jit15k
07-04 09:45 PM
Ramba excellent analysis. One thing has to be red carefully from the July 2nd memo from USCIS says that all 2007 EB visas has been "allocated" which is diffrent from the word " Approved" and that is the 20K visas as per Ramba.
I completely agree that we should fight to recapture the visas that were lost in last 1 years.
I completely agree that we should fight to recapture the visas that were lost in last 1 years.
wallpaper wallpaper kartun islamic. wallpaper muslimah kartun. wallpaper kartun muslim
chanduv23
04-01 09:13 AM
How come these people do not get caught during H-1 approval process or during visa stamping at consulate or maybe later during GC process?
[QUOTE=chanduv23]Thats a new trend. They go to colleges and meet a group of Indian students who are about to graduate and take them out of drinks and dinner and give a presentation about their company. Then when these students come into OPT status, they are all given food + guest house accomodation. Then they are put under intense training for 2 to 3 months and made to do some mockup projects. Then their resumes are massaged with 4 to 5 years of experience ie experience from date they graduated in the under graduation and their MS education is stripped off on their resumes.
As they have Master's degrees, they go to Mexico or Canada for stamping. Thier h1b petitions are filed based on their BS/MS degrees and project works etc. and if any gaps in education, they are filled by experience. As the come under the Master's Cap, the cap lasts longer. The massaging of resumes occurs when employer sends resumes to clients and these resumes are different from what they file for h1b.
When I was trying to reqruit a junior programmer position in my company, I found it very difficult to find the right person. All these people seemed like they had fake experience, tons and tons of resumes from Desi consulting companies , these people are well trained in answering interviews and can also confuse you during the interview.
With this growing trend, the market seems to be going a bit slow for corp to corp h1b consultants and a lot of people seem to be in this category and hiring managers are having a tough time to ascertsain the validity of the candidates.
It is disheartening that this kind of activity has become extremely normal and that people are already noticing it and it does not help solve our purpose and affects those genuine job seekers and genuine hiring managers.
There is more to this. There are consulting companies like visu consultants in India that have ties with all the low grade US universities trying to fill up their grad positions with those aspiring foreign students who can pay fee upto $6000 per semester and you see hoards of people with below average or no GRE scores (GRE will be waived for some universities) filling these positions and do odd jobs inbetween college hours to pay for their next semester and these are the people who actually take loans in their country to pay the high fee, these are the same people who join consulting companies and are hungry to get into jobs by hook or crook (resume massaging) so they they can pay off their debts.
So what is happening is a rippling effect. These days a lot of good H1bs or F1s are not coming here in big numbers because of lack of funding in research or good promising jobs in home countries. People coming through education consulting and moving to jobs through consulting companies has been on rise because of this trend
[QUOTE=chanduv23]Thats a new trend. They go to colleges and meet a group of Indian students who are about to graduate and take them out of drinks and dinner and give a presentation about their company. Then when these students come into OPT status, they are all given food + guest house accomodation. Then they are put under intense training for 2 to 3 months and made to do some mockup projects. Then their resumes are massaged with 4 to 5 years of experience ie experience from date they graduated in the under graduation and their MS education is stripped off on their resumes.
As they have Master's degrees, they go to Mexico or Canada for stamping. Thier h1b petitions are filed based on their BS/MS degrees and project works etc. and if any gaps in education, they are filled by experience. As the come under the Master's Cap, the cap lasts longer. The massaging of resumes occurs when employer sends resumes to clients and these resumes are different from what they file for h1b.
When I was trying to reqruit a junior programmer position in my company, I found it very difficult to find the right person. All these people seemed like they had fake experience, tons and tons of resumes from Desi consulting companies , these people are well trained in answering interviews and can also confuse you during the interview.
With this growing trend, the market seems to be going a bit slow for corp to corp h1b consultants and a lot of people seem to be in this category and hiring managers are having a tough time to ascertsain the validity of the candidates.
It is disheartening that this kind of activity has become extremely normal and that people are already noticing it and it does not help solve our purpose and affects those genuine job seekers and genuine hiring managers.
There is more to this. There are consulting companies like visu consultants in India that have ties with all the low grade US universities trying to fill up their grad positions with those aspiring foreign students who can pay fee upto $6000 per semester and you see hoards of people with below average or no GRE scores (GRE will be waived for some universities) filling these positions and do odd jobs inbetween college hours to pay for their next semester and these are the people who actually take loans in their country to pay the high fee, these are the same people who join consulting companies and are hungry to get into jobs by hook or crook (resume massaging) so they they can pay off their debts.
So what is happening is a rippling effect. These days a lot of good H1bs or F1s are not coming here in big numbers because of lack of funding in research or good promising jobs in home countries. People coming through education consulting and moving to jobs through consulting companies has been on rise because of this trend
gcpool
03-17 09:31 AM
EB3 to EB2 filing is not cheating. They too are waiting in line. What used to be unfair was the fact the labour clearance in a lot of states used to take years and years and some places in months. What is unfair is allowing to labour substitute. If you have been waiting for long you too can try to change to EB2. And its not cheap and convinient.
The biggest problem is interfiling from EB3 to EB2. USCIS must not allow anyone to change categories and retain old priority dates. This is nothing short of cheating ! What about the people who have been standing in line. You can't just change the rules when they suit you and get into the middle of the line. Pathetic !
The biggest problem is interfiling from EB3 to EB2. USCIS must not allow anyone to change categories and retain old priority dates. This is nothing short of cheating ! What about the people who have been standing in line. You can't just change the rules when they suit you and get into the middle of the line. Pathetic !
2011 wallpaper kartun islamik. wallpaper
av2004
06-10 04:09 PM
Sent e-mail to my senators..
more...
hpandey
06-10 12:46 PM
I think we should also work on making sure that Mr Grassley et al don't get elected to the Senate the next time so that they are not able to bring these useless racist amendments. They will only realize it when it will hurt them politically. All the H1b's and AOS people have relatives or friends who are well qualified to vote . They should encourage everyone to vote against these bigoted people .:mad:
nonimmi
03-07 04:11 PM
If AOS takes 3-4 years (read long time) USCIS will issue RFE (for EVL) anyway to re-confirm job offer - even if we dont use AC21 and change employer. That is standard procedure. So sending them employer change notification is not going to help us anyway. And if we change job multiple time during this 3-4 years sending them letters everytime may cause more RFE. But it is always better to have EVL with us if we change employer using AC21 and send them when asked.
more...
wizard20740
07-09 07:25 PM
A FBI name check does not seem to be a mandatory requirement for a GC. I think it maybe part of a "National Security Background Check" but does not seem to be a mandatory one.
Also Please see link below, which seems to indicate that precedents exist for issuing Citizenship to people without completion of background checks. These checks have to be completed within 120 days of citizenship interview, and it seems that in nearly 20% cases, people have been granted citizenship without completion of background checks because the 120 day timeline expired.
http://immigration.about.com/b/a/256020.htm
Would you mind quoting the actual law then?
Does every I-485 need FBI approval or just background check? How do you know that it needs FBI Name Check for all cases. Quote the law please.
Also Please see link below, which seems to indicate that precedents exist for issuing Citizenship to people without completion of background checks. These checks have to be completed within 120 days of citizenship interview, and it seems that in nearly 20% cases, people have been granted citizenship without completion of background checks because the 120 day timeline expired.
http://immigration.about.com/b/a/256020.htm
Would you mind quoting the actual law then?
Does every I-485 need FBI approval or just background check? How do you know that it needs FBI Name Check for all cases. Quote the law please.
2010 wallpaper kartun cinta.
americandesi
12-24 01:46 PM
Another link was provided in this link where a person listed an employer on his g-325a but he was on bench and never got paid. USCIS was trying to deny his 485 due to fraud. Fraud overrules 24k any time.
Therefore; uscis uses many different avenues to get at other aspects; especially to get you to lie, cover up, mislead in things you don't need to but inadvertently do because you think it is problematic when it really wasn't.
You're right. Here's an example on how "Out of Status" can come back and haunt you for fraud
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=9324055071&m=2331096351
Therefore; uscis uses many different avenues to get at other aspects; especially to get you to lie, cover up, mislead in things you don't need to but inadvertently do because you think it is problematic when it really wasn't.
You're right. Here's an example on how "Out of Status" can come back and haunt you for fraud
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=9324055071&m=2331096351
more...
harish
05-29 10:05 PM
Here is a cross-reference to my other post with the case updates...http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=249686&postcount=85.
Received our cards today!
Good luck to the rest of you waiting on your approvals!
Received our cards today!
Good luck to the rest of you waiting on your approvals!
hair wallpaper wallpaper kartun
jthomas
05-26 10:39 PM
I was checked by immigration authorities when i was comming from San diego to Los Angeles. Near the check post there were signs to go slow for imigration checks. One border patrol car came besides me and waved his hand to pull towards the curb. I changed my lanes and also helped the border patrol to change his lanes towards the shoulder. He got down from his car and asked me what is my status I told H1B. I showed him my ID card and told him to check my status through my ID card. He returned my ID card and let me go. (I don't know why they let me go maybe my name is spanish and my last name is british)
Just wondering what would the immigration authorities do if they catch a illegal. There are millions of illegals in Los Angeles and they also had rallies almost every year in downtown Los Angeles.
I am not going to carry my immigration document if i am within US. I never have carried during the last 7 years. At the most they would escort me to my residence which is okay for me.
J thomas
I carry my GC, passport etc even if i get out of my house to my lawn.
I also stick them to my body in a water resistant package when i dive into a swimming pool, in case a immigration nut lay waiting there. Law is law. Why can't they collect my finger print/iris scan and determine status ?
Just wondering what would the immigration authorities do if they catch a illegal. There are millions of illegals in Los Angeles and they also had rallies almost every year in downtown Los Angeles.
I am not going to carry my immigration document if i am within US. I never have carried during the last 7 years. At the most they would escort me to my residence which is okay for me.
J thomas
I carry my GC, passport etc even if i get out of my house to my lawn.
I also stick them to my body in a water resistant package when i dive into a swimming pool, in case a immigration nut lay waiting there. Law is law. Why can't they collect my finger print/iris scan and determine status ?
more...
vine93
03-18 02:14 PM
I booked for myself . Need sufficient miles for one person .He has participated last year too.
hot wallpaper kartun islamic.
nomi
12-11 02:38 PM
[QUOTE=wildvoice]
Yes, I am definitely for this idea that we should petition/ask USCIS to change the rules to allow those with approved I-140 to be able to file I-485 while their PD is not yet current even if we would pay US$5,000.:rolleyes:
[QUOTE]
Yes, I am definitely for this idea that we should petition/ask USCIS to change the rules to allow those with approved I-140 to be able to file I-485 while their PD is not yet current even if we would pay US$5,000.:rolleyes:
[QUOTE]
more...
house wallpaper kartun. wallpaper kartun pooh. wallpaper kartun pooh. toddybody
tikka
07-25 09:40 AM
WHEN: Wednesday �AUGUST 1st
LOCATION- 48th and Park Avenue
TIME: 7 pm
CT FOLKS- Grand Central is a few blocks away. Naveen handle on IV (tnite)will be coming from CT so please send him a PM.
NJ/NYC: Take E, V to 5th avenue and 53rd street and then you have to walk a few blocks!
Let's meet up and get to know each other. It would be great if you can make it!!
ALSO- PLEASE DO UPDATE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION
Thank you and enjoy the week!
LOCATION- 48th and Park Avenue
TIME: 7 pm
CT FOLKS- Grand Central is a few blocks away. Naveen handle on IV (tnite)will be coming from CT so please send him a PM.
NJ/NYC: Take E, V to 5th avenue and 53rd street and then you have to walk a few blocks!
Let's meet up and get to know each other. It would be great if you can make it!!
ALSO- PLEASE DO UPDATE YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION
Thank you and enjoy the week!
tattoo 2011 wallpaper kartun
alias
06-10 02:20 PM
Even with EAD there is a problem finding jobs today. Employers sometimes do not call you after you tell them you have EAD. If they are going to make Immigration difficult for legals do you really think having EAD or not having EAD will really count? Nobody will give job for fear of lot of legal paper work, lawyer cost and complicated rules associated with layoffs. After TARP it was tough to get jobs in financial sector even if there was no TARP restriction for that position.
Don't you guys get it?
why are you digressing from the topic in this thread? let's put aside the EAD discussion for some other time :)
Don't you guys get it?
why are you digressing from the topic in this thread? let's put aside the EAD discussion for some other time :)
more...
pictures wallpaper wallpaper kartun
jetflyer
07-02 09:31 AM
IV core may or may not support this because it is different path then what IV core is working since long.
And Yes online petitions takes more to make impact
but it doesn't hurt to try
So I am with you .....Support!
And Yes online petitions takes more to make impact
but it doesn't hurt to try
So I am with you .....Support!
dresses Wallpaper+kartun+islamik
McLuvin
03-12 01:55 PM
finally the bulletin has been posted in the DOS website...
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
more...
makeup wallpaper kartun lucu.
sunny1000
07-24 10:18 AM
my lawyer says the same thing..no employer letter needed for concurrent filing...do't know what to believe...Pappu, can you please post the link to the USCIS memo, if you have it?
Thanks much.
Thanks much.
girlfriend hairstyles wallpaper kartun
bpratap
06-10 06:24 PM
Sent to California Senators
hairstyles 2011 wallpaper kartun
gjoe
12-11 06:26 PM
If US does not benefit from giving the visas, are they doing it as a part of social service?
Social Service GC is called as Asylum and that comes with added benefits like medicaid and social security checks for a few years.
Black Hole research GC is also called EB3 GC which comes with lot of uncertanities until you really get it :) Unfortunately many of us choose this type because of our math and science background :)
Social Service GC is called as Asylum and that comes with added benefits like medicaid and social security checks for a few years.
Black Hole research GC is also called EB3 GC which comes with lot of uncertanities until you really get it :) Unfortunately many of us choose this type because of our math and science background :)
abcdefgh
01-18 12:27 PM
http://www..com/discussion-forums/dallas-backlog/1171607/#post-6787022
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
indianindian2006
07-14 06:09 PM
This is aboslutly incorrect. Dont spread false information.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
You are correct but his case could be that his employer cancelled his 140 which could damage his case more than the use of AC21 to change employers.
Here is the Q&A in USCIS memo abot changing employer before 180 days
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate
You are correct but his case could be that his employer cancelled his 140 which could damage his case more than the use of AC21 to change employers.
No comments:
Post a Comment