tammigaw
02-06 05:27 PM
Thanks a lot for heart warming response .
I greatly appreciate your comments .
Ask him to go to hell!!!
Pls go on and join wherever you like and tell him this is a free country like India.Go to a lawyer and sue him if he talks any further...Not to worry,my friend.
I greatly appreciate your comments .
Ask him to go to hell!!!
Pls go on and join wherever you like and tell him this is a free country like India.Go to a lawyer and sue him if he talks any further...Not to worry,my friend.
wallpaper Samsung Wave 2 S8530 (Platinum
DudefromBombay
08-11 02:59 PM
Democrats are losers. Socialist. They can only sponsor illegal immigrants. Republican party is pro legal immigration.
casper21
07-27 11:14 AM
Hey ags,
Sorry for asking many question, when you are trying to find answers to your problem.
I'm trying to figure out my situation, you have replied "As long as marriage is before 485 it can be applied." : before 485 means the day of filling the I 485 or the day of I 485 Approval ?
Which means I can do just the registration of the marriage in my desi (legal) before the I485 approval, then come back to USA, apply for Counsular processing (I485) for my spouse with in 180 days, once spouse's application is approved spouse can come to USA?
*** IS this possible?
Sorry for asking many question, when you are trying to find answers to your problem.
I'm trying to figure out my situation, you have replied "As long as marriage is before 485 it can be applied." : before 485 means the day of filling the I 485 or the day of I 485 Approval ?
Which means I can do just the registration of the marriage in my desi (legal) before the I485 approval, then come back to USA, apply for Counsular processing (I485) for my spouse with in 180 days, once spouse's application is approved spouse can come to USA?
*** IS this possible?
2011 samsung wave II s8530
johnamit
07-27 03:49 PM
So if you run this query: select (current date - 26 days) + 180 days from sysibm.sysdummy1
you will get "12/28/2007"
So lets say Jan 1st to be on safe side, so this new year eve we can celebrate our independence from H1b employer. I marked on my calendar Independence day for me and lot of IV friends.
you will get "12/28/2007"
So lets say Jan 1st to be on safe side, so this new year eve we can celebrate our independence from H1b employer. I marked on my calendar Independence day for me and lot of IV friends.
more...
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
Maverick1
09-26 12:25 PM
Hi All,
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
I have been following the data for a while and I see a surge in EAD approvals. There are boatload of approvals from 9/24 and 9/25 (Some still pouring in).
If your case reached June21 (Not Jul 21st ?) , you can request an appointment at the local office and they can request a temp EAD card for you. Or since 90 days is over , you may call the 1 800 number.
Hi,
I filed (along with Wife and son) at NSC on july 2nd.
Got the Receiptts with Date Aug-28 for 485 for all of US.
Also Finished the Finger Printing on 25-Sep-2007.
When can I expect my receipts for EAD and AP?.
Anyone in the same boat?
Thanks,
alex...
AS I stated above there are quite a few approvals lately, but there are a bunch still waiting .
Question for those who got EAD and AP : Did your LUD on these applications change on line when your EAD/AP is approved ?
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
I have been following the data for a while and I see a surge in EAD approvals. There are boatload of approvals from 9/24 and 9/25 (Some still pouring in).
If your case reached June21 (Not Jul 21st ?) , you can request an appointment at the local office and they can request a temp EAD card for you. Or since 90 days is over , you may call the 1 800 number.
Hi,
I filed (along with Wife and son) at NSC on july 2nd.
Got the Receiptts with Date Aug-28 for 485 for all of US.
Also Finished the Finger Printing on 25-Sep-2007.
When can I expect my receipts for EAD and AP?.
Anyone in the same boat?
Thanks,
alex...
AS I stated above there are quite a few approvals lately, but there are a bunch still waiting .
Question for those who got EAD and AP : Did your LUD on these applications change on line when your EAD/AP is approved ?
more...
davidk
02-16 08:39 AM
Hi Everyone,
I will be laid off from an american company by the end of Feb 2009. I spoke to my previous desi employee as my H1b with his company is still valid and he din't revoked it until now
But he agrees to let me join his company but at the same time he worried about few things
Q1) I was with him for 6 months of 2008 and moved to an American Company so the total pay in the W2 for year 2008 is less than LCA amount.
Would that be a problem as i din't work with him for an entire year in which case it is bound to be less than LCA amount..
Mind you i'm looking at the Yearly wage if you look at month wise it is much higher than mentioned in LCA.
Would that be of any problem to both me and employeer.
Q2) He also said that when somebody re hires any one , the employeer is liable to pay back wages for the period of time he was out.
It sounds illogical atleast to me because he didn't terminate me from the job it was me who quit the job and transferred my H1b on a good note , but there is no official document saying i quit the job or he terminated me ....
I would appreciate if some could throw some light on this ....
My future is relied on these issues
Thanks
David
I will be laid off from an american company by the end of Feb 2009. I spoke to my previous desi employee as my H1b with his company is still valid and he din't revoked it until now
But he agrees to let me join his company but at the same time he worried about few things
Q1) I was with him for 6 months of 2008 and moved to an American Company so the total pay in the W2 for year 2008 is less than LCA amount.
Would that be a problem as i din't work with him for an entire year in which case it is bound to be less than LCA amount..
Mind you i'm looking at the Yearly wage if you look at month wise it is much higher than mentioned in LCA.
Would that be of any problem to both me and employeer.
Q2) He also said that when somebody re hires any one , the employeer is liable to pay back wages for the period of time he was out.
It sounds illogical atleast to me because he didn't terminate me from the job it was me who quit the job and transferred my H1b on a good note , but there is no official document saying i quit the job or he terminated me ....
I would appreciate if some could throw some light on this ....
My future is relied on these issues
Thanks
David
2010 Samsung Wave 2 S8530 (Platinum
stirfries
12-01 09:11 PM
via regular mail. There is no tracking available. If it is lost, it is lost. That is what I hate about both the EAD and AP process.:mad:
In my experience, the AP has been received anywhere from 4 days to 7 days after "the document has been mailed" notice.
4 days - 7 days after "document has been mailed" update?
Sounds discouraging BUT from my experience and from my RESEARCH on this forum, I also think that, 4 - 7 days is the normal receipt time. In my case, unfortunately, its been 12 days already. :(
But, SS777 states, he has experienced anywhere from 3 - 20 days. I will take that. :)
Can others please chime in with their experience in terms of how many days they had to wait once they noticed their case status was changed to, "Document has been mailed"?
Your response much appreciated.
Thanks,
In my experience, the AP has been received anywhere from 4 days to 7 days after "the document has been mailed" notice.
4 days - 7 days after "document has been mailed" update?
Sounds discouraging BUT from my experience and from my RESEARCH on this forum, I also think that, 4 - 7 days is the normal receipt time. In my case, unfortunately, its been 12 days already. :(
But, SS777 states, he has experienced anywhere from 3 - 20 days. I will take that. :)
Can others please chime in with their experience in terms of how many days they had to wait once they noticed their case status was changed to, "Document has been mailed"?
Your response much appreciated.
Thanks,
more...
GCwaitforever
05-24 09:38 AM
By the way, the article refers to Immigrant Voice instead of Immigration Voice. I can not find e-mail address of the author. Please get in touch with the author if you can, to have this corrected.
hair samsung samsung wave ii s8530
rameshvaid
05-27 10:25 AM
As long as a person is meek and weak, that's what we get - Nothing. With AOS pending, every person in most states are bound to get 1 year renewal..Period. Be forceful but polite in expressing it. Take it to the next level - Supervisor.Ask what they mean or definition of "old I-485". Tell them you are Paying all Taxes (Federal, state, Social, Medicare.... ).
By the time you come hear, mostly probably, the agent might have approved a 1 year Renewal.
Seems FAIR is slowly creeping into DMV also.
Do u think, we did't do that.. We did everything possibly we could but of no help and been to three diffrent DMV's.. same old crap.. This seems to be a bigger problem than getting GC.. now we will be restrictited of driving too??
By the time you come hear, mostly probably, the agent might have approved a 1 year Renewal.
Seems FAIR is slowly creeping into DMV also.
Do u think, we did't do that.. We did everything possibly we could but of no help and been to three diffrent DMV's.. same old crap.. This seems to be a bigger problem than getting GC.. now we will be restrictited of driving too??
more...
LostInGCProcess
09-01 08:25 PM
Folks,
I had filed my I-485 in Oct 2008 (EB2-I, PD of May 2006) and moved in March 2009. I changed my address online and have a confirmation number for it. However, I don't think I have received a confirmation in the mail from USCIS.
I am trying to find out how to confirm if USCIS has my current address correctly on file. I tried to call in today and was told there is no way for them to confirm that on phone. The lady I spoke with took the updated address again -- saying she will refile for change of address and gave me a service ID that I could apparently use to get an infopass appointment 45 days from now.
Is there anything else I should/could do? Appreciate any input.
Thanks.
Oh man!!!! Why are you so worried? As long as you did the right thing thats all it matters. Since you also have a confirmation number, why worry?
You are freaking out UNNECESSARILY.
This reminds ne of the hindi saying " aa bail mujhe maar"
Literal translation: Hey bull, come and hit me.
:D:D:D:D:D
I had filed my I-485 in Oct 2008 (EB2-I, PD of May 2006) and moved in March 2009. I changed my address online and have a confirmation number for it. However, I don't think I have received a confirmation in the mail from USCIS.
I am trying to find out how to confirm if USCIS has my current address correctly on file. I tried to call in today and was told there is no way for them to confirm that on phone. The lady I spoke with took the updated address again -- saying she will refile for change of address and gave me a service ID that I could apparently use to get an infopass appointment 45 days from now.
Is there anything else I should/could do? Appreciate any input.
Thanks.
Oh man!!!! Why are you so worried? As long as you did the right thing thats all it matters. Since you also have a confirmation number, why worry?
You are freaking out UNNECESSARILY.
This reminds ne of the hindi saying " aa bail mujhe maar"
Literal translation: Hey bull, come and hit me.
:D:D:D:D:D
hot Samsung Wave II S8530 rear
sanprabhu
02-23 01:22 PM
Yes. And they get instate tuition rates too in many states.
more...
house Samsung Wave 2(S8530)
lostinbeta
09-06 10:54 AM
Pixel stretching is what is seen on that Splash Page. You select a 1 pixel row then use the resize tool to stretch it to the edge of your image.
tattoo Samsung Wave 2 S8530
gc_bulgaria
10-09 04:18 PM
http://www.immigration-law.com/
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
10/08/2007: I-140 Portability After 180 Days of 485 Filing and Service Centers Standard Procedure of Review and Adjudication
When there is a retrogression of visa numbers and anticipated long delays in 485 adjudication due to the massive July VB fiasco 485 filings, it is anticipated that there will be a substantial number of 485 applicants who may have to change employment along the way, either voluntarily or involuntarily, under AC 21 Section 106(c) provision. Accordingly, whether one reports the change of employment proactively or not, one should learn the internal review and adjudication procedures within the Service Center which are adopted by the adjudicators in adjudicating such I-485 applications.
The good material to review on this procedure is the USCIS Standard Operating Procedure for the adjudicators. The SOP states that "If the alien is using the portability provisions of AC21 106(c), the adjudicator must determine that both the ported labor certification and the ported I-140 are still valid under the current employer, especially in regards to the continual payment of the prevailing wage, similar occupation classification, and the employer’s ability to pay the prevailing wage."
(1) Prevailing Wage Payment: The AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer pays the prevailing wage or higher wage for portability. However, the adjudicators review the wage as part of their determination of "continuing validity" of the ported certified labor certification application and I-140 petition. When the applicant stays with the same employer without changing employer, payment of wage less than the prevailing wage should not present any serious issue inasmuch as the employer establishes that the employer was financially able to pay the prevailing wage and is continuously able to pay the prevailing wage until the green card is approved. However, when there is a change of employer who pays less than the prevailing wage, there is no clear-cut rule with reference to this issue. Payment of less than prevailing wage thus potentially can raise two issues when there is a change of employer. One is the adjudicator's argument that there is no continuing validity of the labor certification or I-140 petition. The other is the argument that different wage reflects that the labor certification job and the new job with the new employer are two different occupational classifications.
(2) Similar occupational classification issue: The similarity of the two positions involves not the "jobs" but "occupational classification." Accordingly, the old and new positions do not necessarily have to match exactly in every details, especially specific skill sets. Currently, the USCIS is looking up the Labor Department SOC/OES classifications of occupations. When the two jobs fall under the same occupational classification in the DOL occupational definitions, the two jobs are generally considered "similar" occupational classification. As long as the two jobs belong to a similar occupational classification, the applicant can work for the new employer anywhere in the United States. There is no physical location restrictions.
(3) Employer's financial ability to pay the wage: Again, AC 21 106(c) does not specifically require that the new employer must prove that the new employer has and will have a financial ability to pay the prevailing wage. However, the adjudicators appear to review the portability case considering the new employer's ability to pay as well as part of review of continuing vality of labor certification and I-140 petition.
Remember that when there is a portability issue, two things can ensue. If one proactively reports the eligibility of portability meeting all the foregoing requirment, the adjudicators are likely to decide the pending I-485 application on the merit. However, if the 485 applicants do not report proactively change of employment and the USCIS somehow obtains information of the alien's change of employment, for instance, by employer's report of termination of employment or withdrawal of I-140 petition or substitution of alien beneficiary, then 485 applicants are likely to be served a notice of intent to deny I-485 applications or in most cases, the adjudicator transfers the I-485 file to the local district office for interview.
In AC 21 106(c) portability situation, the adjudicators also review the issue of the continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition involving the original employer, and are likely to raise similar issues which are described above. However, when the alien ports with the "approved" I-140 petition with a copy of the last paycheck and W-2, the adjudicators rarely revisit the original employer's foregoing issues in determining the 140 portability issue. The issues are raised when the alien ports before the I-140 petition is approved. Under the Yates Memorandum, when the alien ports before I-140 petition is approved, the alien has a burden of proof that the I-140 petition was approvable. Accordingly, inasmuch as I-140 petition was approvable and the alien ports after 180 days of I-485 filing, even if the original employer withdraws the I-140 petition, the pending I-485 will not be affected. Yates Memorandum indicates that in such a circumstance, the adjudicator should adjudicate the pending I-140 petition and if finds approvable, then recognizes 106(c) portability and continues to adjudicate the pending I-485 application. Without doubt, in the foregoing situation, the adjudicator will intensively and carefully review the issue of continuing validity of labor certification and I-140 petition issues which are specified above, particularly the employer's financial ability to pay the wage, and the applicant will have to overcome tremendous hurdles to deal with the challenges by the USCIS. Accordingly, people should not port before I-140 petition is approved unless they are assured that the original employer will continuously cooperate and support his/her green card process.
more...
pictures Protect your Samsung Wave II
babu123
08-20 03:41 PM
Call 1-800-375-5283
options 1 2 2 6 2 2 1
At level 1, tell you didnt received receipt nbr and check not encashed.
You will be transfered to level 2. The officer at level 2 has access to check the name status.
Myself and my wife got the information. But some of my friends are not receiving the information. Good luck
options 1 2 2 6 2 2 1
At level 1, tell you didnt received receipt nbr and check not encashed.
You will be transfered to level 2. The officer at level 2 has access to check the name status.
Myself and my wife got the information. But some of my friends are not receiving the information. Good luck
dresses Samsung S8530 Wave II Pictures
amohale
02-26 12:26 AM
Please help me with my case.
I am changing my employment and trying to port my PD.The company I am joining is filing for a new Labor for me. My previous employer (A) with who I worked 5 years in US is not cooperating and is threatening to cancel my I-140. which is not a big deal because my I-140 has been approved for more than 180 days and I can retain the PD.
The problem is with their experience letter. I have a post dated letter from them which they gave recently mentioning 4 years and 11 months of experience out of 5.2 years I have worked with them. It is on company letterhead and lists my title, joining date, responsibilities but does not mention my skills: Java. This is a pure consulting firm with around 50 employees. I don't know any of the other employees except for one who I referred. she was with the company for almost 3 years during my 5 years stay.
the Perm that is getting filed for me required 5 years of experience. Since I cannot get a letter from someone in Company A showing all 5 years, is it ok to have this friend of mine show 3 years during her stay. I will not have a letter from a colleague for other 2 years.
So, it all boils down to, can my ex-colleague's affidavit for partial experience from a previous employer, along with a experience letter on company letterhead do the trick for me in case of a RFE. I will really appreciate your help in determining what is the best way to approach as I have other employment options available and my current employer is using every tactic to keep me back.
I am changing my employment and trying to port my PD.The company I am joining is filing for a new Labor for me. My previous employer (A) with who I worked 5 years in US is not cooperating and is threatening to cancel my I-140. which is not a big deal because my I-140 has been approved for more than 180 days and I can retain the PD.
The problem is with their experience letter. I have a post dated letter from them which they gave recently mentioning 4 years and 11 months of experience out of 5.2 years I have worked with them. It is on company letterhead and lists my title, joining date, responsibilities but does not mention my skills: Java. This is a pure consulting firm with around 50 employees. I don't know any of the other employees except for one who I referred. she was with the company for almost 3 years during my 5 years stay.
the Perm that is getting filed for me required 5 years of experience. Since I cannot get a letter from someone in Company A showing all 5 years, is it ok to have this friend of mine show 3 years during her stay. I will not have a letter from a colleague for other 2 years.
So, it all boils down to, can my ex-colleague's affidavit for partial experience from a previous employer, along with a experience letter on company letterhead do the trick for me in case of a RFE. I will really appreciate your help in determining what is the best way to approach as I have other employment options available and my current employer is using every tactic to keep me back.
more...
makeup Samsung Wave 2 S8530
jindhal
05-16 05:44 PM
I also called Sen. Menendez regarding the Murray amendment and talked to someone a lady.
girlfriend Samsung Wave 2 S8530 (Black)
senk1s
10-04 05:31 PM
or is it the same question you wanted an answer to?
hairstyles Samsung Wave 2(S8530)
waitin_toolong
07-18 07:03 PM
what if for some reason you miss the flight or it gets canceled, give yourself some buffer time and save a lot of grief.
Decide a few dollars is more important than getting I-485 on time or not.
I have seen the same thing with B1 people, first they forget the rule is 180 days not six months then they book last day flight and are here beyond I-94 date.
Decide a few dollars is more important than getting I-485 on time or not.
I have seen the same thing with B1 people, first they forget the rule is 180 days not six months then they book last day flight and are here beyond I-94 date.
ronnie0479
03-31 02:39 PM
Immigration and Tax Filing are not at all related.
Can we file taxes seperately on married status?
I mean, my CPA did estimates seperately and we found substantial difference...
Is there any problem in we filing seperately as we r into 485 peding stuff?...
From an Immigration perspective, what are the ramifications when 'Married and filing Jointly' versus 'Married and filing seperately'.
First of all, are they related?
Can we file taxes seperately on married status?
I mean, my CPA did estimates seperately and we found substantial difference...
Is there any problem in we filing seperately as we r into 485 peding stuff?...
From an Immigration perspective, what are the ramifications when 'Married and filing Jointly' versus 'Married and filing seperately'.
First of all, are they related?
pcs
01-02 08:05 PM
Many people like us want to do an automatic contribution. Can the website be modified for this. Setting up direct payment from bank account is more cumbersome as suggested by one member
thanks
thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment