gc_rip
07-05 09:20 AM
Hi,
I am frustrated because been in US for more than 10 years, but still don't have GC. With my current PD (Feb 05, EB3-India) expected to the GC by Oct 2023.
My GC sponsor company also holds my H1B, and applied for 10th year extension just now.
I have an offer from a Company but for India operations. The position is in India, and salary will be paid in Indian Rupees. Is there a way I can continue my GC process?
I am not sure if I can travel every year to renew my Advanced Parole (I131). Can I transfer my H1B to the parent US company, and join as an employee for Indian subsidiary? And for the business reasons only travel using the H1B stamp for the US company?
Please let me know all the possible solutions. It's very hard to abandon the GC process after a decade of wait. At the same time it is impossible for me to keep waiting for another 12 years for the GC while the kids are growing fast, and already resisting the idea of going to India. I want to avoid the forceful exit from USA in future.
Appreciate all your helpful ideas.
Thanks,
I am frustrated because been in US for more than 10 years, but still don't have GC. With my current PD (Feb 05, EB3-India) expected to the GC by Oct 2023.
My GC sponsor company also holds my H1B, and applied for 10th year extension just now.
I have an offer from a Company but for India operations. The position is in India, and salary will be paid in Indian Rupees. Is there a way I can continue my GC process?
I am not sure if I can travel every year to renew my Advanced Parole (I131). Can I transfer my H1B to the parent US company, and join as an employee for Indian subsidiary? And for the business reasons only travel using the H1B stamp for the US company?
Please let me know all the possible solutions. It's very hard to abandon the GC process after a decade of wait. At the same time it is impossible for me to keep waiting for another 12 years for the GC while the kids are growing fast, and already resisting the idea of going to India. I want to avoid the forceful exit from USA in future.
Appreciate all your helpful ideas.
Thanks,
wallpaper Steven Tyler and Cha-Ka
NewToImmigrationVoice
04-08 02:21 PM
[B]
How come EB3 is getting major share from the annual limit for last three years(2007,2006, and 2005)
Gurus : please through some light on this?
I guess EB3 applications are more than EB2.
How come EB3 is getting major share from the annual limit for last three years(2007,2006, and 2005)
Gurus : please through some light on this?
I guess EB3 applications are more than EB2.
krishmunn
03-04 12:28 PM
Also from Attorney blogs ---- If the employer does not file a new LCA (and you are not in a position to ask for it or quit the job), send a mail to Employer asking for a copy of new LCA as of first day of work in the new site. By law , it is employer's responsibility to file a new LCA and give a copy to you. If you send the mail, it is a proof that you have been trying to be on right side of law and employer is at fault.
If in future, you are held accountable for falling out of status, attorneys will probably be able to convince CIS that it is not your fault and save your case.
If in future, you are held accountable for falling out of status, attorneys will probably be able to convince CIS that it is not your fault and save your case.
2011 steven tyler monkey
thomachan72
10-04 02:42 PM
I was also at 10 and few weeks back went and changed to 12. As Tony pointed out I have been wondering about the liquidity issue if at all we were to withdraw early. They take off 30% (20 tax + 10% early termination fee). I do have a bit of company match but will not be enough to cover the 30% loss. I am thinking of cutting back to 5%.
The problem with accounts in India is the requirement to declare it here. Anyway have to quickly call them and get it back to just enough to get the employer match up to the max.
The problem with accounts in India is the requirement to declare it here. Anyway have to quickly call them and get it back to just enough to get the employer match up to the max.
more...
priderock
05-08 11:41 AM
Atleast home countries recognize our potential.
That is why it is called "Mother Land".
But in this story it looks like the locals are a little bit suspicious of returnees.
"Starting a company isn't an option for most of the 20-something haigui. Some end up unemployed and are known as haidai, "seaweed"." :(
That is why it is called "Mother Land".
But in this story it looks like the locals are a little bit suspicious of returnees.
"Starting a company isn't an option for most of the 20-something haigui. Some end up unemployed and are known as haidai, "seaweed"." :(
mihird
07-11 05:29 PM
www.congress.org is not a government site. Please do not mislead people here into thinking that this site has any affiliation to The Congress.
Dude, don't accuse me of anyting...I never said its a government site, although it does look like one - now that you are telling me that it not one - thanks for clarifying...
I think, the emails would still go to Bush/Cheney...
Dude, don't accuse me of anyting...I never said its a government site, although it does look like one - now that you are telling me that it not one - thanks for clarifying...
I think, the emails would still go to Bush/Cheney...
more...
amit_sp
07-16 09:29 AM
Hello: Here's the original article.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118455917060167397-lMyQjAxMDE3ODE0NjUxNTY5Wj.html
see Greg Siskind's blog :
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
This would be hugely disappointing news if true and, according to a source, this was NOT the deal on the table over the weekend. It also will fail to address the three crises facing USCIS:
- fighting multiple lawsuits including at least two class action matters
- staving off congressional hearings and the release of embarrassing documents
- answering press inquiries over why USCIS skipped security clearances during a time when the US is under threat of a major terrorist attack
One would hope that common sense would outweigh USCIS' anti-immigrant instincts. Like an addict that's out of control, it's time for an intervention.
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB118455917060167397-lMyQjAxMDE3ODE0NjUxNTY5Wj.html
see Greg Siskind's blog :
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
An alert reader sent me the following this morning. Miriam Jordan of the WSJ is reporting
Looking to resolve a messy immigration tangle, the U.S. government is close to announcing that it will accept at least some applications for work-based green cards that were filed by thousands of skilled workers in early July at the government's invitation and then abruptly rejected.
This would be hugely disappointing news if true and, according to a source, this was NOT the deal on the table over the weekend. It also will fail to address the three crises facing USCIS:
- fighting multiple lawsuits including at least two class action matters
- staving off congressional hearings and the release of embarrassing documents
- answering press inquiries over why USCIS skipped security clearances during a time when the US is under threat of a major terrorist attack
One would hope that common sense would outweigh USCIS' anti-immigrant instincts. Like an addict that's out of control, it's time for an intervention.
2010 house steven tyler wife. who
nk2006
05-01 07:54 AM
It does seem random. A collegue of mine sent his application on the same day as mine in Dec - his 140 is approved a month ago and I am still waiting (both are EB2; both are similar job types with same company; but he is from ROW and has 485 current dates and poor me is from a retrogessed country).
EB2 I140 @ Texas receipt date: 21st Dec 06
Notice date: 3rd Jan 07 (not sure if this is the receipt date but there is an update on this date)
Processing type: Regular
Current status: PENDING
EB2 I140 @ Texas receipt date: 21st Dec 06
Notice date: 3rd Jan 07 (not sure if this is the receipt date but there is an update on this date)
Processing type: Regular
Current status: PENDING
more...
gc_on_demand
03-25 02:16 PM
Folks,
I would like to share my success story of getting my I-485 application approved with a revoked/withdrawn I-140. We received our Green Cards and Welcome Letters in the mail yesterday. If you go through my profile, you should be able to get most of the information, but here it is anyway:
1] Company A applied for my LC followed by the I-140 application. We never got a chance to file I-485.
2] After I quite company A, they withdrew my I-140 application.
3] Company B started the process again with my labor application, followed by my new I-140 application. We didn't capture the older PD at this stage, but the A# was the same as the old one.
4] When we sent in our I-485 application, we included a letter describing that we would like to retain the older PD (we sent them a snippet of page 27 of the Field Adjudicator's Manual - Yates memo). In the interest of being transparent, we mentioned that the earlier I-140 was withdrawn by the previous employer. After an unrelated RFE, our case was finally approved last Friday (03/18).
I am sharing this information so that others who are stuck in a similar situation can use this as a datapoint in their struggle against the USCIS. I wish you all the very best in your Green Card journey.
You said you didn't get a chance to file for I 485 with company A , means you did transfer H1b. Did company A withdraw before you transfered H1b ? Did you do transfer with in initial 6 year of H1b ?
I would like to share my success story of getting my I-485 application approved with a revoked/withdrawn I-140. We received our Green Cards and Welcome Letters in the mail yesterday. If you go through my profile, you should be able to get most of the information, but here it is anyway:
1] Company A applied for my LC followed by the I-140 application. We never got a chance to file I-485.
2] After I quite company A, they withdrew my I-140 application.
3] Company B started the process again with my labor application, followed by my new I-140 application. We didn't capture the older PD at this stage, but the A# was the same as the old one.
4] When we sent in our I-485 application, we included a letter describing that we would like to retain the older PD (we sent them a snippet of page 27 of the Field Adjudicator's Manual - Yates memo). In the interest of being transparent, we mentioned that the earlier I-140 was withdrawn by the previous employer. After an unrelated RFE, our case was finally approved last Friday (03/18).
I am sharing this information so that others who are stuck in a similar situation can use this as a datapoint in their struggle against the USCIS. I wish you all the very best in your Green Card journey.
You said you didn't get a chance to file for I 485 with company A , means you did transfer H1b. Did company A withdraw before you transfered H1b ? Did you do transfer with in initial 6 year of H1b ?
hair who is steven tyler wife
rvr_jcop
02-17 11:33 AM
Ok ..
Now I dont want to change my employer .
But my employer doent pay when I am on bench . So I may not having paystubs after March .
Will it cause any problem to H1 extention ?
Ofcourse, if H1-extension requires the last couple of pay checks, there is a possibility they would ask for the 'latest', as opposed to March pay stubs, if you apply for extension say in August. Again, if you apply for extension in April with March paystubs (within 6 months of expiry), then there is a less possibility. But you cant rule that out if they ask for latest stubs in the potential RFE in the future. So its up to you.
Now I dont want to change my employer .
But my employer doent pay when I am on bench . So I may not having paystubs after March .
Will it cause any problem to H1 extention ?
Ofcourse, if H1-extension requires the last couple of pay checks, there is a possibility they would ask for the 'latest', as opposed to March pay stubs, if you apply for extension say in August. Again, if you apply for extension in April with March paystubs (within 6 months of expiry), then there is a less possibility. But you cant rule that out if they ask for latest stubs in the potential RFE in the future. So its up to you.
more...
franklin
12-12 11:49 PM
It depends on the terms of the contract.
I think Washington is an "At Will" employment state, so no matter what a contract says, its pretty much !#*$. I'd do some research if I were you -google, get some state specific employment law advice, check your employee handbook etc.
At Will means that either side (employer or employee) can end a contract at any point, AFAIK
Employee handbook should spell it out. I guess they "could" force you to use your PTO - don't know of the legality in that.
Just my opinion, not legal advice:o
Quick search online got this:-
At Will
In Washington, employees are presumed to be "at will." At-will employees may be terminated for any reason, so long as it is not illegal. Generally, employees that work under an employment contract can only be terminated for reasons specified in the contract. In Washington, in order to overcome the at-will presumption, an employee must show that the employer made clear and unequivocal statements of job security to the employee.
The most common exception to employment-at will is for public policy. This holds that an employee is wrongfully discharged if the termination is counter to an explicit policy of the government. One example is the discharge of an employee for filing a workers' compensation claim.
Employee Handbooks
While an employer is not required by law to have an employee handbook, in most cases, it is recommended. An employee handbook provides a centralized, complete and certain record of the employer's policies and procedures. It also provides more convenient access by employees and managers. At a minimum, an employee handbook should include:
* A statement regarding the at-will employment relationship
* An equal employment opportunity statement
* A policy regarding sexual and other types of harassment in the workplace
* Internet access, e-mail, and voice mail policies
* The Family Medical Leave Act
In Washington, in limited circumstances, the at-will presumption can be overcome and a just-cause employment relationship can be created by an employee's legitimate expectations that are grounded in an employer's policy statements. The employee has to show that the employer, through the employee manual or otherwise, made representations or promises that termination would be only for just cause.
The laws regarding an employer's duties and responsibilities arising under an employee handbook are complex, and a licensed attorney should be contacted to review individual circumstances.
I think Washington is an "At Will" employment state, so no matter what a contract says, its pretty much !#*$. I'd do some research if I were you -google, get some state specific employment law advice, check your employee handbook etc.
At Will means that either side (employer or employee) can end a contract at any point, AFAIK
Employee handbook should spell it out. I guess they "could" force you to use your PTO - don't know of the legality in that.
Just my opinion, not legal advice:o
Quick search online got this:-
At Will
In Washington, employees are presumed to be "at will." At-will employees may be terminated for any reason, so long as it is not illegal. Generally, employees that work under an employment contract can only be terminated for reasons specified in the contract. In Washington, in order to overcome the at-will presumption, an employee must show that the employer made clear and unequivocal statements of job security to the employee.
The most common exception to employment-at will is for public policy. This holds that an employee is wrongfully discharged if the termination is counter to an explicit policy of the government. One example is the discharge of an employee for filing a workers' compensation claim.
Employee Handbooks
While an employer is not required by law to have an employee handbook, in most cases, it is recommended. An employee handbook provides a centralized, complete and certain record of the employer's policies and procedures. It also provides more convenient access by employees and managers. At a minimum, an employee handbook should include:
* A statement regarding the at-will employment relationship
* An equal employment opportunity statement
* A policy regarding sexual and other types of harassment in the workplace
* Internet access, e-mail, and voice mail policies
* The Family Medical Leave Act
In Washington, in limited circumstances, the at-will presumption can be overcome and a just-cause employment relationship can be created by an employee's legitimate expectations that are grounded in an employer's policy statements. The employee has to show that the employer, through the employee manual or otherwise, made representations or promises that termination would be only for just cause.
The laws regarding an employer's duties and responsibilities arising under an employee handbook are complex, and a licensed attorney should be contacted to review individual circumstances.
hot who is steven tyler wife
katakamk
07-11 03:00 PM
Yes, USCIS can raise RFE ability to pay even in I-485 stage.
more...
house who is steven tyler wife. who
reddog
04-17 12:26 PM
This is a poignant question for everyone. Any experts that know the law and psychology and the theory of standing in line please answer.
Let me also add one more question. I have a pet that I am bringing from abroad. Which line should the pet stand in? I do not want the IO at Port of entry to call my employer and ask if he tried to find US citizen pets for me .
Pets are considered cargo. They do not need visas to enter the US.
Let me also add one more question. I have a pet that I am bringing from abroad. Which line should the pet stand in? I do not want the IO at Port of entry to call my employer and ask if he tried to find US citizen pets for me .
Pets are considered cargo. They do not need visas to enter the US.
tattoo steven tyler wife
skv
08-30 05:09 PM
Congratulations, my friend! :)
more...
pictures who is steven tyler wife. who
sixburgh
06-28 04:12 PM
Read the link Immigration: EAD and AP (http://immigrationroad.com/green-card/ead-ap.php), especially the advance parole section.
"However, there is an exception for people in H, L, K or V status: you may return to the US using either an AP or a valid visa (H1, H4, L1 or L2), and it won't jeopardize your AOS application."
"However, there is an exception for people in H, L, K or V status: you may return to the US using either an AP or a valid visa (H1, H4, L1 or L2), and it won't jeopardize your AOS application."
dresses who is steven tyler wife
pom
10-13 08:30 AM
:P :P :P
more...
makeup Vandahl as Steven Tyler!
nanneh
04-30 01:29 PM
Can some one help me on this subject please......
girlfriend StevenTyler1 Steven Tyler
GCmuddu_H1BVaddu
05-19 09:03 PM
Dude snathan,
I am not responding to you for this response, I have seen your responses before.
You definetly need to consider taking this How to Communicate with Diplomacy, Tact and Credibility (http://www.amanet.org/training/seminars/How-to-Communicate-with-Diplomacy-Tact-and-Credibility.aspx)
Take it easy buddy, trying to help you....
Then whats the purpose of AP....?
I am not responding to you for this response, I have seen your responses before.
You definetly need to consider taking this How to Communicate with Diplomacy, Tact and Credibility (http://www.amanet.org/training/seminars/How-to-Communicate-with-Diplomacy-Tact-and-Credibility.aspx)
Take it easy buddy, trying to help you....
Then whats the purpose of AP....?
hairstyles who is steven tyler wife
hmehta
07-14 02:12 PM
Yes, that is partially true. But then again they have to prepare identical set of documents, paperwork for both of us - so they are charging for the amount they invest in that.
What is the lawyer charging you for your wife's application for?? If I am not mistaken all they have to do is add your wife's information alongwith your filing stating you are married and show a copy of marriage certificate as proof. Am I right here people?
What is the lawyer charging you for your wife's application for?? If I am not mistaken all they have to do is add your wife's information alongwith your filing stating you are married and show a copy of marriage certificate as proof. Am I right here people?
TheCanadian
01-01 10:27 PM
What about AS1?
reddy77
01-13 06:11 PM
Thanks Guys for taking time and replying to my questions, was able to get answers for all my queries. Thanks ...
No comments:
Post a Comment