meridiani.planum
07-12 08:35 AM
As long as your old I140 is not withdrawn, you can file 485. I think even if it is withdrawn, there still might be a chance, check with your NEW lawyer.
if the I-140 is withdrawn, its too late to file a 485. If its not withdrawn, he can go ahead and file a 485, but would need the co-operation of that employer (employment verification letter)
if the I-140 is withdrawn, its too late to file a 485. If its not withdrawn, he can go ahead and file a 485, but would need the co-operation of that employer (employment verification letter)
wallpaper Yuri girls generation before
don_don
06-25 08:43 AM
If I were you, I would wait till it is 1st of July. What if they reject it,,u loose more time than saving!
waltz
08-24 02:05 PM
I'm sorry if this has been posted before, but the show is based on the following study:
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
************************************************
Kauffman Foundation Study Points to �Brain-Drain� of Skilled U.S. Immigrant Entrepreneurs to Home Country
Contacts:
Barbara Pruitt, 816-932-1288, bpruitt@kauffman.org, Kauffman Foundation
Tom Phillips, 212-935-4655, comptwp@aol.com, Communication Partners
More than a million skilled foreign nationals in the United States, including doctors and scientists, face mounting visa backlog
(KANSAS CITY, Mo.) Aug. 22, 2007 � More than one million skilled immigrant workers, including scientists, engineers, doctors and researchers and their families, are competing for 120,000 permanent U.S. resident visas each year, creating a sizeable imbalance likely to fuel a �reverse brain-drain� with skilled workers returning to their home country, according to a new report released today by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The situation is even bleaker as the number of employment visas issued to immigrants from any single country is less than 10,000 per year with a wait time of several years.
�The United States benefits from having foreign-born innovators create their ideas in this country,� said Vivek Wadhwa, Wertheim fellow with the Harvard Law School and executive in residence at Duke University. �Their departures would be detrimental to U.S. economic well-being. And, when foreigners come to the United States, collaborate with Americans in developing and patenting new ideas, and employ those ideas in business in ways they could not readily do in their home countries, the world benefits.�
Conducted by researchers at Duke University, New York University and Harvard University, the study is the third in a series of studies focusing on immigrants� contributions to the competitiveness of the U.S. economy. Earlier research revealed a dramatic increase in the contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property over an eight-year period.
In this study, "Intellectual Property, the Immigration Backlog, and a Reverse Brain-Drain," researchers offer a more refined measure of this rise in contributions of foreign nationals to U.S. intellectual property and seek to explain this increase with an analysis of the immigrant-visa backlog for skilled workers. The key finding from this research is that the number of skilled workers waiting for visas is significantly larger than the number that can be admitted to the United States. This imbalance creates the potential for a sizeable reverse brain-drain from the United States to the skilled workers� home countries.
The earlier studies, �America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs� and �Entrepreneurship, Education and Immigration: America�s New Immigrant Entrepreneurs, Part II,� documented that one in four engineering and technology companies founded between 1995 and 2005 had an immigrant founder. Researchers found that these companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Indian immigrants founded more companies than the next four groups (from the United Kingdom, China, Taiwan and Japan) combined.
Furthermore, these companies� founders tended to be highly educated in science, technology, math and engineering-related disciplines, with 96 percent holding bachelor�s degrees and 75 percent holding master�s or PhD degrees.
Among key findings in the most recent report:
Foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-inventors in 25.6 percent of international patent applications filed from the United States in 2006. This represents an increase from 7.6 percent in 1998.
Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by a number of large, multi-national companies, including Qualcomm (72 percent), Merck & Co. (65 percent), General Electric (64 percent), Siemens (63 percent) and Cisco (60 percent). Forty-one percent of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals as inventors or co-inventors.
In 2006, 16.8 percent of international patent applications from the United States had an inventor or co-inventor with a Chinese-heritage name, representing an increase from 11.2 percent in 1998. The contribution of inventors with Indian-heritage names increased to 13.7 percent from 9.5 percent in the same period.
The total number of employment-based principals in the employment-based categories and their family members waiting for legal permanent residence in the United States in 2006 was estimated at 1,055,084. Additionally, there are an estimated 126,421 residents abroad also waiting for employment-based U.S. legal permanent residence, adding up to a worldwide total of 1,181,505.
Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, the authors find that, in 2003, approximately one in five new legal immigrants in the United States and about one in three employment-based new legal immigrants either planned to leave the United States or were uncertain about remaining. The authors had no data on how many foreign nationals have actually returned to their homelands.
�Given that the U.S. comparative advantage in the global economy is in creating knowledge and applying it to business, it behooves the country to consider how we might adjust policies to reduce the immigration backlog, encourage innovative foreign minds to remain in the country, and entice new innovators to come,� said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
About the research team
For more information about the Global Engineering and Entrepreneurship research at Duke University, visit http://www.globalizationresearch.com; visit http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/lwp/ to learn about Harvard Law�s Labor and Worklife Program; and visit http://www.nyu.edu/ for more information about New York University.
Read the report
2011 Girls Generation Sunny: that#39;s
oliTwist
01-10 08:46 PM
I had gone through the layoff thing during 2001-2002 time. Maybe, I might be mistaken. But I feel that time it was even worse.
more...
sledge_hammer
05-14 05:57 PM
^^^^
ganam
10-03 10:07 PM
Thank you.
more...
cjain
11-13 03:10 PM
From the Aytes memo:
Question 1
How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer:
If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it’s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A above.
Hope this clears stuff up. RFE's are generally issued for ability to pay issues. If all's clear on that front, there should simply be no issue
Question 1
How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140 petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending 180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer:
If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it’s merits. Then adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A above.
Hope this clears stuff up. RFE's are generally issued for ability to pay issues. If all's clear on that front, there should simply be no issue
2010 tattoo girls generation gee.
vinayskadam
11-29 08:18 PM
Thanks for the Reply and I had called up the USCIS and they had asked me to send a letter for correcting the information. I have sent the letter now along with the supporting documents. Hope evverything goes fine.
more...
shreekarthik
08-08 11:43 AM
Basically, you get 1 credit for a quarter of year, so 4 credits a year. If you have lived and worked 8 full years and 6 months for the year when you came and 6 months the year you depart from the country, you will,be fine. So bottom line is 40 quarters i.e. 10 Years i.e (1 quarter is 3 months) of gainfully employed time and having paid SS Taxes.
It's not per quarter. It's based on your earnings. It was around $4000 per year gross or so for 4 credits. So if u arrived in December and left in Feb with 8 years in between you would be eligible if you get paid $4000 per month.
For a lot of finance information go to http://groups.msn.com/R2IClub. For 401K information, IRA, ROTH etc search google for "RRK Limits". RRK has tonnes and tonnes of info. By planning your departure from USA you can minimize the taxes on 401K. Penalty cannot be avoided.
It's not per quarter. It's based on your earnings. It was around $4000 per year gross or so for 4 credits. So if u arrived in December and left in Feb with 8 years in between you would be eligible if you get paid $4000 per month.
For a lot of finance information go to http://groups.msn.com/R2IClub. For 401K information, IRA, ROTH etc search google for "RRK Limits". RRK has tonnes and tonnes of info. By planning your departure from USA you can minimize the taxes on 401K. Penalty cannot be avoided.
hair efore and after. Jessica:
alterego
06-13 06:21 PM
It means the immigration sub-committee will discuss and vote on this issue and it is a positive sign in my view that the democratic leadership is allowing this to go forward. If it passes the subcommittee then it will be sent to the floor and may be scheduled for a vote there. I am desperately hoping for a floor vote on this, hopefully the democratic leadership will see the justice on this one.
The CHC needs to realize that this is not about elitism. The EB community has been through this cycle of delayed EB reform for the sake of CIR on previous occasions and continuously since 2005. We have never opposed a pathway to legal status for the undocumented. It is time that they give us some consideration for our own plight. Failing which they will be seen by moderates as the hardliners.
Make the calls people. Your call may make the difference, especially if you are in the congressional district of a key contact, please, please make that call. Make a call and consider it your duty to persuade another colleague do one too.
The CHC needs to realize that this is not about elitism. The EB community has been through this cycle of delayed EB reform for the sake of CIR on previous occasions and continuously since 2005. We have never opposed a pathway to legal status for the undocumented. It is time that they give us some consideration for our own plight. Failing which they will be seen by moderates as the hardliners.
Make the calls people. Your call may make the difference, especially if you are in the congressional district of a key contact, please, please make that call. Make a call and consider it your duty to persuade another colleague do one too.
more...
veni001
02-03 07:32 PM
Hey there, I have a three year bachelor's (from Australia) and an American CPA. I believe the two can be evaluated to an Ameircan Master's equivalent. Please, check with your lawyers. It should be possible.
CPA is certification not a degree so i don't think it can be evaluated towards a degree equivalence:confused:
CPA is certification not a degree so i don't think it can be evaluated towards a degree equivalence:confused:
hot girls-generation-4.jpg
GCBy3000
04-15 07:35 PM
I agree as long as you have filed your 485 and 180 days is passed. But in my case, I have not even crossed the labor stage. It was pending with BEC when my company asked me to move. I tried a lot to convince my attorney thinking that I might miss the boat of 485 if at all it becomes current, but it did not help.
THe LPR clearly states that it will become void if any of the below changes.
1. Job description
2. Location
3. Something else, I dont remeber.
The above will not come into effect, if you had crossed 180 days of 485.
Also my attorney told that USCIS will not be able to find from where I file from 485, but it is risk on my part when I go for naturalization. Also if for some reaosn a RFE is issued, any company will tell the truth and the beneficiary will be in trouble. So it is always better to file a new labor unless the beneficiary is intened to move back to original location during the adjucation process and stays at that location for 6+ months.
I dont understand how you got away with this one after changing the location. With your example, the locational requirement of LPR does not make sense at all. Anybody can file LPR anywhere and move anywhere as long as 485 takes more than 180 days. One can deliberately file 485 with improper documentst to delay the approval and getaway. Double check with your attorney on this one and playing safe is not bad idea at all with the current USCIS mess and immigration laws.
AGAIN, I THINK WHEN YOU FILE YOUR 485 you have to be working in the location as stated in your LPR AS PER THE LAW, eventhough USCIS will not be able to find it. Before PERM, there was a column to state the beneficiary will work anywhere in US. But this not available anymore with PERM. The bottom line is the strongest part of LPR, "THE LOCATION", does not make sense at all.
By making you file for new labor, your attorney has played it too safe. In your case, filing a new labor was not neccesary. Please read below and check with an immigration lawyer for advice. I AM NOT A LAWYER but this advice is based on 2 different lawyers I have talked to regarding my own case where I moved from Phoenix, to Reno after my labor was filed.
Here is the deal when changing the location while GC is pending:
1. You can change location during your pending GC. But your job description must not change. Also, you have to move back to the location where your GC was filed, ONLY IF your 485 is processed and approved in less than 180 days from filing (I dont think USCIS will ever be that efficient and process 485 petitions in less than 180 days). That's because your option of AC21 of changing employers and locations (within the same job description, you cant work at a gas station or McDonalds) kicks in after 180 days of filing 485. If your 485 is approved in less than 180 days, then yes, you have to go back to the original location where your Greencard was filed because you dont have the AC21 options of switching employers and locations during your 485 stage ... which is available ONLY AFTER 180 days have passed in the processing of your 485 file.
So as long as your 485 takes longer than 180 days, you can continue to work at your new location even though you GC and labor was filed at a previous location.
2. After 180 days of filing 485, you can change employers using your EAD and change locations. No limit. But it has to be the same job description. You cannot start working as a manager if your Greencard was filed for the position of a programmer.
THe LPR clearly states that it will become void if any of the below changes.
1. Job description
2. Location
3. Something else, I dont remeber.
The above will not come into effect, if you had crossed 180 days of 485.
Also my attorney told that USCIS will not be able to find from where I file from 485, but it is risk on my part when I go for naturalization. Also if for some reaosn a RFE is issued, any company will tell the truth and the beneficiary will be in trouble. So it is always better to file a new labor unless the beneficiary is intened to move back to original location during the adjucation process and stays at that location for 6+ months.
I dont understand how you got away with this one after changing the location. With your example, the locational requirement of LPR does not make sense at all. Anybody can file LPR anywhere and move anywhere as long as 485 takes more than 180 days. One can deliberately file 485 with improper documentst to delay the approval and getaway. Double check with your attorney on this one and playing safe is not bad idea at all with the current USCIS mess and immigration laws.
AGAIN, I THINK WHEN YOU FILE YOUR 485 you have to be working in the location as stated in your LPR AS PER THE LAW, eventhough USCIS will not be able to find it. Before PERM, there was a column to state the beneficiary will work anywhere in US. But this not available anymore with PERM. The bottom line is the strongest part of LPR, "THE LOCATION", does not make sense at all.
By making you file for new labor, your attorney has played it too safe. In your case, filing a new labor was not neccesary. Please read below and check with an immigration lawyer for advice. I AM NOT A LAWYER but this advice is based on 2 different lawyers I have talked to regarding my own case where I moved from Phoenix, to Reno after my labor was filed.
Here is the deal when changing the location while GC is pending:
1. You can change location during your pending GC. But your job description must not change. Also, you have to move back to the location where your GC was filed, ONLY IF your 485 is processed and approved in less than 180 days from filing (I dont think USCIS will ever be that efficient and process 485 petitions in less than 180 days). That's because your option of AC21 of changing employers and locations (within the same job description, you cant work at a gas station or McDonalds) kicks in after 180 days of filing 485. If your 485 is approved in less than 180 days, then yes, you have to go back to the original location where your Greencard was filed because you dont have the AC21 options of switching employers and locations during your 485 stage ... which is available ONLY AFTER 180 days have passed in the processing of your 485 file.
So as long as your 485 takes longer than 180 days, you can continue to work at your new location even though you GC and labor was filed at a previous location.
2. After 180 days of filing 485, you can change employers using your EAD and change locations. No limit. But it has to be the same job description. You cannot start working as a manager if your Greencard was filed for the position of a programmer.
more...
house cute efore she wasahem
pnjbindia
07-20 12:08 AM
Gcfever007,
thanks for the post.. on your point below -
3. Spouse in USA as your dependent ( i.e. H4 etc.)
he/she will be 'out of status' as soon as your GC is approved. Inspected by an immigration agent at entry point. Not on parole. You can file 485 under [Section 245(K)] within 180 days. No special processing. NO fines.
doesnt my PD have to be current for me to apply for her 485? What if the PD is not current at the time after my approval?! I will not be able to apply for her 485?
thanks for the post.. on your point below -
3. Spouse in USA as your dependent ( i.e. H4 etc.)
he/she will be 'out of status' as soon as your GC is approved. Inspected by an immigration agent at entry point. Not on parole. You can file 485 under [Section 245(K)] within 180 days. No special processing. NO fines.
doesnt my PD have to be current for me to apply for her 485? What if the PD is not current at the time after my approval?! I will not be able to apply for her 485?
tattoo Jessica Girls Generation
sbabunle
08-23 06:24 PM
I think in 2000 some of the unused visa's are recaptured and allocated.
That would be the reason the numbers are not looking exact in each year
That would be the reason the numbers are not looking exact in each year
more...
pictures www.youtube.com Girl#39;s
chintals
09-03 11:43 AM
I have got an LUD on 09/01/2009 for both the cases, but the status is still pending.
I am worried, did any have similar experience?
I am in the same boat as you.. See SLUD on both bases on 09/01/09 with EAC08** pending at TSC. Waiting.
I am worried, did any have similar experience?
I am in the same boat as you.. See SLUD on both bases on 09/01/09 with EAC08** pending at TSC. Waiting.
dresses After a KBS 2TV made an image
rameshvaid
09-16 11:17 PM
Done ...
RV
RV
more...
makeup Girls#39; Generation Selca in
fromnaija
07-20 04:34 PM
You will need to file an immigrant petition (Form I-130) for your child and wait for its approval. Your child will have to wait overseas until his/her priority is current. Thereafter, there will be some form of consular processing and the child will obtain an immigrant visa. Thereafter you can bring your child to the USA. It is a long process......
Caveat: I am not an attorney. You may want to confirm this solution with your lawyer.
I and my spouse both have green card. We have a kid who was born in INDIA. He has not visited USA till now. The kid is about 2 years.
We are planning to bring the kid by end of this year to USA.
So what visa should we apply for him we are not sure :confused:
A friend told that he had a baby born to him in india and came to usa with in the 1st 6 month to USA and since both parents were having green card, at port of entry in USA, the kid also got greencard for 5 years this was couple of years back.
But in my case, the kid is 2 years AND also not sure what is the procedure now. Is it still true by default the kids automatically gets the green card at port of entry (Is there any age limit I hope may be till < 13 yrs) if parents posses valid green card. Please help me in this situation.
Thanks in advance, ;)
Caveat: I am not an attorney. You may want to confirm this solution with your lawyer.
I and my spouse both have green card. We have a kid who was born in INDIA. He has not visited USA till now. The kid is about 2 years.
We are planning to bring the kid by end of this year to USA.
So what visa should we apply for him we are not sure :confused:
A friend told that he had a baby born to him in india and came to usa with in the 1st 6 month to USA and since both parents were having green card, at port of entry in USA, the kid also got greencard for 5 years this was couple of years back.
But in my case, the kid is 2 years AND also not sure what is the procedure now. Is it still true by default the kids automatically gets the green card at port of entry (Is there any age limit I hope may be till < 13 yrs) if parents posses valid green card. Please help me in this situation.
Thanks in advance, ;)
girlfriend makeup girls generation | A
slowwin
04-25 11:30 AM
hello folks,
I am switching jobs after an approved I140 and over 180 days from 485 receipt.
I am expecting no problems when leaving my current company. but just incase they decide to revoke my 140,
- is it ok to file AC21 after i receive the NOID if some thing happens or is it better to file AC21 now?
one other complication is i will be changing address too. how long does it take for USCIS to update my new address in their records? the reason i am asking is if they send me RFE or NOID, i will totally miss the boat if they send it to the wrong address. i am sure they will send a copy to my attorney, but he works form my current employer and I will assume he is less likely to help. Does it help if i file G28 with my own name and my new address?
I need to join my new job in 10 days and i hev give my crrent company a notice so it is a bit urgent. Please help.
Thank you
Rex
Rex,
1) It is better to send in an AC21 letter, when in doubt i.e, in case your employer revokes I-140., even though you have crossed 180 days threshold after filing for I-485/AOS.
2) Retain your own lawyer and change G-28 to him/her. For changing G-28 to self is done by sending in a letter to USCIS saying that you are withdrawing the representation rights (for you) of the the previous lawyer.
3) First Change address. Use AR-11 form. send it to the address shown on that form. secondly, Call the number on your I-485 and other receipts to update your new address.
The proper sequence to follow is 3, 2, 1.
Thanks,
----------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Not a legal advise. This is my personal opinion. Consult an attorney to proceed.
I am switching jobs after an approved I140 and over 180 days from 485 receipt.
I am expecting no problems when leaving my current company. but just incase they decide to revoke my 140,
- is it ok to file AC21 after i receive the NOID if some thing happens or is it better to file AC21 now?
one other complication is i will be changing address too. how long does it take for USCIS to update my new address in their records? the reason i am asking is if they send me RFE or NOID, i will totally miss the boat if they send it to the wrong address. i am sure they will send a copy to my attorney, but he works form my current employer and I will assume he is less likely to help. Does it help if i file G28 with my own name and my new address?
I need to join my new job in 10 days and i hev give my crrent company a notice so it is a bit urgent. Please help.
Thank you
Rex
Rex,
1) It is better to send in an AC21 letter, when in doubt i.e, in case your employer revokes I-140., even though you have crossed 180 days threshold after filing for I-485/AOS.
2) Retain your own lawyer and change G-28 to him/her. For changing G-28 to self is done by sending in a letter to USCIS saying that you are withdrawing the representation rights (for you) of the the previous lawyer.
3) First Change address. Use AR-11 form. send it to the address shown on that form. secondly, Call the number on your I-485 and other receipts to update your new address.
The proper sequence to follow is 3, 2, 1.
Thanks,
----------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Not a legal advise. This is my personal opinion. Consult an attorney to proceed.
hairstyles watched Girls#39; Generation
EB3June03
06-16 06:17 PM
Like the original poster, I too am in the US for more than 11 years (12th year about to complete)
I too had my PPD test (skin test for TB) come out positive but i don't know exactly how big the size was.
I just came from a civil surgeon who said that i might have to undergo the treatment for it if the size was above 10 mm. He also said that i will have to be retested for it if we don't find the reports of the size when this was done earlier. My PCP had mentioned that there is no point it getting the test done again.
I had submitted my medical exam records with my 484 application in July 2007. I wonder if USCIS is trying to boost the economy by trying to get us go for the medical again? (my lawyer says to go to the doctor and get a medical exam done again would be the most practical and quickest way to respond to the RFE.
I too had my PPD test (skin test for TB) come out positive but i don't know exactly how big the size was.
I just came from a civil surgeon who said that i might have to undergo the treatment for it if the size was above 10 mm. He also said that i will have to be retested for it if we don't find the reports of the size when this was done earlier. My PCP had mentioned that there is no point it getting the test done again.
I had submitted my medical exam records with my 484 application in July 2007. I wonder if USCIS is trying to boost the economy by trying to get us go for the medical again? (my lawyer says to go to the doctor and get a medical exam done again would be the most practical and quickest way to respond to the RFE.
viper673
06-07 12:37 PM
Yes pending 485 at TSC.
The IRS can't produce transcripts older than 3 years.
There's a form you can fill out and pay $39/return and takes up to 60 days, but even on this one it says: "records older than 7 years may not be available as it's admissable by law that they be distroyed".
The IRS can't produce transcripts older than 3 years.
There's a form you can fill out and pay $39/return and takes up to 60 days, but even on this one it says: "records older than 7 years may not be available as it's admissable by law that they be distroyed".
NKR
10-13 04:18 PM
Next time I'm thinking of going Tarzan style....
They take only finger prints.. ;)
They take only finger prints.. ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment