venky08
09-25 05:00 PM
you have till december to find a job. thats 2-3 months. put all your energy to find a new job and ask the new employer to file H1B. if you can find a job in a good company you will have another stab at it. stay away from consultancies this time if thats what causing the rejection...you need to elaborate more on your situation to exactly know what your options are (field of study/experioence etc)....
I am a Master's student and had applied for H1B through a consultant under master quota 2007. I was devastated when the consultant told me today that my H1B was not approved. When i checked online with my WAC no, as expected it said that a decision was mailed to the employer which in most cases means H1B denied.
I have OPT left until dec 07. I haven't yet found a job while on OPT but have been applying for jobs rigorously. I was really banking on the H1B visa for getting a job and then transferring it over to whoever hires me.
With my H1B not approved, I am totally clueless now. Please advice if my H1B application can be reconsidered/re-appealed/ resubmitted. Any other options/suggestions welcome.
I am a Master's student and had applied for H1B through a consultant under master quota 2007. I was devastated when the consultant told me today that my H1B was not approved. When i checked online with my WAC no, as expected it said that a decision was mailed to the employer which in most cases means H1B denied.
I have OPT left until dec 07. I haven't yet found a job while on OPT but have been applying for jobs rigorously. I was really banking on the H1B visa for getting a job and then transferring it over to whoever hires me.
With my H1B not approved, I am totally clueless now. Please advice if my H1B application can be reconsidered/re-appealed/ resubmitted. Any other options/suggestions welcome.
wallpaper january 2011 calendar pink
Lill
03-02 03:59 AM
oi :D im gonna join too if i can.. when are the last day for submission? (or what its called in english XD hehe)
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
2011 hair January 2011 Calendar
gc_on_demand
08-13 02:19 PM
Any hope for Jan 2008 PD to get EAD..
more...
BEC_fog
07-04 12:13 PM
Could someone please post the article here?
LostInGCProcess
03-03 11:24 AM
I did AC21 from a Consulting company into a big financial company and moved using EAD. My old employer requested USCIS to revoke my 140 and as a result I got a NOID from USCIS asking details of new employment. I gave the details and my case processing resumed.
AC21 issues can be resolved. So don't worry about it.
Chanduv23, When you moved to another employer, did they give you a permanent offer letter for your GC process that you would attach with the Ac21 documents or did you use the employment letter that they gave for joining the new company?? Am I confusing you? I meant to ask, since GC is for future employment, did thay give you a separate employment letter for the future job?
AC21 issues can be resolved. So don't worry about it.
Chanduv23, When you moved to another employer, did they give you a permanent offer letter for your GC process that you would attach with the Ac21 documents or did you use the employment letter that they gave for joining the new company?? Am I confusing you? I meant to ask, since GC is for future employment, did thay give you a separate employment letter for the future job?
more...
raghureddy
03-18 07:45 PM
it is usually 6 to 9 months now, i guess u can wait for some more time and then approach senators office...Good Luck
2010 Calendar Planner 2011
rbachu21
02-03 03:03 PM
Invincibleasian,
Is your FOIA request completed? Did you get your I-140 Approval Notice? If yes, how long did it take?
Is your FOIA request completed? Did you get your I-140 Approval Notice? If yes, how long did it take?
more...
krishnam70
02-22 12:48 PM
This is possibly a repeat/trivial question for the gurus here - but I am seeking latest upto date information. So here it goes..
I have been on H1B since Oct06 ( after OPT), working for the same company as Electrical Engineer in full time position. I haven't traveled to India ( or anywhere out of US) since Aug 2003 when I came here for my MS.
I am planning to travel to India this Dec and probably to UK in July. And so I planned to get my H1B stamped from Canada in May/June. But my company attorney has advised me that its better to go for stamping in India - as because of the Tech Alert List, there have been significant delays for some people.
I wanted to know if anybody has any real time experience. And what is the advise of the gurus - India or Canada?
Thanks a lot - your help is much appreciated!
Unless its absolutely necessary that you go out of the country I would not advise you to leave. In recent days I have heard of people with even valid H1 stamps and with projects on hand being turned back from POE by IO's despite getting assurances from the employee's manager that the position is critical. The question from the IO was they could find ton's of people here in the US who have similar skills and there is no need for a H1 guy to do it.
Do not want to spread the panic but ....Be careful..
- good luck
kris
I have been on H1B since Oct06 ( after OPT), working for the same company as Electrical Engineer in full time position. I haven't traveled to India ( or anywhere out of US) since Aug 2003 when I came here for my MS.
I am planning to travel to India this Dec and probably to UK in July. And so I planned to get my H1B stamped from Canada in May/June. But my company attorney has advised me that its better to go for stamping in India - as because of the Tech Alert List, there have been significant delays for some people.
I wanted to know if anybody has any real time experience. And what is the advise of the gurus - India or Canada?
Thanks a lot - your help is much appreciated!
Unless its absolutely necessary that you go out of the country I would not advise you to leave. In recent days I have heard of people with even valid H1 stamps and with projects on hand being turned back from POE by IO's despite getting assurances from the employee's manager that the position is critical. The question from the IO was they could find ton's of people here in the US who have similar skills and there is no need for a H1 guy to do it.
Do not want to spread the panic but ....Be careful..
- good luck
kris
hair Free Homemade Calendar 2011
spicy_guy
04-26 12:24 PM
we live in Chicagoland. PM me if you would like to talk.
Hi Evildead,
Can you check your PM pls?
Hi Evildead,
Can you check your PM pls?
more...
eb3_nepa
07-12 04:49 PM
The FBI name check is a bottleneck agreed. BUTTT It has NOTHING to do with the recent VB fiasco!
Some people were approved by the USCIS even WITHOUT the name checks. This is entirely a US Dept of State vs USCIS mess.
Some people were approved by the USCIS even WITHOUT the name checks. This is entirely a US Dept of State vs USCIS mess.
hot art january 2011 calendar
vbkris77
12-27 02:29 PM
So many bills are introduced but most don't even see day of light.. I personally don't see this ever passing the congress.. For most treaty countries this feature is already available and its called E1/E2 visa.. There is no limit on number of people and number years for visa.
Hope some of you might have seen the Wall Street Journal story this weekend on visas/Green Cards for owners of start-up businesses. (Foreign Entrepreneurs Eye StartUp Visa Act - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704694004576020001550357580-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwNTEyNDUyWj.html) )
According to the story there is broad consensus for a program to offer green card to foreign nationals who can bring in as low as $100,000 to start a new business in U.S. While this may not be an option for most of the folks in this forum, the premise of the proposed law has something in common with all of us.
The law is proposed by senators John Kerry (D) and Richard Lugar (R) on the principle that immigrants are more willing to be entrepreneurial and hence offering permanent residency to foreigners who will open a small business will increase the employment opportunities in U.S. Endorsing the entrepreneurial mind of new immigrants WSJ sights that; �Immigrants are nearly 30% more likely to start a business than non-immigrants � and �about a third of Silicon Valley technology firms were started by Indian or Chinese entrepreneurs� . If the proposed bill is attempting to attract skilled and entrepreneurial minded immigrants into U.S. as a means to increase employment why not U.S. look into the pool of highly skilled and eager folks waiting for a green card for many years? Wouldn�t these folks be highly likely to open a new small business than someone from outside of the U.S. with no U.S. business background? If we are to take cues from the one third of the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs wouldn�t a good number of these people waiting for green card open up the starts up businesses that senators Kerry and Lugar are hoping to .
Would it be worth writing on behalf of Immigration Voice to senators Kerry and Lugar to consider the pool of potential entrepreneurs minded people already in U.S. and have been waiting for an opportunity to realize their entrepreneurial dreams? I don�t have the actual numbers. Aren�t there about 30 or 40,000 people who have been in U.S. with an approved immigration petition but waiting for a green card for many years? Could IV put forward a win-win propositions for everyone?
Hope some of you might have seen the Wall Street Journal story this weekend on visas/Green Cards for owners of start-up businesses. (Foreign Entrepreneurs Eye StartUp Visa Act - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB10001424052748704694004576020001550357580-lMyQjAxMTAwMDIwNTEyNDUyWj.html) )
According to the story there is broad consensus for a program to offer green card to foreign nationals who can bring in as low as $100,000 to start a new business in U.S. While this may not be an option for most of the folks in this forum, the premise of the proposed law has something in common with all of us.
The law is proposed by senators John Kerry (D) and Richard Lugar (R) on the principle that immigrants are more willing to be entrepreneurial and hence offering permanent residency to foreigners who will open a small business will increase the employment opportunities in U.S. Endorsing the entrepreneurial mind of new immigrants WSJ sights that; �Immigrants are nearly 30% more likely to start a business than non-immigrants � and �about a third of Silicon Valley technology firms were started by Indian or Chinese entrepreneurs� . If the proposed bill is attempting to attract skilled and entrepreneurial minded immigrants into U.S. as a means to increase employment why not U.S. look into the pool of highly skilled and eager folks waiting for a green card for many years? Wouldn�t these folks be highly likely to open a new small business than someone from outside of the U.S. with no U.S. business background? If we are to take cues from the one third of the Silicon Valley entrepreneurs wouldn�t a good number of these people waiting for green card open up the starts up businesses that senators Kerry and Lugar are hoping to .
Would it be worth writing on behalf of Immigration Voice to senators Kerry and Lugar to consider the pool of potential entrepreneurs minded people already in U.S. and have been waiting for an opportunity to realize their entrepreneurial dreams? I don�t have the actual numbers. Aren�t there about 30 or 40,000 people who have been in U.S. with an approved immigration petition but waiting for a green card for many years? Could IV put forward a win-win propositions for everyone?
more...
house printable planner
gcadream
02-24 03:38 PM
Hi Sakthisagar,
So this time when you are going to apply in April for ur H1 extn, you will again be paying for H1 extn fees and H4 extn in case you have dependents ?
Also one can file for H1 extn 1 week before his current H1 expiry date right ? without premium processing ?
So this time when you are going to apply in April for ur H1 extn, you will again be paying for H1 extn fees and H4 extn in case you have dependents ?
Also one can file for H1 extn 1 week before his current H1 expiry date right ? without premium processing ?
tattoo january 2011 calendar printable : : EZ Menu Planner – FREEBIE PRINTABLE!
rockstart
03-16 12:26 PM
You can use the services of some CPA since you have so many changes in status and deductions to claim plus filing of ITIN for your wife. When I changed status from F1- H1 I used the CPA since I was not sure if I would be able to do it right. Better to go to an experienced CPA rather than H&R block kind of people. PM me if you want details of the guy I use.
more...
pictures Here is a Blank Calendar 2011
ab2k7
07-05 04:19 PM
Thanks for your response, paisa. Does that mean start over the whole process from LC for GC again? As per this doc there is a difference b/w LCA for H1B and LC for GC. So incase a H1B employee files LC for GC, does he also need to maintain LCA in parallel? This is still not clear to me.
I've found this doc from
www.lawmh.com/practice_areas/pdfs/H-1B%20Visas.pdf
'
Labor Condition Application (“LCA”): This document attests to the DOL that the employer will pay the prevailing wage and that hiring the H-1B worker will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers. The LCA must be certified by the DOL, and included in the H-1B package. The LCA process is now streamlined with the use of electronic filings. LCAs can be obtained in a matter of seconds. NOTE: The LCA is not the same as Labor Certification for green card purposes. For an LCA in connection with an H-1B, there is no need to advertise the job or to test the labor market
for U.S. workers.
'
Would appreciate if someone can shed some light.
Thanks in advance.
I've found this doc from
www.lawmh.com/practice_areas/pdfs/H-1B%20Visas.pdf
'
Labor Condition Application (“LCA”): This document attests to the DOL that the employer will pay the prevailing wage and that hiring the H-1B worker will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers. The LCA must be certified by the DOL, and included in the H-1B package. The LCA process is now streamlined with the use of electronic filings. LCAs can be obtained in a matter of seconds. NOTE: The LCA is not the same as Labor Certification for green card purposes. For an LCA in connection with an H-1B, there is no need to advertise the job or to test the labor market
for U.S. workers.
'
Would appreciate if someone can shed some light.
Thanks in advance.
dresses Calendar Planner 2011
ram_ram
06-08 02:16 PM
Not possible. You can carry your PD once the 140(based on the labor that has the PD) is approved. Not the other way..
more...
makeup As from January 2011 we have
logiclife
01-01 11:03 PM
I have been looking at a lot of posts on this Rajiv Khanna�s immigrationportal and there seems to be a lot of confusion about who is legit and really interested in our cause and who is faking it to collect money and run with it.
I agree that its hard to trust someone you�ve never met and get involved in discussing strategy, participate etc let alone cut a check of $50.
LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING HERE:
I have no vested interested in diverting people from any website to any website and re-divert people from one organization to another. If you know someone who works for you and you trust � fine. Go with it.
I personally am really really mad at the retrogression going on in EB GC. I applied for my Labor in Sept 2004. Got it approved in June 2005. I have been sitting on my hands since. I-140 is in process. With the speed things are going now, I will have GC no sooner than 6 years.
AND I AM JUST MAD THAT AFTER ALL THESE YEARS�I CAN�T EVEN APPLY FOR I-485.
Then I came across this website on the morning of 31st DEC and then looked at immigrationvoice.org. Talked to a couple of people on the phone from immigrationvoice.org. I am going to post tomorrow�s agenda of conference call RIGHT HERE.
If you want to participate in this call, either to suggest ideas or to check out if we are legit or not, just register on immigrationvoice.org (ITS FREE) and send an email with your phone numbers (its free) so that we can verify that you are legit and not a heckler who is going to disrupt the conference call.
If you still are not convinced and trust someone else, go with it.
Another thing�immigrationvoice.org is only 4 days old. Bear with us if we are not perfect. But we will surely be fully functional with all the bells and whistles before you know it.
AGENDA for tomorrow�s conference call:
A) GENERATE PUBLICITY ABOUT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.ORG.
Spread the word that this website is going to consolidate all efforts to have provisions to eliminate retrogression. Convince people that immigrationvoice.org is legit and operated by people WHO DON�T HAVE GC/CITIZENSHIP and are waiting in line for GC.
B) GATHER FACTS FROM BOOKS, AUTHENTIC SOURCES.
There are at least 3 books out there that deal with exodus of talent from this country either due to cultural reasons or due to hostile immigration policy. These books claim that there is competition for talent out there (�Talent� being people like H1Bs, researchers, engineers etc) between US and other countries and USA IS LOSING. Check out �Flight Capital� by David Heenan and �The flight of the creative class� by Richard Florida.
We want those facts to convince congress that eliminating retrogression is not only in an immigrant�s interest, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF AN AVERAGE AMERICAN EMPLOYER. We are not looking for a frigging charity or a handout. We are not saying �O dear congress, give us a green card and we shall be eternally thankful to thy congress�. That is a wrong strategy and an unnecessary one.We are legal immigrants. We are not looking for amnesty. Just a fair deal for people who stand in line for GC and play by the rules, pay their taxes, protect their status and obey the rule of the law.
We are looking to consolidate an already existing symbiotic relationship. A win-win situation.
C) INFLUENCE CONGRESS.
By this time, anyone who is not living under a rock knows that there is a comprehensive immigration bill coming up before congress. The bill will be introduced, debated and most likely passed. The question is whether or not the retrogression relief measures are included or thrown out.
We need to plan a strategy to
1) Convince congress with FACTS and NUMBERS how the current H1B program has given an edge to US employers and contributed to the society in general and how it is in America�s interest to put this symbiotic relationship on a solid ground by speeding up Employment based green card.
2) To work with congress, devise a strategy to meet them in person, as many as possible. Create an A-list of senators and congressmen who have the most say in committees and sub-committee hearings. We would work to communicate and convince these men first and then have a message machine to send a blanket message to ALL.
If you are still not convinced and go with someone else or go with do-nothing-and-hope-for-best strategy, then go ahead.
OTHERWISE register and participate. And you wont lose a dime by doing that.
I agree that its hard to trust someone you�ve never met and get involved in discussing strategy, participate etc let alone cut a check of $50.
LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT SOMETHING HERE:
I have no vested interested in diverting people from any website to any website and re-divert people from one organization to another. If you know someone who works for you and you trust � fine. Go with it.
I personally am really really mad at the retrogression going on in EB GC. I applied for my Labor in Sept 2004. Got it approved in June 2005. I have been sitting on my hands since. I-140 is in process. With the speed things are going now, I will have GC no sooner than 6 years.
AND I AM JUST MAD THAT AFTER ALL THESE YEARS�I CAN�T EVEN APPLY FOR I-485.
Then I came across this website on the morning of 31st DEC and then looked at immigrationvoice.org. Talked to a couple of people on the phone from immigrationvoice.org. I am going to post tomorrow�s agenda of conference call RIGHT HERE.
If you want to participate in this call, either to suggest ideas or to check out if we are legit or not, just register on immigrationvoice.org (ITS FREE) and send an email with your phone numbers (its free) so that we can verify that you are legit and not a heckler who is going to disrupt the conference call.
If you still are not convinced and trust someone else, go with it.
Another thing�immigrationvoice.org is only 4 days old. Bear with us if we are not perfect. But we will surely be fully functional with all the bells and whistles before you know it.
AGENDA for tomorrow�s conference call:
A) GENERATE PUBLICITY ABOUT IMMIGRATIONVOICE.ORG.
Spread the word that this website is going to consolidate all efforts to have provisions to eliminate retrogression. Convince people that immigrationvoice.org is legit and operated by people WHO DON�T HAVE GC/CITIZENSHIP and are waiting in line for GC.
B) GATHER FACTS FROM BOOKS, AUTHENTIC SOURCES.
There are at least 3 books out there that deal with exodus of talent from this country either due to cultural reasons or due to hostile immigration policy. These books claim that there is competition for talent out there (�Talent� being people like H1Bs, researchers, engineers etc) between US and other countries and USA IS LOSING. Check out �Flight Capital� by David Heenan and �The flight of the creative class� by Richard Florida.
We want those facts to convince congress that eliminating retrogression is not only in an immigrant�s interest, BUT IN THE INTEREST OF AN AVERAGE AMERICAN EMPLOYER. We are not looking for a frigging charity or a handout. We are not saying �O dear congress, give us a green card and we shall be eternally thankful to thy congress�. That is a wrong strategy and an unnecessary one.We are legal immigrants. We are not looking for amnesty. Just a fair deal for people who stand in line for GC and play by the rules, pay their taxes, protect their status and obey the rule of the law.
We are looking to consolidate an already existing symbiotic relationship. A win-win situation.
C) INFLUENCE CONGRESS.
By this time, anyone who is not living under a rock knows that there is a comprehensive immigration bill coming up before congress. The bill will be introduced, debated and most likely passed. The question is whether or not the retrogression relief measures are included or thrown out.
We need to plan a strategy to
1) Convince congress with FACTS and NUMBERS how the current H1B program has given an edge to US employers and contributed to the society in general and how it is in America�s interest to put this symbiotic relationship on a solid ground by speeding up Employment based green card.
2) To work with congress, devise a strategy to meet them in person, as many as possible. Create an A-list of senators and congressmen who have the most say in committees and sub-committee hearings. We would work to communicate and convince these men first and then have a message machine to send a blanket message to ALL.
If you are still not convinced and go with someone else or go with do-nothing-and-hope-for-best strategy, then go ahead.
OTHERWISE register and participate. And you wont lose a dime by doing that.
girlfriend january 2011 calendar
chanduv23
02-17 08:48 PM
Durbin likes to have it both ways - be perceived as being pro-immigration (for his work on behalf of Hispanic illegal immigrants) but also being the champion of unions. I think he might respond if he starts to get labeled as anti-immigrant. He will not want to start to get the label of being someone who opposes immigrants. But I'd probably stick to the flowers and make it IV's signature. When the media hears about another flower campaign, they'll know something big is up and that the person getting the flowers is being targeted for an important reason.
For some reason this thread caught my attention. Looks like this was discussed sometime back.
Sending flowers once again ???? Is this a good idea :D:D:D
For some reason this thread caught my attention. Looks like this was discussed sometime back.
Sending flowers once again ???? Is this a good idea :D:D:D
hairstyles January 2011 Calendar PDF;
GCNirvana007
04-08 04:50 PM
Also, did you know we have some action items? and did you notice some people donate time and money?
Winner - Thanks for the recommendation. You should have stopped right there. I ask questions to understand how it functions and whats going on. If you dont know the answer. Just be quiet. Stop making smartass comments. I dont have time go back and forth on it.
Winner - Thanks for the recommendation. You should have stopped right there. I ask questions to understand how it functions and whats going on. If you dont know the answer. Just be quiet. Stop making smartass comments. I dont have time go back and forth on it.
w000f
05-19 12:30 PM
Good information but I feel that it doesn't matter anymore. Even if your visa number is up, your application will probably still sit in a warehouse while the acting director or whomever, keeps using the FBI namecheck backlogs to blind everyone of their inefficiency. :( Frustrated to a point of numbness.
ssharma
04-27 01:36 PM
Your question has been answered at www.immigration-law.com ( advanced Q&A section). I am copy pasting :
Q-74 (04-15-2006): I had a pending RIR (EB-3) labor certification with priority date of October 2004. In November 2005, I filed PERM (EB-2) which was approved in February 2006. I filed I-140 (EB-2) right away. Now, my RIR was approved. I plan to file another I-140 based on RIR (EB-3). Can I carry over the priority date of October 2004 to EB-2? What should I do to carry over the October 2004 priority date?
A-74: The immigration regulation provides that when an alien has multiple "approved" I-140 petitions with different classifications, the alien can use the earliest priority date. This carry-over of the priority date is available regardless of difference in the occupational classifications, preference categories or employers. Unlike common misunderstanding, one cannot seek amendment of the approved I-140 petition to change the priority of a given petition. In your case, once your EB-2 I-140 petition is approved and the visa cut-off date for EB-2 for your country moves to October 2004, even if your EB-2 priority date is November 2005, you can file I-485/I-765/I-131. In filing I-485, you should attach EB-2 I-140 approval notice (original) as the underlying I-140 petition and submit a photocopy of the approved EB-3 I-140 approval notice as an evidence to prove the priority date of October 2004. Thus, EB-3 approval notice serves the sole purpose of proof of the priority date and nothing else. Once EB-3 approval notice is attached, the agency will pull out the EB-3 proceeding file to determine whether the EB-3 petition has been revoked for fraud or error. Unless such revocation is detected, the agency will keep processing your I-485, I-765, and I-131 based on the approved EB-2 I-140 petition and using the priority date of October 2004 for the purpose of determining availability of a visa number to approve I-485. This priority date transfer should not be confused with the rule of transfer of pending I-485 from one approved I-140 petition to another approved I-140 petition. Soon, the popular substitution of labor certification is expected to be eliminated, which provided a valuable means to pick up earlier priority dates. In its place, it is likely that more and more people may file multiple petitions with the same or different employers and for same or different occupations in different preference categories to take advantage of the current rule of transferability of earliest priority date among different classification of the approved I-140 petitions.
Ref: http://www.immigrationportal.com/archive/index.php/t-210170.html
Q-74 (04-15-2006): I had a pending RIR (EB-3) labor certification with priority date of October 2004. In November 2005, I filed PERM (EB-2) which was approved in February 2006. I filed I-140 (EB-2) right away. Now, my RIR was approved. I plan to file another I-140 based on RIR (EB-3). Can I carry over the priority date of October 2004 to EB-2? What should I do to carry over the October 2004 priority date?
A-74: The immigration regulation provides that when an alien has multiple "approved" I-140 petitions with different classifications, the alien can use the earliest priority date. This carry-over of the priority date is available regardless of difference in the occupational classifications, preference categories or employers. Unlike common misunderstanding, one cannot seek amendment of the approved I-140 petition to change the priority of a given petition. In your case, once your EB-2 I-140 petition is approved and the visa cut-off date for EB-2 for your country moves to October 2004, even if your EB-2 priority date is November 2005, you can file I-485/I-765/I-131. In filing I-485, you should attach EB-2 I-140 approval notice (original) as the underlying I-140 petition and submit a photocopy of the approved EB-3 I-140 approval notice as an evidence to prove the priority date of October 2004. Thus, EB-3 approval notice serves the sole purpose of proof of the priority date and nothing else. Once EB-3 approval notice is attached, the agency will pull out the EB-3 proceeding file to determine whether the EB-3 petition has been revoked for fraud or error. Unless such revocation is detected, the agency will keep processing your I-485, I-765, and I-131 based on the approved EB-2 I-140 petition and using the priority date of October 2004 for the purpose of determining availability of a visa number to approve I-485. This priority date transfer should not be confused with the rule of transfer of pending I-485 from one approved I-140 petition to another approved I-140 petition. Soon, the popular substitution of labor certification is expected to be eliminated, which provided a valuable means to pick up earlier priority dates. In its place, it is likely that more and more people may file multiple petitions with the same or different employers and for same or different occupations in different preference categories to take advantage of the current rule of transferability of earliest priority date among different classification of the approved I-140 petitions.
Ref: http://www.immigrationportal.com/archive/index.php/t-210170.html
No comments:
Post a Comment