Raju
02-22 06:06 PM
Hello everyone,
I have a question abt the recent contributions. Of late i have seen a SHARP drop in contributions. Have we reached a plateau now, or are the contributions not updated live?
Also i have a question abt what the agreement is with QGA. Do they do nothing till we pay the $200k or do they do things in installments (like our immigration lawyers ;)). A lot of non members, but possibly potential contributors keep asking me abt the same. If the board can answer this question i would appreciate it. If you do not want to post that info on here, please send me a Private Message.
Why don't we sell some advertising space on immigrationvoice.org
I have a question abt the recent contributions. Of late i have seen a SHARP drop in contributions. Have we reached a plateau now, or are the contributions not updated live?
Also i have a question abt what the agreement is with QGA. Do they do nothing till we pay the $200k or do they do things in installments (like our immigration lawyers ;)). A lot of non members, but possibly potential contributors keep asking me abt the same. If the board can answer this question i would appreciate it. If you do not want to post that info on here, please send me a Private Message.
Why don't we sell some advertising space on immigrationvoice.org
wallpaper WWE Kelly Kelly quot;Bombshellquot;
bazuka6
09-01 11:41 AM
I-140 and I-485 are always for future employment. Current employment only assures that employer has future permanent employment on your GC approval (employment on H1 is supposed to be temporary). There is nothing to stop you from working anywhere (or not working at all) until you get GC, at which time sponsoring employer is obligated to give you a job (for which he got LC and I-140 approved), and you are obligated to work for him. If AOS is not approved within 180 days, AC21 can be applied leaving no obligation to work for sponsoring employer.
BTW, I-140 is an employer filing. They are expected to pay for it. Since July 07 it is illegal for employers to ask employees to pay immigration related fees (or ask to fill a bond to work for certain period).
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
BTW, I-140 is an employer filing. They are expected to pay for it. Since July 07 it is illegal for employers to ask employees to pay immigration related fees (or ask to fill a bond to work for certain period).
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
pmat
04-10 04:32 PM
I don't get what caused the sudden spike in the Master's quota. Earlier it used to be open for at least 15 days... Can it be because of increase in number of international students or people loosing in previous year lotteries going for Masters??? I seriously believe that H1B visa program needs reform - a valid job offer (read project for consultancies) must be necessary for applying AND a joining date within 2 months of starting FY. This is true madness going on.
2011 women wwe
new_horizon
05-07 08:36 AM
I don't think you should make it a big deal. I know it hurts you and your family to see PD question you, but they were doing their job based on someone's complaint. Moreover you don't want to complicate matters, and put you in the spotlight for nothing.
I am sure the gods will be more forgiving on these ignorant officers, and so should you.
I am sure the gods will be more forgiving on these ignorant officers, and so should you.
more...
sparky123
07-18 02:12 PM
We're running out of time. Any timely suggestions would be much appreciated.
Please help to expedite Atlanta center.
We just want to get ours filed too and join the rest of the gang in celebration :p
Please help to expedite Atlanta center.
We just want to get ours filed too and join the rest of the gang in celebration :p
Nil
11-09 01:58 PM
Done!
I would have love to see a section to show that we are law-abiding and the contribution of our family to our community and the economy. For instance my son has graduated college and now working, paying taxes and contributing to the US economy. And I am sure that most of you here who have college age kids are sending them to colleges and sometimes even paying out-of-state tuition to boot.
Thank You for filling in and for your suggestion.
Have you filled some details in the section of "Any other way you have contributed to the American Economy / Community." in the survey?
I would have love to see a section to show that we are law-abiding and the contribution of our family to our community and the economy. For instance my son has graduated college and now working, paying taxes and contributing to the US economy. And I am sure that most of you here who have college age kids are sending them to colleges and sometimes even paying out-of-state tuition to boot.
Thank You for filling in and for your suggestion.
Have you filled some details in the section of "Any other way you have contributed to the American Economy / Community." in the survey?
more...
nashdel
08-07 11:09 PM
Mine approved August 2nd, Wife`s pending. May be this is one of the administrative fixes from USCIS! As primary on EAD I would have to Work in same job classification, can not stay here for long without work or open a new business. But spouse on EAD can do either one of those per my knowledge. They can allot visa number to another primary. I do not think this is the reasoning from USCIS and there has to be some other reason though such as security check. I wonder if it is smart for them to allot visa numbers to primary and secondary in 2:1 ratio. Will ease problems for lot of people.
2010 WWE Women#39;s Champion
sac-r-ten
02-26 04:56 PM
Sorry for your situation. Its better to look for H1 transfer soon. Also expose such body shopper here, so that future H1B are aware of such dingy fly by night operators.
Nothing more anybody can do here on this forum, because everyone is sitting tight and holding on to their seats in this economy.
Good luck man.
Nothing more anybody can do here on this forum, because everyone is sitting tight and holding on to their seats in this economy.
Good luck man.
more...
rockstart
05-19 03:40 PM
Its not 40,000 labor or 140's dude every GC is minimum 2 (applicant + spouse) in some cases if you add children then it can consume 3-4 visa's from the quota and that is what is making the line even more longer.
If I assume that every year EB3-India gets 5000 GC-Visa. From 2001 - 2008 Total = 40,000 EB3-India Visas
Is number of applications in 2001 and 2002 is > 40,000.
Its very hard to believe.
If I assume that every year EB3-India gets 5000 GC-Visa. From 2001 - 2008 Total = 40,000 EB3-India Visas
Is number of applications in 2001 and 2002 is > 40,000.
Its very hard to believe.
hair Wwe Divas
shaikhshehzadali
07-16 07:16 PM
Lets not count the chickens before they are hatched. Its entirely plausible that if anything favourable comes up, its due to combined efforts. Lets not fight out yet, as if we havent seen anything concrete yet.
cheers
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
cheers
It's pretty strange..I really don't understand...why the entire credit is either being given to IV...or for that matter to AILA/AILF....Everyone has contributed....
People about to file I-485 have spread the word to everyone abt the injustice done to them...whereas each organization has done its own thing...
I won't blame or taunt AILA/AILF....because the idea of class lawsuit itself would have scared a lot of people in USCIS.....that also coming from legal organization...And filing a lawsuit takes time...there r lot of things to be considered..
more...
andycool
04-23 02:49 PM
I am employeed in IT consultancy, and wants to change my employement as a permenent employee of the client.
When i told this to my employeer he is telling me that he can file a lawsuite against my Client(New Employeer) on the bases of Small Business Administantion laws, stated below
Although the contract does not specifically state that the client cannot hire the contractor (you) on a permanent job, it also does not state that the client can. Current Employeer comes under the category of the 'Small Business Administration' under the State and the Federal Governments. Both governments fully support the growth and looks after the interests of small businesses in the country. They have always done it and are even more supportive lately as a result of the struggle small businesses are undergoing in these bad economic times. I have been advised by the company attorney that I contracted you to the client purely on professional and ethical grounds for the benefit of Current Employeer business. If a giant company like Client just takes you away to their advantage, it may not be looked upon favorably by a small business court.
Below is what is in the contract between my Employeer and Client.
1. This agreement is for the sole purposes of providing the services of the Contractor’s employee XXX to (Client).
2. Contractor will be an independent contractor of Company and will work on a Client assignment.
3. Company will pay $XX.00 per hour to Contractor for all the hours of work and expenses approved by Client.
4. All time and expenses should be entered into client’s system and should be approved by the concerned manager or project manager.
5 Company will not pay contractor for any time and expenses not authorized and not approved by Client.
6. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the quality of work performed.
7. Payment terms shall be XX days net and will be made on a bi-weekly basis.
8. The start date and the length of assignment will be determined by Client, and Company shall let the Contractor know in writing before the date on which the consultant starts working for the Client.
9. Contractor reserves the right to offer consultant’s services to other clients until such time the Company and the Contractor executes this agreement as well as a project work order.
10. This is the only agreement between the Contractor and the Company. Changes can be made in writing only and have to be signed by both parties to be effective.
11. This agreement is subject to the laws of the State of Texas.
12. Either party can terminate this contract by giving 2 week’s written notice, via email or physical mail. The notifying party must obtain proof of delivery of such notification to the other party.
Can any one tell if there is any possibility of that
I think your Employer is trying to scare you ...:)
When i told this to my employeer he is telling me that he can file a lawsuite against my Client(New Employeer) on the bases of Small Business Administantion laws, stated below
Although the contract does not specifically state that the client cannot hire the contractor (you) on a permanent job, it also does not state that the client can. Current Employeer comes under the category of the 'Small Business Administration' under the State and the Federal Governments. Both governments fully support the growth and looks after the interests of small businesses in the country. They have always done it and are even more supportive lately as a result of the struggle small businesses are undergoing in these bad economic times. I have been advised by the company attorney that I contracted you to the client purely on professional and ethical grounds for the benefit of Current Employeer business. If a giant company like Client just takes you away to their advantage, it may not be looked upon favorably by a small business court.
Below is what is in the contract between my Employeer and Client.
1. This agreement is for the sole purposes of providing the services of the Contractor’s employee XXX to (Client).
2. Contractor will be an independent contractor of Company and will work on a Client assignment.
3. Company will pay $XX.00 per hour to Contractor for all the hours of work and expenses approved by Client.
4. All time and expenses should be entered into client’s system and should be approved by the concerned manager or project manager.
5 Company will not pay contractor for any time and expenses not authorized and not approved by Client.
6. Contractor shall be solely responsible for the quality of work performed.
7. Payment terms shall be XX days net and will be made on a bi-weekly basis.
8. The start date and the length of assignment will be determined by Client, and Company shall let the Contractor know in writing before the date on which the consultant starts working for the Client.
9. Contractor reserves the right to offer consultant’s services to other clients until such time the Company and the Contractor executes this agreement as well as a project work order.
10. This is the only agreement between the Contractor and the Company. Changes can be made in writing only and have to be signed by both parties to be effective.
11. This agreement is subject to the laws of the State of Texas.
12. Either party can terminate this contract by giving 2 week’s written notice, via email or physical mail. The notifying party must obtain proof of delivery of such notification to the other party.
Can any one tell if there is any possibility of that
I think your Employer is trying to scare you ...:)
hot wwe wallpapers women.
gc_in_30_yrs
11-12 12:52 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?
sure. i will PM you.
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?
sure. i will PM you.
more...
house pictures desktop wallpapers women. wallpaper women. house wallpaper woman.
ItIsNotFunny
12-03 12:03 PM
Bump ^^^^
tattoo on WWE women championship
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...
pictures wallpaper women. pd052009. 05-10 11:47 AM. Wondering whether the people who
ItIsNotFunny
12-03 05:40 PM
Bump ^^^^
Keep pledging. We need to make this happen.
Keep pledging. We need to make this happen.
dresses images hd wallpapers women. hd wallpaper women. hd wallpaper women.
webm
04-21 01:24 PM
I got the Card Production Ordered e-mail today. No LUD even last night at 1 Am. Only one LUD today. My case is processed at Texas service center. And my receipt date is not with in their processing times.
Good luck to everyone.
Congrats!! dude...:) really a magic...
-----------------------
EB3-I Oct 1,2001
485 RD June,2007 --TSC (waiting/hope)
Good luck to everyone.
Congrats!! dude...:) really a magic...
-----------------------
EB3-I Oct 1,2001
485 RD June,2007 --TSC (waiting/hope)
more...
makeup super Diesel+wwe+wallpaper
ash0210
06-28 04:15 PM
You already goofed with Independence day of India..Now you are eyeing on Geeta...!!
Oh man, I am enjoying...!!!
Didn't you earn all the dollars in this country? Then where is the pain man? Remember Geeta --- Jo liye Yehin pe liye, Jo diya yahin pe diya (Whatever I got I got here, Whatever I gave, I gave here)....so think that and write checks to Lawyer, Doctor, USCIS. I hope Geeta will reduce your pain.
Oh man, I am enjoying...!!!
Didn't you earn all the dollars in this country? Then where is the pain man? Remember Geeta --- Jo liye Yehin pe liye, Jo diya yahin pe diya (Whatever I got I got here, Whatever I gave, I gave here)....so think that and write checks to Lawyer, Doctor, USCIS. I hope Geeta will reduce your pain.
girlfriend wallpaper women. hd wallpaper
IfYouSeekAmy
01-11 03:43 PM
I disagree. DV may not have relevance to you but to a person who does not have an advance degree but still would like to come here to live,work and have a better standard of life it is still VERY relevant. Remember that this country was built by IMMIGRANTS not neccessarily by immigrants with advanced degrees.
NO co-sponsors. This bill is going nowhere, even though I will jump with joy if it is passed. DV has no relevance right now and the country is diverse enough. Good idea to eliminate DV and add that to EB, but not going to happen. This congress is going to be a crab jar, one climbing up and others pulling down... nothing will get done.
NO co-sponsors. This bill is going nowhere, even though I will jump with joy if it is passed. DV has no relevance right now and the country is diverse enough. Good idea to eliminate DV and add that to EB, but not going to happen. This congress is going to be a crab jar, one climbing up and others pulling down... nothing will get done.
hairstyles defeated Women#39;s Champion
wandmaker
04-04 01:34 PM
I work as a software engineer in India and the US branch of my company has filed a L1-B petition by September 2008. The petition got denied by Nov 18, 2008 stating that I don't possess "specialized knowledge". Knowing that I am the only person who possesses knowledge of one of the company's product, we filed an appeal to re-consider by Dec 18, 2008.
The USCIS moved the case to AAO by Feb 9, 2009. After which there is no status change. The status of the case as reported by the USCIS web site is:
Application Type: I290B, NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER
Current Status: Appeal/Motion/Certification sent to Administrative Appeals Office for review.
Two months have passed by and I don't know how much more time it is going to take. Can someone please tell me how long this process is going to take?
Should we just withdraw this appeal and re-file again? In the meantime can I opt a B1 and work there a few months until the L1-B is approved?
If your resume portraits a product customization or support then in the USCIS eyes, you do not posses specialized skills.... Additionally, The initial evidence (including resume) that your company has submitted is not sufficient enough to prove that you posses that specialized skills. Your company also has a base in the US so the availability of US worker in the same skill is very much possible with in the company - Hence, USCIS denied your L1. IMHO, your appeal may not be fruitful....
The USCIS moved the case to AAO by Feb 9, 2009. After which there is no status change. The status of the case as reported by the USCIS web site is:
Application Type: I290B, NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE COMMISSIONER
Current Status: Appeal/Motion/Certification sent to Administrative Appeals Office for review.
Two months have passed by and I don't know how much more time it is going to take. Can someone please tell me how long this process is going to take?
Should we just withdraw this appeal and re-file again? In the meantime can I opt a B1 and work there a few months until the L1-B is approved?
If your resume portraits a product customization or support then in the USCIS eyes, you do not posses specialized skills.... Additionally, The initial evidence (including resume) that your company has submitted is not sufficient enough to prove that you posses that specialized skills. Your company also has a base in the US so the availability of US worker in the same skill is very much possible with in the company - Hence, USCIS denied your L1. IMHO, your appeal may not be fruitful....
raju123
07-08 05:06 PM
I don't know the thinking of some people. immigration-law has nicely covered flower campaign. What is the reason to criticize?
We have very fewwwwwww friends for our cause. Mathew Oh is one of them. Do you guys want to loose few friends???? Are we going to win any battle without others support???
Please delete your negative comments and I request not to do any negative comments for like minded organization or person.
We have very fewwwwwww friends for our cause. Mathew Oh is one of them. Do you guys want to loose few friends???? Are we going to win any battle without others support???
Please delete your negative comments and I request not to do any negative comments for like minded organization or person.
kola
05-08 01:09 PM
Thanks every one.I have to just wait and see how my 140 goes
No comments:
Post a Comment