gcseeker2002
11-04 02:09 PM
This is weird. I thought a lot of people have got EAD but did not get AP. Of course some people have got both. Can anyone shed some light on how they approve AP? In what order? I believe quite some people have travel plan during the coming months.
Is this something to be concerned about, getting AP before EAD , both are of course 124 days since receipt date.
Is this something to be concerned about, getting AP before EAD , both are of course 124 days since receipt date.
god_bless_you
06-14 09:14 PM
From Today's Lou Dobb's....
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
Tonight, congressional leaders are unable to break a deadlock and begin work on an immigration reform compromise. A provision in the Constitution could kill the Senate immigration bill and chances for immigration reform this year.
LOUISE SCHIAVONE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It could be a real procedural holdup or just a good excuse. But for now, immigration legislation is stalled on what could be the road to nowhere.
Here's the problem...
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: A notice has been served on the Senate that a blue slip will be filed, which, in effect, says they will not consider the bill in the House because it has a revenue enhancement in it, a tax provision in it.
SCHIAVONE: A blue slip is like a legislative traffic ticket. A blue slip would be slapped on the Senate bill because, besides a guest worker program, a wall at the border, punishment for employers who hire illegals, and so on, the measure includes tax provisions, including one requiring illegal aliens to pay back taxes and another making U.S. workers overseas pay more taxes than they do now.
What's wrong with that? The Constitution says tax laws start in the House, not in the Senate. The same way, for example, that it's the Senate, not the House that confirms judges and cabinet secretaries.
REP. TOM TANCREDO (R), COLORADO: If they shot the Senate bill over here, it would be shot down in about a heartbeat simply because, for one thing, no revenue-raising bill can originate in the Senate. There's a constitutional problem.
So it can be stopped. I mean, they can try it. Have them send it. That's fine with me, because that's the end of it.
SCHIAVONE: Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist suggests tacking the immigration bill on to a benign House tax bill that's been on the Senate docket so that it has a House bill designation. But Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid wants assurances that no other legislation will hitch a ride on that train. Senator Frist's office says he has offered those assurances.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SCHIAVONE: And Kitty, it gets even more complicated than that. Congressman Tancredo says that lawmakers on both sides of the Capitol went home for Memorial Day and heard lots of protests about that Senate immigration bill and the eventual amnesty it offers, leaving some on Capitol Hill to wonder if in this election year it might just be better to let the clock run out on this session of Congress and start fresh next year -- Kitty.
PHILLIPS: Interesting stuff. Thanks very much. America's opinions on illegal immigration and border security should affect the legislation Congress adopts and the one that President Bush signs. In his news conference this morning, however, President Bush explained the crucial role of public opinion in a democracy.
Senator Jeff Sessions says the Senate ignored the will of the people in passing an amnesty bill for illegal aliens that would cost taxpayers tens of billions each year. A CBO report Sessions commissions says that the bill will also do nothing to stop illegal aliens entering this country. I asked Senator Sessions what the purpose of the Senate immigration bill is, if not to stop the flow of illegal aliens?
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
SEN. JEFF SESSIONS (R), ALABAMA: That was the purpose, but the CBO numbers are based on the Senate bill. And they say, in a fact, there's no change in illegal immigration for 10 years. It would be 700,000 to 900,000 a year. If anything, that's certainly no less and maybe more than the current rate. So it really belies the argument that this bill is going to make any progress on enforcement. It certainly does not appear to.
PILGRIM: What does that say about the value of this bill, sir?
SESSIONS: Well I think it again is another indication that it is unacceptable, that it's terribly flawed, should never become law and will not do what it promises. It promises to enforce the border. And that's proven to be false. I think I've already said that, but the CBO confirmed it. Workplace enforcement is not there. And the future flow plans to allow millions coming in in the future at a much higher rate are just unprincipled and not valuable, not good for the United States. So we definitely need to review this legislation.
PILGRIM: House Speaker Dennis Hastert has said that he wants to take a long look at this bill and potentially hold hearings. Do you think hearings are appropriate? They're certainly not normal.
SESSIONS: No, they're not normal. But you know, the House has none of this so-called comprehensive approach to immigration. Theirs was focused primarily on enforcement. And so if they're going to consider the comprehensive bill at all, they absolutely should study it. We never had enough hearings in the Senate. This bill just basically came up and moved through with very few hearings directly related to the gray issues on immigration.
We just didn't discuss the real important issues in any significant way. For example, we've never considered whether or not we ought to adopt what Canada does, and that is to have a point system. Why haven't we even discussed that? It seems to me it makes an awful lot of sense.
PILGRIM: All right, you know, could this immigration reform bill be hammered out behind closed doors with the congressional leadership? Do you see it going that way?
SESSIONS: Well, that's a very dangerous thing. The American people's confidence in the government on a question of immigration is very low. They're very cynical. And if anyone thinks they can hammer out a bill and then ram it through without the American people being alerted, I think they're in for big trouble and just further erode public confidence in what we're doing.
PILGRIM: The Senate -- procedurally the Senate bill has to be attached to a House bill to avoid a constitutional issue. Would you support a unanimous consent to send to it the House?
SESSIONS: You know, I haven't made a decision about that. My personal view is we need to discuss this bill more. No one senator can block a bill from being considered, but can provide an opportunity for more debate. So we'll be looking at that.
PILGRIM: And timetable-wise, if this doesn't get to the House and Senate by August 1st, do you think it will make it at all in this session?
SESSIONS: You know, it may not. Then again, something could happen. But from what I'm hearing from the House, that they're so concerned about the viability of the comprehensive language in the Senate bill, not that they're so against the comprehensive bill, but just that they are uneasy and unaccepting of what we've done, then I think it's got a long way to go to become law, frankly.
smisachu
12-09 06:43 PM
PhD in Business from an accredited US institution; currently working as Asst Prof.
I guess there is no way to port till I graduate then. :mad:
I guess there is no way to port till I graduate then. :mad:
snram4
08-04 06:26 AM
SA 4319 is not being considered so far. It is not quoted anywhere except IV website. Because CIR is ruled out for 2010 any pro or anti immigrant bill will not be considered most likely. This is just fear that SA 4319 will be attached to any other bill. The chance of passing this bill is 1% without CIR. But with CIR there is 80% chance of attaching with CIR.
I received the same email too.What a pity.....
I received the same email too.What a pity.....
more...
485Mbe4001
01-08 01:55 PM
As far as i know PF is controlled by the central government, TCS will not have any say in you withdrawing your money. Generally there is an upto 15% match from the company in your account, and that is yours the moment it is deposited in your account. You should not have any problems withdrawing your money. Your money is yours. Some companies deposit PF monies quarterly, small companies deposit it annually, in those cases you might be screwed if you company did not deposit the money in your account.
Has anyone managed to withdraw money from TCS PF from Mumbai India?
If so, pls advise on the procedure for the same?
Thanks,
Has anyone managed to withdraw money from TCS PF from Mumbai India?
If so, pls advise on the procedure for the same?
Thanks,
kris04
08-07 08:56 PM
Hi,
Iam trying to explain my employer that it's ok to hire employees with EAD. For some reason they prefer GC or Citizen only. I referred them to the Discrimination clause on I-9 form. Then they told me about their problems hiring EAD.
1) If the Employee is hired on a valid EAD and later during the course of employment the EAD expired, there is no system in place for them to check back with the employee if (s)he has renewed it in a timely manner.
2) If such an employee that has not renewed their EAD and continued their employment beyond expiration without notifying the employer, the company is worried that they may be legally liable for harboring employees with illegal statuses.
Please help me understand if their concerns are valid and if not what is the remedy.
how big is your employer, any decent HR software should have compliance system that can handle this legal status issue
Iam trying to explain my employer that it's ok to hire employees with EAD. For some reason they prefer GC or Citizen only. I referred them to the Discrimination clause on I-9 form. Then they told me about their problems hiring EAD.
1) If the Employee is hired on a valid EAD and later during the course of employment the EAD expired, there is no system in place for them to check back with the employee if (s)he has renewed it in a timely manner.
2) If such an employee that has not renewed their EAD and continued their employment beyond expiration without notifying the employer, the company is worried that they may be legally liable for harboring employees with illegal statuses.
Please help me understand if their concerns are valid and if not what is the remedy.
how big is your employer, any decent HR software should have compliance system that can handle this legal status issue
more...
snathan
05-17 05:04 PM
Thanks Nathan for quick response.
But what do i need to do? Do i have to change my place of birth in my indian passport? Can i have "Nepal" as place of birth in my indian passport? Do i still remain indian citizen or would it be considered a fraud? I think, my parents put india as birth place, so i dont face any difficulty in india. what does Indian constitution say about citizenzip?
Are there more people like me here? who were born outside of india, but are Indian citizens?
Thank you for help
People who were born outside India can be Indian Citizen. But you need to have the only one country as birth place. Otherwise it will create trouble for you with USCIS
But what do i need to do? Do i have to change my place of birth in my indian passport? Can i have "Nepal" as place of birth in my indian passport? Do i still remain indian citizen or would it be considered a fraud? I think, my parents put india as birth place, so i dont face any difficulty in india. what does Indian constitution say about citizenzip?
Are there more people like me here? who were born outside of india, but are Indian citizens?
Thank you for help
People who were born outside India can be Indian Citizen. But you need to have the only one country as birth place. Otherwise it will create trouble for you with USCIS
shukla77
01-02 11:45 AM
Does anyone know why NSC is slow in the I140 processing that TSC? My I140 date is October 25'06 and I think I would have to get that converted into Premimum Processing if I dont get approval in next 2 months. I aksed my attorney but she has no clue about the realistic processing times.
Good Luck to all.
Shukla
Good Luck to all.
Shukla
more...
anilsal
10-12 11:59 AM
If you do not have a state chapter for IN, please start one. All the mid western chapters do collaborate.
485Mbe4001
11-29 03:49 PM
Get a syllabus booklet from your university. if you attended a 4 year course they will send you 1 booklet for each year which describes the required courses and the course content in detail. Send this with your reply to the RFE, refer to the pages where they mention the course content and graduation requrements. A friend of mine did this 6 years back for his RFE and was approved. The problem was that the transcript mentioned math but USCIS had not idea of the level of math at the university (yours could be similar...just guessing).
The other option could be to get your transcripts evaluated by a third party.
The other option could be to get your transcripts evaluated by a third party.
more...
gg_ny
10-20 07:31 AM
You need to file tranfer papers anyway when you move. That means you have new H1B approval, and thus a new stamp is required when you travel out.
I would appreciate, if any of you can answer this question either through their personal experience or their knowledge.
I recently got my H1b visa renewed(& transferred) for 3 years based on a previous I-140 approved from my earlier job. I would like to get my H1b visa stamping done either at Mexico or Canada based on the current validity(for 3 years) of my H1b approval. If after stamping, I change companies will I need to get a new stamping to reflect the new company on my passport? If I don't need to get a new stamping, then if I travel to my home country and then return to US, will it cause a problem at the border post if my H1b approval paper shows a different company than that on the passport? Your advice in this regard would be greatly appreciated.
I would appreciate, if any of you can answer this question either through their personal experience or their knowledge.
I recently got my H1b visa renewed(& transferred) for 3 years based on a previous I-140 approved from my earlier job. I would like to get my H1b visa stamping done either at Mexico or Canada based on the current validity(for 3 years) of my H1b approval. If after stamping, I change companies will I need to get a new stamping to reflect the new company on my passport? If I don't need to get a new stamping, then if I travel to my home country and then return to US, will it cause a problem at the border post if my H1b approval paper shows a different company than that on the passport? Your advice in this regard would be greatly appreciated.
nikh
07-27 11:33 AM
Urstruly,
There is already thread going on with exaclty the same situation. The thread is 485 Approved without spouse being added and run by user smovva. It seems there quite a few people like you. You should read the thread.
There is already thread going on with exaclty the same situation. The thread is 485 Approved without spouse being added and run by user smovva. It seems there quite a few people like you. You should read the thread.
more...
JunRN
12-17 07:37 PM
It your decision and must get a good lawyer. If I were you, I will file AC21.
ultimate_champ
11-27 09:49 AM
Thanks all. Appreciate it.
I'll keep you updated what happens next.
I'll keep you updated what happens next.
more...
newuser
05-30 12:35 PM
If I remember my Uncle's word correctly, it was Ted Kennedy who was instrumental in relaxing (changing) the rules for future immigrants in 60 or 70's. Only then, we saw a huge increase in immigrants from India especially doctor's and engineers in 60's & 70's.
smartboy75
07-09 04:43 PM
Well the lawyer representing the new company believes that without a copy of 140
1. that, they cannot do a H1B transfer.
2. that, I cannot do EAD extension when it expires in October 2008.
Why r u doing an h1 transfer ??? why can't u invoke AC21.....??
1. that, they cannot do a H1B transfer.
2. that, I cannot do EAD extension when it expires in October 2008.
Why r u doing an h1 transfer ??? why can't u invoke AC21.....??
more...
veni001
11-05 09:27 AM
That is true, however, would that result in the 140 being cancelled? As per several discussions the 140 can still be used for extensions (assuming that the 140 has not been revoked/cancelled by USCIS due to fraud and that the PD is not current for that catagory). Again this is debatable and there are lots of opinions on this issue out there.
Some people say that the PD of the older 140 (even if revoked/cancelled by the former employer) can be used when the new company clears the labor and is applying for the new 140.
You need to consider two scenarios here...
First: Approved I-140 revoked by employer, since the employee is no longer with him and or employer no longer want to proceed with immigrant worker petition.
In this case the beneficiary of I-140 can recapture priority date to a future immigrant worker petition by his prospective employer ( at new I-140 stage)
Second: Approved I-140 revoked by USCIS due to Fraud
In this case the employer or employee can no-longer eligible to use that I-140 , which includes recapturing priority date.
Remember: To get H1B extension beyond 6th year one need to have valid approved and/or pending labor/I-140.
If the PERM labor expires then you can not use that to get 1 year extension
If I-140 revoked by employer then you can not use that to get extension even for the same employer ( if you come back to him):p
Some people say that the PD of the older 140 (even if revoked/cancelled by the former employer) can be used when the new company clears the labor and is applying for the new 140.
You need to consider two scenarios here...
First: Approved I-140 revoked by employer, since the employee is no longer with him and or employer no longer want to proceed with immigrant worker petition.
In this case the beneficiary of I-140 can recapture priority date to a future immigrant worker petition by his prospective employer ( at new I-140 stage)
Second: Approved I-140 revoked by USCIS due to Fraud
In this case the employer or employee can no-longer eligible to use that I-140 , which includes recapturing priority date.
Remember: To get H1B extension beyond 6th year one need to have valid approved and/or pending labor/I-140.
If the PERM labor expires then you can not use that to get 1 year extension
If I-140 revoked by employer then you can not use that to get extension even for the same employer ( if you come back to him):p
Tommy_S
04-08 03:02 PM
Yup, the text "suffers".
tinamatthew
07-23 10:45 AM
If you read the rules closely, the employer is attesting to the fact that the job will be readily available at a future date. So as long as the employer issues a letter attesting to this, there is no issue. AC21 is very specific = 180 days not less. So even with a letter from the employer, IF i-485 has not been pending 180 days, you cannot induce AC21 If you do indeed move prior to the six months, make sure you amend your H1B for the necessary changes (eg location)
Confirm with the co lawyer also. Yes, you are right. Always confirm advice with a lawyer
Hope this helps
Confirm with the co lawyer also. Yes, you are right. Always confirm advice with a lawyer
Hope this helps
raj_k
03-23 10:24 PM
Frist's enforcement only bill will be very popular in the house, but is unlikely to pass the senate. There seems to be quite a few republican senators (Specter, Mccain, Graham, Brownback to name a few) who might vote against any bill which is not "comprehensive". They along with the dems easily have more than 50 votes to block. Now, even if Frist's passes senate, it has to be reconciled with the house version - there are plenty of vocal anti EB folks there and hardly anyone pro. So if push comes to shove, Frist would probably agree to drop the EB provisions and pass rest of the bill , so that he can take credit and hit the '08 presidential campaign trail.
Specter's will easily pass the senate, will be a miracle if it passes the house - senate conference commitee in its present form. The only hope is all the attention will be on the amnesty provisions and negotiations surrounding that, and the EB part of it will fly under the radar.
Specter's will easily pass the senate, will be a miracle if it passes the house - senate conference commitee in its present form. The only hope is all the attention will be on the amnesty provisions and negotiations surrounding that, and the EB part of it will fly under the radar.
Carlau
01-24 11:55 AM
I have a suggestion, offer your company to pay a half an hour consultation with a lawyer, such as Sonal Mehta or Hooyou or Shusterman, this way you will not only get your H-1B 3 year extension but you will save your company from paying the 1k+ attorney's fee x 3.