krishmunn
01-05 12:55 PM
They cannot hold your PF no matter what. Send a Attorneys letter (in India) stating that it is illegal for them to hold the PF and they should pay it immediately. It has worked magic for a friend of mine who quit one of the largest IT employer.
As for OPs question on email being binding , it probably is not. To be a binding contract both party need to sign. When you say "Wipro didn't want me to stay longer" do you have any mail to prove that they indeed wanted you to leave earlier ? If you have that, they sure cannot do anything. As for Leave encashment, if it for leave earned in US, complaint to DOL using form WH4 (assuming you are on H1, not L1) .
As for OPs question on email being binding , it probably is not. To be a binding contract both party need to sign. When you say "Wipro didn't want me to stay longer" do you have any mail to prove that they indeed wanted you to leave earlier ? If you have that, they sure cannot do anything. As for Leave encashment, if it for leave earned in US, complaint to DOL using form WH4 (assuming you are on H1, not L1) .
wallpaper Mortal+kombat+pictures+of+
abhijitp
02-14 07:02 PM
A friendly bump from NORCAL;)
bluez25
07-15 01:09 PM
All,
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
Chennai Consulate has released the August appointment schedule on their site.
http://chennai.usconsulate.gov/uploads/images/K4oeM-zL_hPooV2orVvylA/ivappoint0808.pdf
I got an appointment too.. yahoooooooooo...
2011 mortal kombat scorpion
lrindy
09-27 08:33 AM
Hi All,
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
I received the I-485 reciept notice yesterday from my lawyer (see below for my info), but the alien number on I-485 is different from the number on my approved I-140. My I-140 has a number starting with A099, but my I-485 reciept notice has a number starting with A088. Someone in this forum mentioned that A099 is for the primary applicant and A088 is for the dependant. I am the primary applicant for I-485, so if it is true, I should get A099, not A088. I am not sure if I can have two different alien numbers or if this is a mistake by USCIS. Is anyone in the same situation?
I am sorry if this issue is discussed previously (I couldn't find the related thread). I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thank you very much.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EB1 ROW
PD: 08/2006
140: approved in 06/2007 (NSC)
485 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
765 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
131 (self and spouse): RD: 07/06/2007; RN: 09/12/07 (NSC)
FP notice recieved on 09/24/07
FP appointment (self and spouse): 10/16/07
Don't worry about it. When you go to FP appointment point this out to IO. You are correct "usually" 099 for primary & 088 for dependents. The "A" number is assigned at I-140 approval; that is "usually" the number you have on your receipts & GC when issued.("A" number is Alien Registration number and NOT the actual visa. The "A" number will be assigned to a visa once you get approved for GC.) There have been a few people on various threads have this happen to them. Just let the IO at FP know and they will help you OR speak to your lawyer about it. Note: Some applicants actually end up with a different "A" number on GC approval all together. So don't sweat it!
Cheers,
LRIndy. I am not a lawyer always consult one before making a decision.
more...
nixstor
07-01 01:26 PM
I am not sure if I am reading this right or not, go this page
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/3-7.html
and read the first para. It says G-325A has to be processed only if the applicant has entered the US in non immigrant status less than one year prior to current calendar date of review.
So any one who has entered US before (07/02/06) will have their G-325A trashed? I was under the impression that USCIS does use the biographic information to check with local law enforcement for the the past 5 years as stated in the G-325A. Any ideas?
Guys,
Can some read the SOP in the above quote and figure out what they are trying to say?
http://www.imminfo.com/resources/cis-sop-aos/3-7.html
and read the first para. It says G-325A has to be processed only if the applicant has entered the US in non immigrant status less than one year prior to current calendar date of review.
So any one who has entered US before (07/02/06) will have their G-325A trashed? I was under the impression that USCIS does use the biographic information to check with local law enforcement for the the past 5 years as stated in the G-325A. Any ideas?
Guys,
Can some read the SOP in the above quote and figure out what they are trying to say?
vaishnavilakshmi
11-13 09:08 PM
Hi Guys,
I verified my 485 Application status online and this is what I found can you guys tel what could this mean.
My I140 is not approved yet.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
Hi,
As far as forum knowledge,Usually 485 approval updates would be either we sent u a welcome notice or approval notice sent or card production ordered etc.But when document mailed etc,i think it might be a RFE on ur 485 or may be ur AP document(by mistake,updated on ur 485).If u r extreme lucky,it could be ur GC!!!!
Anyway wish u goodluck,
Please update ur post when u recieve the document mailed by USCIS,
thanks,
lakshmi
I verified my 485 Application status online and this is what I found can you guys tel what could this mean.
My I140 is not approved yet.
Application Type: I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
Hi,
As far as forum knowledge,Usually 485 approval updates would be either we sent u a welcome notice or approval notice sent or card production ordered etc.But when document mailed etc,i think it might be a RFE on ur 485 or may be ur AP document(by mistake,updated on ur 485).If u r extreme lucky,it could be ur GC!!!!
Anyway wish u goodluck,
Please update ur post when u recieve the document mailed by USCIS,
thanks,
lakshmi
more...
tinamatthew
07-17 11:07 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You're ok - TSC is fine. Nothing to worry about. All the best
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You're ok - TSC is fine. Nothing to worry about. All the best
2010 Mortal Kombat Fan Art
nidar
03-05 11:04 AM
just did
more...
letstalklc
10-03 03:16 PM
Your's is crossed 15 month stage, so you can ask your lawyer to enquire about it...
Hope fully DOL will approve yours soon...
Good luck
Hope fully DOL will approve yours soon...
Good luck
hair Scorpion (Mortal Kombat)
gcformeornot
04-07 02:07 PM
As far as I know, labor subs was banned in 2007...So if labor was substituted before 2007, we need to worry....Other cases who have 140 and labor intact now need not worry abt this rule for AC21..
Correct me if this is wrong...
but in many many cases people do not know about their Labor and 140 details. Many many chose not file AC21 documents... they just move to a new employer.... some of them might have their labor substituted without them know it.....
Mind you if you look at 485 inventory.... there are thousands of them out there who have filed 485 before July 2007 and still are waiting....
Correct me if this is wrong...
but in many many cases people do not know about their Labor and 140 details. Many many chose not file AC21 documents... they just move to a new employer.... some of them might have their labor substituted without them know it.....
Mind you if you look at 485 inventory.... there are thousands of them out there who have filed 485 before July 2007 and still are waiting....
more...
gc_chahiye
09-27 01:42 PM
^^^^^^^ bump
Appreciate any advice...thanks
habils advice is best at this point: try to get a quota-exemp H1 (if you cant extend your F1 and study some more)
Appreciate any advice...thanks
habils advice is best at this point: try to get a quota-exemp H1 (if you cant extend your F1 and study some more)
hot mortal kombat scorpion
desi3933
05-14 11:41 AM
......
My H-1B and COS has been approved now.
Q#1: My question is that can I travel to & back from India from Aug-2-2009 to Aug-19-2009 and enter Port of entry on my L-1B visa?
......
Since your H-1B change of status is approved, you are in H-1B Status now. In order to continue working on H-1B status after overseas trip, you must enter USA using H-1B visa stamp. This may require you to apply and get new H-1B visa stamp.
Please consider getting professional advice from your attorney before making any travel plans and what visa to use for re-entering.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
.
My H-1B and COS has been approved now.
Q#1: My question is that can I travel to & back from India from Aug-2-2009 to Aug-19-2009 and enter Port of entry on my L-1B visa?
......
Since your H-1B change of status is approved, you are in H-1B Status now. In order to continue working on H-1B status after overseas trip, you must enter USA using H-1B visa stamp. This may require you to apply and get new H-1B visa stamp.
Please consider getting professional advice from your attorney before making any travel plans and what visa to use for re-entering.
______________________
Not a legal advice.
US citizen of Indian origin
.
more...
house mortal kombat scorpion
abqguy
01-19 05:15 PM
lmao :D
tattoo FRIENDSHIP mortal kombat sub
Mount Soche
09-04 10:23 PM
Don't know much about how long medical tests are valid for but for sure the test has changed. I medical took a test last year for the employer sponsored green card and just took another medical test in August for another green card petition and my doctor told me that they're much stricter with the TB section.
I saw the form and it is totally different. They're asking for more detail.
I had to take another vaccine, which wasn't required last year.
Folks,
Due to the priority data transfer issue my I-485 application was rejected in June'08 (submitted based on June'08 visa bulletin).
As part of my application necessary medical exam tests were conducted in May'08. If I were to submit my application today based on the new visa bulletin do you think I need to take all medical exams again and re-submit? Won't the first set of medical exams have any validity?
Also, on the forums there is a talk about medical forms being changed? Can anyone confirm?
Thanks in advance for all your responses.
I saw the form and it is totally different. They're asking for more detail.
I had to take another vaccine, which wasn't required last year.
Folks,
Due to the priority data transfer issue my I-485 application was rejected in June'08 (submitted based on June'08 visa bulletin).
As part of my application necessary medical exam tests were conducted in May'08. If I were to submit my application today based on the new visa bulletin do you think I need to take all medical exams again and re-submit? Won't the first set of medical exams have any validity?
Also, on the forums there is a talk about medical forms being changed? Can anyone confirm?
Thanks in advance for all your responses.
more...
pictures mortal kombat scorpion
cool_guy_onnet1
06-01 01:28 PM
New Immigration Bill Amendment Could Help Keep Foreign Tech Workers In U.S.
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
dresses Mortal Kombat Ninjas; Scorpion
geesee
07-25 12:34 PM
another ^^^^
more...
makeup girlfriend Mortal Kombat 3
imm_pro
07-18 01:03 PM
This suggested flower campaign is to send flowers to DOL (Atlanta) and not USCIS.
Members please support or suggest ideas to expedite Atlanta labor processing time.
Members please support or suggest ideas to expedite Atlanta labor processing time.
girlfriend Scorpion+mortal+kombat+
logiclife
02-16 01:02 PM
There is a 7% limit per country. This 7% is applicable when all countries have large number of applicants. I case of several countries not filling their own 7% limit, those numbers have gone to India and China whose demand far outstrips 7% of 140,000 EB visas.
In 2004 and 2005, India and China already got way more than 7% since there wasnt much demand from other countries.
I think India got 42,000 EB visas out of 140,000, the visas that overflowed from those countries whose demand was negligible. Do you want this to be in IV goals still and draw attention to yourself especially since India got almost 30% of EB visas? Coz if you do so, someone will say : What are you talking about...what 7%? Indian employees consumed 30% of EB visa numbers in previous years.
Per country quota limit, if eliminated will not have any benefit but will draw attention to India and China already claiming way more than 7% of 140,000 visas. Its a counterproductive strategy.
The quota itself is a problem. The per country limit within the quota is NOT a problem.
--logiclife.
In 2004 and 2005, India and China already got way more than 7% since there wasnt much demand from other countries.
I think India got 42,000 EB visas out of 140,000, the visas that overflowed from those countries whose demand was negligible. Do you want this to be in IV goals still and draw attention to yourself especially since India got almost 30% of EB visas? Coz if you do so, someone will say : What are you talking about...what 7%? Indian employees consumed 30% of EB visa numbers in previous years.
Per country quota limit, if eliminated will not have any benefit but will draw attention to India and China already claiming way more than 7% of 140,000 visas. Its a counterproductive strategy.
The quota itself is a problem. The per country limit within the quota is NOT a problem.
--logiclife.
hairstyles mortal kombat scorpion
Edison99
02-11 11:54 AM
Pappu, could you share IVs recommendations in this thread too�
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
Looks like the news is out on this in media.
Immigration Voice has been aware of this and actively working on it for last 3 weeks. This had been also posted on the donor forums. Core members and several key IV volunteers/ donors already have been working on it and analyzing it. We also had been asked for our recommendations and had send our recommendations. We should see this bill introduced soon in a few days.
chanduv23
09-10 02:23 PM
texcan,
I did create such a platform. Launched it two weeks back. http://www.h1bfraud.com.
There is one more started by an IV member called www.desicrunch.com and another called h1bmajdoor.blogspot.com
I did create such a platform. Launched it two weeks back. http://www.h1bfraud.com.
There is one more started by an IV member called www.desicrunch.com and another called h1bmajdoor.blogspot.com
sanjuatl
09-04 10:40 AM
I think the Medical's are valid for 18 Months and not one year.I checked this out when i took infopass.Correct me if i am wrong .
As I remember, the validity is one year.
As I remember, the validity is one year.
No comments:
Post a Comment