01:10 PM
Any idea what these LUDs may be which you had
LUD on 09/22, 09/23 ,09/29 and 09/30.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
No idea...these were just soft LUD....the last updated date was changed online.
LUD on 09/22, 09/23 ,09/29 and 09/30.
EB2 India Mar 2005 NSC
No idea...these were just soft LUD....the last updated date was changed online.
tsarun11
07-12 05:33 PM
I have the same question. I have my labor approved (pre-approved labor) and I-140 approved. My PD is Nov-04. I don't have a copy of my approved I-140 and my company does not give it to me.
If I wish to change companies, how do I proceed - Is there a circumvent process?
If I wish to change companies, how do I proceed - Is there a circumvent process?
2011 cintia dicker pictures
ab2k7
07-17 04:28 AM
Thanks desi3933,
The article here from Murthy specifies the solution in a different way and doesn't mention the need of filing LC or 140 again if the LC was properly filed as roving employee. Will have to confirm with attorney. Hope this would help ppl in similar situations.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_svcupd.html
I-485 Filing for Roving Employees
�MurthyDotCom
The USCIS indicated that, if a roving employee's I-140 petition is filed with Service Center A where the company is headquartered, but the employee moves to Service Center B's jurisdiction before the I-485 is filed, the employee may file the I-485 with either Service Center A or Service Center B. The USCIS also noted, however, that if the I-140 petition is filed at Service Center A, and then the I-485 is filed with Service Center B, the I-485 must be held until the I-140 is adjudicated. It is not clear if this means no action will be taken or if it simply cannot be approved until the I-140 petition is adjudicated. Roving employees are those who do not have fixed work sites, but can be moved from location to location, depending upon the needs of the employer. This is common with IT contractors. The safer approach would be to file the I-140 petition and the I-485 application in the same Service Center to avoid additional delays or the need to transfer the file from one Service Center to another.
In this instance when ever a consultant or "roving employee" moves to another city/state an LCA amendment is to be filed to accomodate USCIS rules. Whether this would have any adverse effect on LC/140/485 as far as refiling/ RFEs later is still not clear. I'll keep looking around for more credible info regarding the same. Pls point out of you guys know of any.
Thanks again in advance.
The article here from Murthy specifies the solution in a different way and doesn't mention the need of filing LC or 140 again if the LC was properly filed as roving employee. Will have to confirm with attorney. Hope this would help ppl in similar situations.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_svcupd.html
I-485 Filing for Roving Employees
�MurthyDotCom
The USCIS indicated that, if a roving employee's I-140 petition is filed with Service Center A where the company is headquartered, but the employee moves to Service Center B's jurisdiction before the I-485 is filed, the employee may file the I-485 with either Service Center A or Service Center B. The USCIS also noted, however, that if the I-140 petition is filed at Service Center A, and then the I-485 is filed with Service Center B, the I-485 must be held until the I-140 is adjudicated. It is not clear if this means no action will be taken or if it simply cannot be approved until the I-140 petition is adjudicated. Roving employees are those who do not have fixed work sites, but can be moved from location to location, depending upon the needs of the employer. This is common with IT contractors. The safer approach would be to file the I-140 petition and the I-485 application in the same Service Center to avoid additional delays or the need to transfer the file from one Service Center to another.
In this instance when ever a consultant or "roving employee" moves to another city/state an LCA amendment is to be filed to accomodate USCIS rules. Whether this would have any adverse effect on LC/140/485 as far as refiling/ RFEs later is still not clear. I'll keep looking around for more credible info regarding the same. Pls point out of you guys know of any.
Thanks again in advance.
more...
H1B-GC
07-15 02:14 PM
All,
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Congrats Bud! Can you Tell us when did you apply for the consular Process and ur I-485 date ???
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Congrats Bud! Can you Tell us when did you apply for the consular Process and ur I-485 date ???
Life2Live
02-29 01:34 PM
mate have you heard of thread hijacking? anyways looks like you have a weird one...when you say "resubmitted" it seems like they have lost your application once before as well? How are they accepting 485 application for you? what category are you in and whats your pd?
Filed when date was current, it returned back by USCIS error. Resubmitted with the evidence on Nov along with the USCIS letter. Is that clarify ur doubt.
Filed when date was current, it returned back by USCIS error. Resubmitted with the evidence on Nov along with the USCIS letter. Is that clarify ur doubt.
more...
cool_guy_onnet1
06-01 01:28 PM
New Immigration Bill Amendment Could Help Keep Foreign Tech Workers In U.S.
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
2010 Cintia Dicker was photographed
GcSTART1
09-01 02:13 PM
You may not use AC-21 AOS portability for future employment green cards. This is because the start date of employment on your AC-21 letter(from I assume your current employer) should be 180 days after filing of your future employment 485. Since you have been working for your current employer prior to that - USCIS will deny your 485
I a in similar situation My I 140 is approved from previous employer (company A) if the employer agrees to go forward with I 485 , Can I still work for Compnay B and use Ac21.
For AC21 does the jobs exactly have to match with the technoligies mentioned in labor , Or a generic job descirption of Software developer will be taken in to considerarion.
I a in similar situation My I 140 is approved from previous employer (company A) if the employer agrees to go forward with I 485 , Can I still work for Compnay B and use Ac21.
For AC21 does the jobs exactly have to match with the technoligies mentioned in labor , Or a generic job descirption of Software developer will be taken in to considerarion.
more...
maverick_joe
05-05 10:07 AM
I totally agree, but as if there isnt a backlog at I-140 right now!! its been more than an year since I filed my I-140 ..I see a couple of LUDs but no approval in sight!
Does anyone else have the same story? I-140 pending for 12+ months now(transfered from NSC to TSC last month).
Years before, the back log was at Labor Stage, then when PERM Labor came into existance, the back log was at 485 stage, now with non-concurrent filing I think the I 140 will get backlogged.
Does anyone else have the same story? I-140 pending for 12+ months now(transfered from NSC to TSC last month).
Years before, the back log was at Labor Stage, then when PERM Labor came into existance, the back log was at 485 stage, now with non-concurrent filing I think the I 140 will get backlogged.
hair Cintia Dicker. Vol. 1.
pa_arora
07-18 07:22 PM
1) I think you can file EAD /AP even if you dont have a AOS receipt. Can someone comment on this?
2) What all docs are required for filing EAD & AP?
2) What all docs are required for filing EAD & AP?
more...
santb1975
02-14 11:02 PM
We need participation. We know we have committed people in our group
hot cintia dicker gallery
kumarh1b
01-28 05:16 PM
Can some please advice me how to proceed further Please find the denial notice for your reference. All your inputs means a lot to me. Please help me and guide in proper direction.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
on Nov 19,2009, the petitioner responded by submitting a copy of a Contract or consulting Services agreement betwwen the petitioner and another software consulting firm, Company X-Which will further Contract the benificiary's services with other firms needing computer related positions to complete thier projects - to show that the petitioner has work for the beneficiary.
However, without valid contracts between CompanyX and the actual end-client firm ultimately involved with the eneficiary's computer related duties, the evidence does not establish the work to be completed; that the duties to be performed are those of a systems administrator and thus a specialty occupation Position and that the work will be avilable for the beneficiary.
The present record fails to demonstrate the specific duties the beneficiary would perform under contract for petitioners clients.The court in defensorv.meissner,201F.3d 384 (5th cir.2000) held that for purposes of determining whether apreferred positions is a specialty occupation,a petitioner acting ina similar manner as the present petitioner is merely a "token employer", while the entity for which the services are to be performed is the "more relevant employer". the defensor court recognized that evidence of the client companies job requirements is critical where the work to be performed is for an entity other than the petitioner. Accordingly, the court held that the legacy immigration and Naturalization service ( Service now CIS) had reasonably interpreted the Act and regulations to require that a petitioner produce evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation on the basis of the requirements imposed by the entities using the beneficiary's services.
As Such, the petitioner has not established that the duties of the proferred position for the beneficiary require a speciality occupation and that it has sufficient work for the required priod of intended employment. There for the beneficiary is ineligible for classificationas a specialty occupation worker.
Pursuant to INA 291, the burden of the proof in these proceedings rests solely with the petitioner. Here that burden has been met.
Consequently, the petiton is hereby denied.
more...
house Cintia Dicker American Eagle
hopefulgc
07-13 11:49 AM
in suits .. we might look like a funeral protest rally.
dress formals.. but leave out the suit.
dress formals.. but leave out the suit.
tattoo Cintia Dicker American Eagle
purplehazea
06-11 01:00 PM
This is a weak president making rhetorics which never pan out. He knows his time has come to step out and this is only an attempt to use his left over strength. Honestly the president no longer enjoys support of his own party members and this is only rhetoric. There is just not enough time to move this through senate, house and then agree on it all.
more...
pictures Cintia dicker wall paper
naresh515
09-24 05:52 PM
Below is one of the .....link that can scare any one who is planning on visiting mexico....
Given 221g administrative processing in Matamoros, Mexico - Topic Powered by Infopop (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4724019812&m=3631066902)
I have changed my plan from getting h1b renewal stamping from matamoros to INDIA..
Given 221g administrative processing in Matamoros, Mexico - Topic Powered by Infopop (http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4724019812&m=3631066902)
I have changed my plan from getting h1b renewal stamping from matamoros to INDIA..
dresses cintia dicker swimsuit
miami75
07-03 11:47 PM
In Miami, as my nickname
more...
makeup cintia dicker model.
akhilmahajan
11-15 10:54 AM
We (3 of us from the PA state chapter) had a meeting with Congressman Joe Sastak's office staff in Media, PA.
The staff member was completely unaware of our issues (other than, FBI name check takes long time and USCIS processing is slow). However, she was eager to understand our problems.
She recommended that we should meet the office staff in DC since they handle issues related to legislations.
Thats great u met the congressman, I am telling you, politicians are not aware of our problems. For them legal immigration is working great and it does not needs to be bothered.
We need to keep on meeting the politicians and highlighting our problems over and over again.
Meetign them once is not a solution, we need to keep on following with them. This issue has to be highlighted again and again.
Lets get together and try to highlight or issues and hardships being faced by us.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
The staff member was completely unaware of our issues (other than, FBI name check takes long time and USCIS processing is slow). However, she was eager to understand our problems.
She recommended that we should meet the office staff in DC since they handle issues related to legislations.
Thats great u met the congressman, I am telling you, politicians are not aware of our problems. For them legal immigration is working great and it does not needs to be bothered.
We need to keep on meeting the politicians and highlighting our problems over and over again.
Meetign them once is not a solution, we need to keep on following with them. This issue has to be highlighted again and again.
Lets get together and try to highlight or issues and hardships being faced by us.
GO IV GO. TOGETHER WE CAN.
girlfriend Cintia Dicker who is a L#39;Oreal
snathan
01-22 04:22 PM
Hi,
My H1B extension got denied, I have n't got the denial notice yet. Can someone please advice what options do i have with out going out of status? and how long i can stay in this country?. My current I94 expired in sept 2009.
Please advice.
Whats the reason for denial...
My H1B extension got denied, I have n't got the denial notice yet. Can someone please advice what options do i have with out going out of status? and how long i can stay in this country?. My current I94 expired in sept 2009.
Please advice.
Whats the reason for denial...
hairstyles Cintia Dicker
permfiling
01-18 10:47 AM
If it is a big company, the lawyer fees is not small, they charge about 15K for the whole process and if they add liquidation damages(marketing efforts), it might be bigger.
Talk to them if you have not started work, you might just have to pay the H1B fees
I dont think it is reasonable amount if it is 15k then why the employer will bother for a H1 in the first place in this volatile economy...I think it is around 4000k etc
Talk to them if you have not started work, you might just have to pay the H1B fees
I dont think it is reasonable amount if it is 15k then why the employer will bother for a H1 in the first place in this volatile economy...I think it is around 4000k etc
ck_b2001
12-12 11:33 AM
I got only 2 copies of AP from TSC. I might have to go to India multiple times in coming months (more that 2). Will the POE officer take the original AP on each entry? Is there any USCIS/CBP reference/guidelines that instructs the POE officer to take the copies and leave the orignals with us? Any help appriciated
Thanks
Give them one orginal. Subsequent trips, just tell them that you have only one original and they will make copies. Some body posted a memo but i am telling you from my personal experience that they do not insist for original if you dont want to give them one.
Thanks
Give them one orginal. Subsequent trips, just tell them that you have only one original and they will make copies. Some body posted a memo but i am telling you from my personal experience that they do not insist for original if you dont want to give them one.
iad2ead
02-10 05:56 PM
Weigh in with % raise and take decision. If its around 15%-20% raise with
good benefits etc then move..
cheers
Iad
good benefits etc then move..
cheers
Iad
No comments:
Post a Comment