milind70
10-15 10:45 AM
Hello Gurus,
I am EB3 India with PD September 2002.
After all these years of endless waiting I am called for
an interview at the local office in Philadelphia
in Nov 26th 2007.
Here are my details:
Labour Applied: September 2002
Labour approved: September 2003
I-140/I-485 Applied: April 2004
I-140 Pproved: August 2004
Got married: August 2005
Applied I-485 for Wife: June 2007
Current Status of Wife: H1-B
Countelss EADs and APs for me and a recent EAD approval
for my wife with her AP still pending and status is still H1-B.
In the beginning of this year, I resigned from the
company who was the original sponsorer of my GC.
I then started contracting on hourly basis and worked for
a decent hourly rate for the first half of this year.
Finally I got a full time offer with decent salary and
benefits and took the job. I started working for this
job - remotely and also took up another contracting job
on an hourly basis (Got greedy as I waited too long :-))
and started working on both these jobs.
The point is - it is a different technology and not even
remotely connected to my original job where my Labour
cert was applied and approved. I was a developer
back then and with all the experience, I couldn't
continue as the pay was too low and no growth at all.
I can have a letter of future employment that
states that I have on offer in the same technology
in which my original labour was applied and approved
and that is not a problem at all.
Please advise me on how to go about it. I can
afford to pay and take the best attorney with me
to the interview - some one who is very well known in
the Philadelphia area.
Any inputs/advise are really appreciated.
IMP: Icing on the cake - my PD was mentioned wrong in
the interview notice - it says april 2004 !!
That was when my i-140 was applied and not labour.
My labour was applied in September 2002 !!!
Advise on this is also appreciated.
Thanks a lot.
I think you should be fine, just be confident dont waiver in interview.
Stick to what is on paper.
Regarding your PD it is of utmost importance that you get it corrected now
than later, I had a friend who had a PD of May 2001 but his PD was detrmined to be may 2004 his attorney raised a query and got it corrected.
I think in your case because have put your 140 date as PD since PD is usually determined at 140 stage and u have filed concurrently,make sure you bring this upto the notice of USCIS and get it corrected .
I am EB3 India with PD September 2002.
After all these years of endless waiting I am called for
an interview at the local office in Philadelphia
in Nov 26th 2007.
Here are my details:
Labour Applied: September 2002
Labour approved: September 2003
I-140/I-485 Applied: April 2004
I-140 Pproved: August 2004
Got married: August 2005
Applied I-485 for Wife: June 2007
Current Status of Wife: H1-B
Countelss EADs and APs for me and a recent EAD approval
for my wife with her AP still pending and status is still H1-B.
In the beginning of this year, I resigned from the
company who was the original sponsorer of my GC.
I then started contracting on hourly basis and worked for
a decent hourly rate for the first half of this year.
Finally I got a full time offer with decent salary and
benefits and took the job. I started working for this
job - remotely and also took up another contracting job
on an hourly basis (Got greedy as I waited too long :-))
and started working on both these jobs.
The point is - it is a different technology and not even
remotely connected to my original job where my Labour
cert was applied and approved. I was a developer
back then and with all the experience, I couldn't
continue as the pay was too low and no growth at all.
I can have a letter of future employment that
states that I have on offer in the same technology
in which my original labour was applied and approved
and that is not a problem at all.
Please advise me on how to go about it. I can
afford to pay and take the best attorney with me
to the interview - some one who is very well known in
the Philadelphia area.
Any inputs/advise are really appreciated.
IMP: Icing on the cake - my PD was mentioned wrong in
the interview notice - it says april 2004 !!
That was when my i-140 was applied and not labour.
My labour was applied in September 2002 !!!
Advise on this is also appreciated.
Thanks a lot.
I think you should be fine, just be confident dont waiver in interview.
Stick to what is on paper.
Regarding your PD it is of utmost importance that you get it corrected now
than later, I had a friend who had a PD of May 2001 but his PD was detrmined to be may 2004 his attorney raised a query and got it corrected.
I think in your case because have put your 140 date as PD since PD is usually determined at 140 stage and u have filed concurrently,make sure you bring this upto the notice of USCIS and get it corrected .
wallpaper Girls Generation Members
geniousatwork
04-13 03:26 PM
Congratulations....Hope we have more approvals.
BarneySha
07-18 08:42 AM
$320 an hr!
His 'RFE response' charges were $450!
go figure...
lotsa people are making money out of the s*ituation we are in!
His 'RFE response' charges were $450!
go figure...
lotsa people are making money out of the s*ituation we are in!
2011 Girls Generation is a
amalshe
12-09 06:13 PM
PhD in Business from an accredited US institution; currently working as Asst Prof.
more...
msyedy
02-05 02:29 PM
Is the 45 day approved labor validity Rule already in place?
Jonty ask a lawyer.... that is the best solution because no one here will be filling your application for I-140.
Jonty ask a lawyer.... that is the best solution because no one here will be filling your application for I-140.
saketkapur
03-24 03:38 PM
She will need to complete a 3 year waiver in medically underserved area or a 2 year home return before you can file for her adjustment of status(I-485).
We had faced a similar situation 3 years back and decided to go ahead with it since looking at the backlogs I am assuming with my PD of 2007 I am still way off from getting my GC.
So now my wife is completing her residency in June this year and has a waiver job lined up. Once/ If dates become current I will file for her I-485 after the waiver is complete.
If you need details then PM me.
Everyone has their own priorities and their own way of dealing with the situations.
We had faced a similar situation 3 years back and decided to go ahead with it since looking at the backlogs I am assuming with my PD of 2007 I am still way off from getting my GC.
So now my wife is completing her residency in June this year and has a waiver job lined up. Once/ If dates become current I will file for her I-485 after the waiver is complete.
If you need details then PM me.
Everyone has their own priorities and their own way of dealing with the situations.
more...
CareerHit
10-15 12:01 AM
Wow .. I did not know that this was a grey area :)
Amazing .. no one doing this?
I have a friend who does this, but he hasn't consulted a lawyer :).
Anyone who has spoken to a lawyer?
Amazing .. no one doing this?
I have a friend who does this, but he hasn't consulted a lawyer :).
Anyone who has spoken to a lawyer?
2010 Girls Generation SNSD member
desi3933
06-22 08:23 AM
I-485 can be rejected if filed with incomplete initial evidence.
Folks, it is the time for us to be more careful than even to make sure that our lawyer files I-485 correctly. With there mistake, we can really get screwed up. All they can say one word “Sorry”.
It happened to me while filing for H-1 extension, I got only one year extension, based on Labor pending whereas my I-140 was approved at that time, they refilled at no cost to me with 3 year extension.
Here in I-485, refilling will not be possible, since by the time we get the receipt notice, the date might have moved back already.
Agree.
Initial Evidence for I-485 includes
1. Copy of approved I-140 (or concurrent filing or I-140 receipt)
2. Employment Letter (for GC job)
3. Proof that person is maintaining valid status in USA since last entry in USA
Not a legal advice
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
Folks, it is the time for us to be more careful than even to make sure that our lawyer files I-485 correctly. With there mistake, we can really get screwed up. All they can say one word “Sorry”.
It happened to me while filing for H-1 extension, I got only one year extension, based on Labor pending whereas my I-140 was approved at that time, they refilled at no cost to me with 3 year extension.
Here in I-485, refilling will not be possible, since by the time we get the receipt notice, the date might have moved back already.
Agree.
Initial Evidence for I-485 includes
1. Copy of approved I-140 (or concurrent filing or I-140 receipt)
2. Employment Letter (for GC job)
3. Proof that person is maintaining valid status in USA since last entry in USA
Not a legal advice
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
more...
dingudi
03-05 01:45 PM
I found this link and it is mentioned that there are two type of appointment. I got the second type.
http://www.immigrationlinks.com/news/news418.htm
I was wondering if the ASC asks to reschedule instead of doing a walk-in again , as my search tells me that Boston ASC most likely will ask to reschedule. Can we just go to another nearest ASC (Rhode Island) or Manchester, NH which allows walk-in after the finger heals instead of waiting for the rescheduled appointment notice to be received from the original ASC. My wife has made plans to go visit her parents in next 2 weeks and we did not anticipate that such a thing would happen.
http://www.immigrationlinks.com/news/news418.htm
I was wondering if the ASC asks to reschedule instead of doing a walk-in again , as my search tells me that Boston ASC most likely will ask to reschedule. Can we just go to another nearest ASC (Rhode Island) or Manchester, NH which allows walk-in after the finger heals instead of waiting for the rescheduled appointment notice to be received from the original ASC. My wife has made plans to go visit her parents in next 2 weeks and we did not anticipate that such a thing would happen.
hair Girls Generation leader
ram_nara303
05-12 03:09 PM
I travelled through FRA last year to be precise. Never had a H1-B1 stamping on my passport. Used my AP. Sent email to german consulate prior to travel to check for transit visa. They responded that there is no need to have transit visa unless you are going out of the airport to visit(Schengen visa). So you should be good to go on AP.
more...
Lara007
01-16 10:33 PM
All the metros are crowded in India. Bangalore & Pune have more IT opportunities and have good schools.
hot Girls Generation members are
ImmiLosers
12-23 06:14 PM
Hi,
Can I apply for AC 21 and H1B Transfer (to the new employer) together so that I can maintain my H1 status plus EAD/AP?
Can I apply for AC 21 and H1B Transfer (to the new employer) together so that I can maintain my H1 status plus EAD/AP?
more...
house SNSD (aka Girls#39; Generation)
lonedesi
10-20 03:27 PM
Thank you guys for all your responses. Appreciate you letting me know your experience in this regard.
tattoo “Oh” my! Girls Generation
walker15
03-17 10:15 PM
Hi lavanyamohan and mhtahim,
Many of my friends utilized Mr.Gowda for H1B and GC. All my friends & hundreds in the same firm got GC'S without any querries.
Frankly speaking I do not have any personal relations with the company.
I used his services and felt exactly what mhtahim mentioned about Gowda. He is reasonable and professional.
All the best
Many of my friends utilized Mr.Gowda for H1B and GC. All my friends & hundreds in the same firm got GC'S without any querries.
Frankly speaking I do not have any personal relations with the company.
I used his services and felt exactly what mhtahim mentioned about Gowda. He is reasonable and professional.
All the best
more...
pictures girls generation jessica oh.
zoozee
06-11 05:56 PM
Mistake..............Now i am not able to change the title-sorry guys.
dresses SNSD / Girls#39; Generation
mk26
05-24 09:14 AM
Nobody wants to 'predict'? Or people are interested only in seeing the real data!
click below to find information you reqested:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/1331594-eb2-eb3-predictions-rather-calculations-63.html
click below to find information you reqested:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum2-retrogression-priority-dates-and-visa-bulletins/1331594-eb2-eb3-predictions-rather-calculations-63.html
more...
makeup Girl#39;s Generation, a 9-member
eb3_nepa
05-28 10:54 AM
Thanks Surabhi.
girlfriend gee girls generation members.
bluekayal
09-08 01:19 AM
approving 2 I-140s , one based on Schedule A priority date - 2006-- and then another one using the prior labor date 2004. And then when it comes to adjudication, refusing to accept the 2004 priority date.
hairstyles Name : Girls#39; Generation
mnkaushik
11-07 05:07 PM
I did use my experience in my current company for my I 140 and my I 140 has been approved. I had 2 years of exp prior to joining my company and my LC was for 4 years exp, so I used 2 years of exp from my current company. From your priority date it looks like you have applied using RIR or traditional. I think it is true for PERM that you cannot use the experience of your current company but for RIR or Traditional you can.
So your lawyer is right in saying that you can use your exp with your current company.
So your lawyer is right in saying that you can use your exp with your current company.
dce.deepak
11-08 08:30 PM
Labor needs to be applied accordingly too.. mention of masters degree and experience in job duties and posting
gcformeornot
02-03 02:14 PM
AILA/CBP Liaison Practice Alert : H-1B Admissions at Newark, NJ Airport
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 10020237 (posted Feb. 2, 2010)"
AILA CBP Liaison Committee Practice Alert
H-1B Admissions � Newark, New Jersey Airport
(2/2/2010)
The AILA U.S. Customs and Border Protection (�CBP�) Liaison Committee received reports from AILA members that CBP inspectors at the Newark, New Jersey airport port of entry were apparently assisting in an investigation involving certain H-1B nonimmigrants from India and certain H-1B petitioner companies. The inspectors� questions focused on who the individuals worked for, how their pay was computed, who paid their salary, their job duties, and what they were paid. In some cases, the individuals were subjected to expedited removal and visa cancellation.
After inquiring with CBP headquarters (�HQ�) about these incidents, the CBP Liaison Committee was advised by HQ that several of these cases involved companies under investigation by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (�ICE�) and/or U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (�USCIS�) for ongoing fraud. CBP HQ noted that they use as much advance information as possible to target specific individuals who warrant additional inspection. HQ also noted that recent enforcement cases reviewed ranged from simple documentary deficiency to visa/petition fraud. Upon an inadmissibility finding, the determination to either allow the applicant to withdraw his or her application for admission or to subject the applicant to expedited removal is based on �the totality of the circumstances and reviewed on a case by case basis.� In the Newark enforcement actions, CBP Newark worked closely with USCIS � Fraud Detection and National Security (�FDNS�) and the Department of Labor � Office of Investigations. CBP HQ stated that those questioned were offered the opportunity to contact their consulate and that CBP officers contacted the petitioner and/or current employer when clarification was needed. CBP HQ confirmed that they screen ALL employment-based visa holders to determine admissibility and ensure compliance with entry requirements.
In addition, on January 27, AILA members attending a CBP meeting in the Newark, New Jersey area were informed that a new policy has been instituted at Newark Airport. This policy involves conducting random checks for returning H-1B, L-1, and other employment-based visa holders. Based upon the initial check, if the person�s admissibility is questionable, then he or she will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview. In some cases, if CBP discovers discrepancies in previously filed petitions, then the applicant may be asked to withdraw his/her application for admission into the United States or be subject to expedited removal.
During that same local CBP meeting, attendees were advised that if CBP discovers that a returning Lawful Permanent Resident has a post-1998 conviction, the Lawful Permanent Resident may be detained. The Newark airport port of entry has adopted a mandatory detention policy for crimes that were committed after 1998. In the event that CBP cannot get a copy of the conviction record in twenty-four hours, the person may be released. The only exceptions are that CBP will release a Lawful Permanent Resident for humanitarian reasons; extenuating circumstances such as if the foreign national is traveling with children and there is no one to pick up the children; or when the person is a sole provider for United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident children. Please refer to the CBP Committee advisory as to the detention of returning Lawful Permanent Residents. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09100122).
Individuals with pending I-751 petitions returning to the United States via the Newark airport port of entry, who have a I-751 filing receipt documenting that an I-751 has been properly filed or an ADIT Legal Permanent Resident stamp, will be sent to secondary inspection for further interview to verify the validity of the I-751 Petition. It is unclear if CBP will undertake a substantive review of the I-751 Petition.
In all cases, attorneys should remind their clients to thoroughly prepare for their trip to the United States and their inspection upon application for admission by reviewing all pertinent documents to their petition and to consider carrying evidence to support the assertions made in the petition filed on their behalf by their employer. Similarly, employers must be prepared for telephone inquiries from CBP officers at ports of entry to confirm the assertions made in any nonimmigrant petition and supporting documentation. Finally, employers must be advised that the government may review information in any public venues such as websites and other media for consistency with petition content. Thus, keeping such public information accurate and current is essential.
Note the new fraud related language added to I-797 approval notices �
NOTICE: Although this application/petition has been approved, DHS reserves the right to verify the information submitted in this application, petition, and/or supporting documentation to ensure conformity with applicable laws, rules, regulations, and other authorities. Methods used for verifying information may include, but are not limited to, the review of public information and records, contact by correspondence, the Internet, or telephone, and site inspections of businesses and residences. Information obtained during the course of verification will be used to determine whether revocation, rescission, and/or removal proceedings are appropriate. Applicants, petitioners, and representatives of record will be provided an opportunity to address derogatory information before any formal proceeding is initiated.
Please do not forget to contact the CBP port director to follow up on case problems at a particular port. In addition, as needed, file complaints through the CBP complaint process referenced on InfoNet. (AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 09090364).
No comments:
Post a Comment