mayitbesoon
11-29 01:36 PM
can someone tell me how to find LUD on the online status. Thanks.
hangover 2 trailer. Teaser trailer for Hangover II
bijualex29
07-31 05:51 PM
Dear All,
Today, one of my Friend�s I-485 got returned from Mail room due to Filing fee missing.
He is 100% sure that he attached 325$+70$ filing fee along with application, he has photocopy too to prove his stand.
He is lucky, that he is re- filing it again, my question is , what happens, if the file get returned due to mail room clerks error . Can we refile again after 17th Aug,2007 ?
What proof we have to make sure that we filed properly, will USCIS honor our proof ( that is photocopy of all the document we retain ) as a proof that we filed properly.
Today, one of my Friend�s I-485 got returned from Mail room due to Filing fee missing.
He is 100% sure that he attached 325$+70$ filing fee along with application, he has photocopy too to prove his stand.
He is lucky, that he is re- filing it again, my question is , what happens, if the file get returned due to mail room clerks error . Can we refile again after 17th Aug,2007 ?
What proof we have to make sure that we filed properly, will USCIS honor our proof ( that is photocopy of all the document we retain ) as a proof that we filed properly.
hangover 2 trailer. the hangover 2 trailer. the
GCBoy786
10-08 03:54 PM
We gave for fingerprints 5 days back but our LUD on I-485 is not yet updated. Is this common?
I-485 receipts from NSC.
Most of my friends LUD is updated within 2 days of giving finger prints.
Please post your experiences.
I-485 receipts from NSC.
Most of my friends LUD is updated within 2 days of giving finger prints.
Please post your experiences.
hangover 2 trailer. Hangover 2 Movie Poster, Bradley Cooper
keepwalking
05-13 04:56 PM
My priority date becomes current on June 1st. I need to add my wife (dependent) to my green card process. Please let me know how long it takes for her to get her green card. We stay in Houston, Texas. My I-485 is with Texas processing Center.
more...
hangover 2 trailer. Hangover 2 Poster, Justin Bartha
veni001
07-06 08:53 PM
Looks like my attorney did not read 8 CFR completely before answering my question?:(
Veni001 , you are again giving the wrong information. I have just talked with my lawyer about this.
The Pd is yours in any circumstances I 140 revoked or not.(except substitution labour case and fraud case).
Veni001 , you are again giving the wrong information. I have just talked with my lawyer about this.
The Pd is yours in any circumstances I 140 revoked or not.(except substitution labour case and fraud case).
hangover 2 trailer. Like The Hangover 2 (Official
sledge_hammer
07-09 04:28 PM
What about those whose PD is 2006 or later and DID file I-485?!?
What a waste of poll!
What a waste of poll!
more...
hangover 2 trailer. hangover 2 movie trailer
outlook2
07-18 04:34 PM
Hello All
My attorney has scheduled conference call for all the AOS issues (after the yesterday's update)
All of you are welcome to listen the recorded version
details are
1-800-475-6701 access code 881306. The reply will be available after 6.30 p.m. today
Thanks IV again
PS: This 1 hr recorded discussion will answer some of the questions regarding fee hike/advantage of paying fee hike etc
My attorney has scheduled conference call for all the AOS issues (after the yesterday's update)
All of you are welcome to listen the recorded version
details are
1-800-475-6701 access code 881306. The reply will be available after 6.30 p.m. today
Thanks IV again
PS: This 1 hr recorded discussion will answer some of the questions regarding fee hike/advantage of paying fee hike etc
hangover 2 trailer. hangover 2 trailer 2011.
hazishak
08-01 11:16 AM
I know it is not the right place to put it. But I could not find any appropriate thread..............................:( :( :(
more...
hangover 2 trailer. the hangover 2 trailer. the
ajju
09-08 12:26 PM
Dear All:
Need your advice. Filed I-485 on July 5th. I-140 is approved. Working with the employer for 6 yrs. Now that I filed for final stage, my employer wants me to sign a contract voluntarily that I should stay with them for 24 months. What are my legal options in state of CA? He wants to get 20K if I leave earlier than contract term. I signed it since he threatened me to revoke I-140. Can I backout after portability law kicks in.
Thanks in advance.
Check with a good attorney like Sheela Murthy or Rajiv Khanna after 6 months... Until then you really don't have any choice... I am surprised to see that you worked for this employer for last 6 years and this is the state of your relationship... Did he paid for all the legal fees or was it paid by you??
Need your advice. Filed I-485 on July 5th. I-140 is approved. Working with the employer for 6 yrs. Now that I filed for final stage, my employer wants me to sign a contract voluntarily that I should stay with them for 24 months. What are my legal options in state of CA? He wants to get 20K if I leave earlier than contract term. I signed it since he threatened me to revoke I-140. Can I backout after portability law kicks in.
Thanks in advance.
Check with a good attorney like Sheela Murthy or Rajiv Khanna after 6 months... Until then you really don't have any choice... I am surprised to see that you worked for this employer for last 6 years and this is the state of your relationship... Did he paid for all the legal fees or was it paid by you??
hangover 2 trailer. The Hangover 2 Trailer
Canadianindian
07-06 11:25 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/06/30/DI2007063000525.html
Please post on the question on USCIS/DOS mess up, if there are enough people asking the same question then they migh answer it
This is what I asked:
Can the USCIS explain the mental, physical and financial trauma caused to 400,000 LEGAL immigrants. This illegal and reckless actions by the USCIS needs immediate attention by the law makers.
What is USCIS doing to address this 300 million dollar fiasco. We need some response and justice. Please help (www.immigrationvoice.org)
Please post on the question on USCIS/DOS mess up, if there are enough people asking the same question then they migh answer it
This is what I asked:
Can the USCIS explain the mental, physical and financial trauma caused to 400,000 LEGAL immigrants. This illegal and reckless actions by the USCIS needs immediate attention by the law makers.
What is USCIS doing to address this 300 million dollar fiasco. We need some response and justice. Please help (www.immigrationvoice.org)
more...
hangover 2 trailer. The Hangover Part 2 Trailer 2
theconfused
12-15 07:57 PM
Dear Sunny,
I will be honest to VO and there is no doubt about it. But i am wonerding if my past condition is going to pose any threat on my visa stamping.
And i am also wondering if anyone has gone with situation like mine?
My company has not applied for GC (labor) yet.
I will be honest to VO and there is no doubt about it. But i am wonerding if my past condition is going to pose any threat on my visa stamping.
And i am also wondering if anyone has gone with situation like mine?
My company has not applied for GC (labor) yet.
hangover 2 trailer. The Hangover Part II Trailer
veni001
02-03 11:16 AM
Defensive post :)
What makes you think I am suspecting the content in that article? ;)
I do not understand the problem here! First you questioned the source and then you are saying that i am suspecting the content. If i suspect the content i won't post it here at any cost.This forum is to educate the folks not to fall prey to their employer(s)/lawyer(s) promises.
if you are open for discussion we can start with the requirements for PERM form DOL and then move on with requirements for i140 with USCIS, will be a good discussion for everybody!
What makes you think I am suspecting the content in that article? ;)
I do not understand the problem here! First you questioned the source and then you are saying that i am suspecting the content. If i suspect the content i won't post it here at any cost.This forum is to educate the folks not to fall prey to their employer(s)/lawyer(s) promises.
if you are open for discussion we can start with the requirements for PERM form DOL and then move on with requirements for i140 with USCIS, will be a good discussion for everybody!
more...
hangover 2 trailer. #39;The Hangover Part II#39; trailer
gcdreamer05
01-05 04:27 PM
i woudl think the actual number porting is miniscule...
but what i dont understand is why is USCIS hiding the data..why cant they reveal the exact number of application... and at what stage they?
Even an annual release would be very helpful...:confused:
Oh yeah , talk about that, there were few posts few months ago, that the great uscis had 4-5 diconnected databases and hence they had some project they were planning to centralize their dbs so as to arrive at a number.
Now God only knows how that project is going on (as per schedule), only after that is done can we know the exact number........
Comon USCIS hire some h1b's these guys will work their ass off to finish the project on time....
but what i dont understand is why is USCIS hiding the data..why cant they reveal the exact number of application... and at what stage they?
Even an annual release would be very helpful...:confused:
Oh yeah , talk about that, there were few posts few months ago, that the great uscis had 4-5 diconnected databases and hence they had some project they were planning to centralize their dbs so as to arrive at a number.
Now God only knows how that project is going on (as per schedule), only after that is done can we know the exact number........
Comon USCIS hire some h1b's these guys will work their ass off to finish the project on time....
hangover 2 trailer. Hangover 2 Trailer
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgReCB0uOl0RSc5Q8Yzf645qwgK1bD184xKEgGEnMYoj4i42MPhdXX3-LQes2SobLwxvo_ezfDk9B12Pvr1ytfQuQtckTt97aHuWv_FaxPenC2rNahHcruF9HxHRn_a3PF4wVZS8LTdHVl5/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgReCB0uOl0RSc5Q8Yzf645qwgK1bD184xKEgGEnMYoj4i42MPhdXX3-LQes2SobLwxvo_ezfDk9B12Pvr1ytfQuQtckTt97aHuWv_FaxPenC2rNahHcruF9HxHRn_a3PF4wVZS8LTdHVl5/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
more...
hangover 2 trailer. Hangover 2 Poster, Ken Jeong
jayleno
09-23 12:32 PM
Soft LUD for me. It was so soft that it didnt even update the date.
New term: Very Soft LUD. No visible change to the naked eye, but something is cooking behind the scenes regarding your case
New term: Very Soft LUD. No visible change to the naked eye, but something is cooking behind the scenes regarding your case
hangover 2 trailer. The Hangover Part 2 Trailer
punjabi77
08-10 01:17 AM
Hi Everyone,
Dont know if anyone thought about this or not.
I know so many people have switched their previous employer who actually filed for GC.
The employer also had the GC cost deducted from the employees salary.
Now my situation is the same.
I no longer work for the previous employer and my offer letter does say that employer will cover the cost of GC.
but what actually happened is something that happened with so many people.
Now since i dont work for that employer is it appropriate to ask the employer to reimburse me the GC cost as it was mentioned in the offer letter that employer will pay for the GC processing?
BTW.. my 485 is filed and i do have my EAD
let me know if someone has more information about it.
Dont know if anyone thought about this or not.
I know so many people have switched their previous employer who actually filed for GC.
The employer also had the GC cost deducted from the employees salary.
Now my situation is the same.
I no longer work for the previous employer and my offer letter does say that employer will cover the cost of GC.
but what actually happened is something that happened with so many people.
Now since i dont work for that employer is it appropriate to ask the employer to reimburse me the GC cost as it was mentioned in the offer letter that employer will pay for the GC processing?
BTW.. my 485 is filed and i do have my EAD
let me know if someone has more information about it.
more...
hangover 2 trailer. The Hangover 2: Official
roseball
01-30 03:12 PM
I checked online for my daughter's 485 and it shows approved and document(possibly GC):eek: mailed on 12 Jan. But my status shows RFE stage. Another interesting thing is my daughter got fingerprinting for Jan 15. She has already done fingerprinting with us in Dec 07. Even if it was to be approved for my daughter how it can happen that she goes for FP on 15 Jan and they mailed document. I dont know what is going on. Any suggestions?
Since your PD is not current, I would assume the online case status of Document Production could possibly mean a finger printing notice that you received for her. Having said that, for some cases it is not unusual to receive a fingerprinting notice after I-485 approval. In such cases, though I-485 is approved and approval notice is sent, the physical card is not produced until the applicant completes the fingerprinting formalities. In your case, in my view, the online case status just refers to finger printing notice. But who knows, its USCIS and anything is possible.
Since your PD is not current, I would assume the online case status of Document Production could possibly mean a finger printing notice that you received for her. Having said that, for some cases it is not unusual to receive a fingerprinting notice after I-485 approval. In such cases, though I-485 is approved and approval notice is sent, the physical card is not produced until the applicant completes the fingerprinting formalities. In your case, in my view, the online case status just refers to finger printing notice. But who knows, its USCIS and anything is possible.
hangover 2 trailer. from The Hangover 2?
humdesi
12-21 08:30 PM
If you were born in India, EB-2 or EB-3 doesn't matter.
Absent any legislation, it is estimated both will take anywhere between 20 to 40 years to get to current date.
Good luck!
Absent any legislation, it is estimated both will take anywhere between 20 to 40 years to get to current date.
Good luck!
hangover 2 trailer. Hangover 2 Coming Soon.
GCNirvana007
09-04 02:37 PM
Guys,
Thanks for the responses...My email as you see in the first message is neither "Welcome" nor a CPO.
So am I unique....unwelcomed approval.....strange...even in this there is no standard format or routine....
SoP
:p USCIS loves you - you just get special treatment
Thanks for the responses...My email as you see in the first message is neither "Welcome" nor a CPO.
So am I unique....unwelcomed approval.....strange...even in this there is no standard format or routine....
SoP
:p USCIS loves you - you just get special treatment
coopheal
02-19 05:32 PM
Please one of you summarize handling of EAD/AP for multiple I-485s on wiki.
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS/I485_FAQ#How_does_USCIS_handles_EAD.2FAP_for_Multi ple_I-485s
Thanks,
Coopheal
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS/I485_FAQ#How_does_USCIS_handles_EAD.2FAP_for_Multi ple_I-485s
Thanks,
Coopheal
boreal
07-28 03:53 PM
I got the LUD on last year's approved AP too on 7/27..wonder why on an approved AP..(PD Jan 06)..maybe because i had applied for its renewal...or maybe a mass system update, as it occured on a Sunday. Dont think we can read anything into such LUDs..only LUD that i would believe in - 'Your 485 has been approved and you are a free man!!!' :-)
No comments:
Post a Comment