nixstor
10-24 03:33 PM
In my opinion its just one of the marketing gimmicks of Y! See how it works
http://news.yahoo.com/s/judy_woodruff/20060823/judy_woodruff/j_woodruff10015
Similar lines ask the white house program. many people in the forum sent Q's to USCIS director and he didnt chose even one Q about retrogression or labor situation etc..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/judy_woodruff/20060823/judy_woodruff/j_woodruff10015
Similar lines ask the white house program. many people in the forum sent Q's to USCIS director and he didnt chose even one Q about retrogression or labor situation etc..
wallpaper My X-Men: First Class Casting
Raj_2009
08-18 11:38 PM
Hi ,
Thanks for your kind advice. I tried to take Infopass now. Shockingly, no appointment is available for August and September. Is there any way that we can get emergency Infopass at Local office?
Thanks,
Raj
Thanks for your kind advice. I tried to take Infopass now. Shockingly, no appointment is available for August and September. Is there any way that we can get emergency Infopass at Local office?
Thanks,
Raj
pcbadgujar
09-23 11:18 PM
Thanks a lot guys for the response.
2011 on Beast from the X-Men.
immiguy
07-18 02:16 PM
Sorry for being Naive. What is the skill bill?
more...
yabayaba
08-18 09:34 PM
My Wife got RFE on EAD, asking her to schedule an appointment for biometrics. There is no scuch thing that we could sehedule biometrics. We took an infopass appointment, USCIS officer she understood the issue and aimmediately gave an apponitment for biometrics.
Inconsistent RFE are issued by USICS these days. Take infopass appointment, go to the field office with all the documents and hope they would help you.
Inconsistent RFE are issued by USICS these days. Take infopass appointment, go to the field office with all the documents and hope they would help you.
waitingnwaiting
11-29 10:22 AM
This is where our problem lies. People once they are greened completely forget the troubles and "never ever" look back. Many of us (either directly or as dependents) have been greened and have reached very high positions but never feel the need to help out. I am wondering whether it is because we have failed to ask their help??
Instead on focussing on senators and congressmen/women (which IV members are already doing) would it be worthwile to prepare a list of influential (political, business, scientists) immigrants (particularly chinese and Indians) and then getting their help/input to our cause??
First people who do not have greencard should support.
Right now we do not even have 1% of those people part of IV
Instead on focussing on senators and congressmen/women (which IV members are already doing) would it be worthwile to prepare a list of influential (political, business, scientists) immigrants (particularly chinese and Indians) and then getting their help/input to our cause??
First people who do not have greencard should support.
Right now we do not even have 1% of those people part of IV
more...
Canadian_Dream
07-24 07:03 PM
That's correct you cannot open a service request without a receipt, this was suggested to me because I was tracking my spouse's application and they accepted my receipt number. In a way it was a service request on my name.
You can do the following, use your I-140 receipt number. They only reason they need a receipt number is to track the person with the service request.
You can request that your I-485 was filed with the following I-140 XXX receipt number. This will start some kind of tracking on your I-485 application
for which no receipt has been issued in more that 45 days.
Don't read too much in IO's response, you will get different responses from each one of them.
I am sure you will get your receipts before July 30.
Thanks Canadian_Dream and mrcmic!
I just called NSC to put an service request. I was told no receipt #, no service request can be put in.
Further I was told, there was hold all application to be processed till 2days ago, hence they have started receipting again 2 days back. Hard to believe it. I said I am 11thJune filer, but the IO kept saying there was a hold till 2 days ago. According to IO, all applications will be receipted by30thJuly. But she repeatedly suggested to check the bank for encashed checks. She said 'no encashed checks, no receipt #'...
SO if no receipt #, then how do we file at service request ?? Is there a link to file an online service request?? (I couldn't find one)
Anybody else in the same boat?? Please let us know so that we can track each other's progress.
Thanks once again!
You can do the following, use your I-140 receipt number. They only reason they need a receipt number is to track the person with the service request.
You can request that your I-485 was filed with the following I-140 XXX receipt number. This will start some kind of tracking on your I-485 application
for which no receipt has been issued in more that 45 days.
Don't read too much in IO's response, you will get different responses from each one of them.
I am sure you will get your receipts before July 30.
Thanks Canadian_Dream and mrcmic!
I just called NSC to put an service request. I was told no receipt #, no service request can be put in.
Further I was told, there was hold all application to be processed till 2days ago, hence they have started receipting again 2 days back. Hard to believe it. I said I am 11thJune filer, but the IO kept saying there was a hold till 2 days ago. According to IO, all applications will be receipted by30thJuly. But she repeatedly suggested to check the bank for encashed checks. She said 'no encashed checks, no receipt #'...
SO if no receipt #, then how do we file at service request ?? Is there a link to file an online service request?? (I couldn't find one)
Anybody else in the same boat?? Please let us know so that we can track each other's progress.
Thanks once again!
2010 onslaught of “X-Men: First
psk79
05-27 12:10 PM
Hi,
After reading about the pro's and cons of EAD e-file and paper based. I found that when you paper file I765, you DONOT get a fingerprinting notice and you DONT need to give FP. You will get your EAD directly. With e-file you dont send in the photos but u will have to go do the fingerprints and photo taken..
Can anyone confirm this?
Thanks.
After reading about the pro's and cons of EAD e-file and paper based. I found that when you paper file I765, you DONOT get a fingerprinting notice and you DONT need to give FP. You will get your EAD directly. With e-file you dont send in the photos but u will have to go do the fingerprints and photo taken..
Can anyone confirm this?
Thanks.
more...
sweet23guyin
04-23 06:46 PM
Can you be a little more specific on what you are doing?
If you don't want to publish it in this open forum, please send me a PM.
I'm a full time IT employee; Now, I am taking up part time work with my earlier clients (Consulting) on the newly formed LLC with my spouse as the sole member.
If you don't want to publish it in this open forum, please send me a PM.
I'm a full time IT employee; Now, I am taking up part time work with my earlier clients (Consulting) on the newly formed LLC with my spouse as the sole member.
hair X-Men: First Class chronicles
waitingGC
01-22 08:38 PM
Thank you, IV core! You are great!
more...
abracadabra
06-02 04:46 PM
E-Filing Support <e-filing.support@dhs.gov> send email, you should get it very fast
hot for X-Men: First Class,
mhtanim
11-26 06:06 PM
My friend was in India (out of the U.S.) while his green card got approved. The card was mailed to his U.S. home address. Another friend picked up his mail and mailed the green card to my friend in India. My friend got back into the U.S. with his green card. If the lawyer is correct, how did my friend do it?
Card production is only ordered after your I-485 is approved. If you leave the U.S. after your I-485 is approved (although you didn't receive the physical card), logically you should not be able to use Advance Parole any longer since your AP was based on pending I-485.
The best solution probably would be to go to a local USCIS office, show them your online status and get a stamp on your passport.
Card production is only ordered after your I-485 is approved. If you leave the U.S. after your I-485 is approved (although you didn't receive the physical card), logically you should not be able to use Advance Parole any longer since your AP was based on pending I-485.
The best solution probably would be to go to a local USCIS office, show them your online status and get a stamp on your passport.
more...
house Xmen Stealth Beast Original L
Prashant
05-22 11:26 PM
Cant remember precisely .. as soon as ones information is entered .. there's a link to add another passport..
as far as I see it they gonna review them together.. but not sure
as far as I see it they gonna review them together.. but not sure
tattoo X-MEN THE BEAST
shreekhand
07-25 05:23 PM
He is not supposed to give you the entire document. Please read the instructions carefully printed on the upper portion !!
Something does not sound right here. How can the employer "misplace" the upper portion of the approval notice? In the first place, why did he even separate the upper portion and the lower portion? He is supposed to give you the entire document as a single piece of paper.
Some thing really does not sound right here. By law, he is required to give you the approval notice.
Something does not sound right here. How can the employer "misplace" the upper portion of the approval notice? In the first place, why did he even separate the upper portion and the lower portion? He is supposed to give you the entire document as a single piece of paper.
Some thing really does not sound right here. By law, he is required to give you the approval notice.
more...
pictures BeastQtype.jpg. WOLVERINE
belmontboy
02-24 04:39 PM
Thanks again guys.
Well company A can file my GC but the issue is that the financial books of company A are not clear right now. Hence there are chances I-140 will be refused even if I file on EB1.
Company B is willing to take me but the issue is how do I join B. The options which I see are that B files my GC under EB2 or EB3 and I continue to work with company A till then. But then in EB2/EB3 the processing will take years till I get my EAD and join company B.
Is Company A Satyam??
Well company A can file my GC but the issue is that the financial books of company A are not clear right now. Hence there are chances I-140 will be refused even if I file on EB1.
Company B is willing to take me but the issue is how do I join B. The options which I see are that B files my GC under EB2 or EB3 and I continue to work with company A till then. But then in EB2/EB3 the processing will take years till I get my EAD and join company B.
Is Company A Satyam??
dresses STA: X-Men: Prototypes:
uma001
11-05 11:48 AM
For a long time, between 2001 to late 2004, All PDs (EB1-EB5) were current. Main reason for this was, labor certification used to take 2-4 years during that time. If you do not have labor certification coming out, you always have visa numbers available. Just when PERM hit, retrogression came in to the picture.
Thanks Kumar
Thanks Kumar
more...
makeup X-Men Origins: Wolverine will
gc_chahiye
11-28 01:04 AM
Hi guys,
I am a july 3 filer . I saw that there is on LUD with date of 11/25/2007 on my 140 which was approved on Jan 8,2007. My 485, EAD are still pending at NSC.
Can you guys tell me what that LUD on my 140 means?
I appreciate your help.
Your PD is still current (its still Nov.) so you never know, this might even be an approval coming soon... All the best...
I am a july 3 filer . I saw that there is on LUD with date of 11/25/2007 on my 140 which was approved on Jan 8,2007. My 485, EAD are still pending at NSC.
Can you guys tell me what that LUD on my 140 means?
I appreciate your help.
Your PD is still current (its still Nov.) so you never know, this might even be an approval coming soon... All the best...
girlfriend best X-Men film so far,
marwan234
10-09 09:04 PM
not yet.
hairstyles Beast
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikgHH324dg7_PVZNflDP3Xxn-Oqwbm3ijwOJDUX1QwdYcyi2sf0PYG98Ra6KBMDbnjp7ES_EQRTzPlisUf4iZOHGRiIoBtGM2xN9x6xn8sspoZA9AcG3oP_kdUkTurTlP9PCh15cZS5qG7/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEikgHH324dg7_PVZNflDP3Xxn-Oqwbm3ijwOJDUX1QwdYcyi2sf0PYG98Ra6KBMDbnjp7ES_EQRTzPlisUf4iZOHGRiIoBtGM2xN9x6xn8sspoZA9AcG3oP_kdUkTurTlP9PCh15cZS5qG7/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
whoever
02-23 12:43 PM
when does lobbying come into picture?
pthoko
08-12 12:49 PM
I think in your case it's OK
No comments:
Post a Comment