anjans
07-11 02:52 PM
hold on tight and hope for the best
waiting4gc
07-18 03:06 PM
As long as you file I 140 as soon as your labor is approved. Spouse has nothing to do with application till it hits the 485 stage so you can file your 485 later.
Make sure you file your 140 in the regular channels and it should take some time to get approved.
Even if you decide to change jobs, after 140 is approved, the priority date is yours. So if you have a copy of the approved I 140 when you change jobs, you have to start the process all over again but by submitting the approved I 140 from previous company, you can maintain the priority date.
Hello guys,
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
Make sure you file your 140 in the regular channels and it should take some time to get approved.
Even if you decide to change jobs, after 140 is approved, the priority date is yours. So if you have a copy of the approved I 140 when you change jobs, you have to start the process all over again but by submitting the approved I 140 from previous company, you can maintain the priority date.
Hello guys,
First of all thank you very much for your answers in advance.
I am currently on H1-B (valid till 2010) and recently applied for PERM LC. I work for a non-profit organization and the category is EB-2. Nationality: Turkey.
I was planning to go for my GC but my plans have recently changed. I am planning to get married in 2009 Summer (earlier is not possible). I have done my research and found out that if I receive my GC before I get married, it will be very difficult to get my spouse here.
I am expecting to get the LC in about 4 months. Then, most probably I can file I-140 and I-485 concurrently as the visa numbers will be available for my case. However, I am not planning to do it anymore due to the reasons mentioned above.
So, here are my questions:
Now, the new rule tells that LC certification must be used within 180 days. So, can I just file I-140 while single and even though my visa numbers are current for I-485 (Can I seperate I-140 and I-485 and save I-1485 for after marriage - Summer 2009). Does it matter for the purposes of I-140, if I am single - and then add my spouse to I-485 in the US (She will be on H-4 with me here)?
I am not planning to change my job. So, would my I-140 have an expiration date?
Do you have any other suggestions? Thank you!
Simran21
10-01 01:18 PM
Thanks for the reply.
For me I will select "YES" to "Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?" but what should I select for my daughter (she 2 yrs old)?
In VISA renewal criteria it says "First time H4 or L2 applicants under 18 years of age." do not qualify for appointment in this renewal category?
This statement has confused me to whether to go for "YES" or "NO"?
thanks in advance
For me I will select "YES" to "Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?" but what should I select for my daughter (she 2 yrs old)?
In VISA renewal criteria it says "First time H4 or L2 applicants under 18 years of age." do not qualify for appointment in this renewal category?
This statement has confused me to whether to go for "YES" or "NO"?
thanks in advance
Libra
08-31 12:03 PM
All midwest members please go to this thread and cast your vote
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12599
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=12599
more...
permfiling
10-28 01:23 PM
Nope did not getthe I-797 yet, just an e-mail from USCIS. This was at NSC
Did you get your physical green card? Have you completed your FP?
I got the I-797 approval notice in mail but no card yet. I heard CARD takes few weeks.
Did you get your physical green card? Have you completed your FP?
I got the I-797 approval notice in mail but no card yet. I heard CARD takes few weeks.
Legal
07-19 10:19 AM
Can you start residency on EAD if you are the primary for 485? Meaning, can you use AC21 and change jobs from research to residency after 180 days from filing? Please help, really confused.
you won't be in the "similar" occupation...don't know if you can get away with it.
you won't be in the "similar" occupation...don't know if you can get away with it.
more...
droy1981
04-07 04:47 PM
I am planning to go on a Hawaii cruise on the Norwegian Cruise line ship (Pride of America) which is registered in the US. My H1-B visa has expired but my I-94 is valid. The Cruise ship only visits islands in Hawaii and embarks/disembarks in Hawaii.
Do I need to worry about my visa stamping or just the Passport with valid I-94 and drivers license should suffice?
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Do I need to worry about my visa stamping or just the Passport with valid I-94 and drivers license should suffice?
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
imind
03-12 12:09 PM
SUBJECT:
Start new LLC with wife's EAD and work on 1099/w2 to any company :
GETTING HARD TO GET IT JOB WITH H1Bs. Asking ONLY accept work on 1099/W2 with EAD/GC with Self Incorporated company LLC Certificate :
I have following questions on starting LLC on wife's EAD :
My 1-140 is approved and I-485 is pending (i140 and 485 both completed 180 days) and me and my wife both have EAD and AP. My current status is H1B with the current employer who filed for GC.
Q1: As current market crisis, lot of companies asking to work on 1099 or on their W2 basis.
(lot of IT jobs listed for only EAD/GC ....NO H1Bs like that...became hard to find IT job with H1B ).
For getting job purpose only, can I open LLC (100% owned by wife's name) on wife's name only and can I work for my wife's company through AC21 with my EAD (I'll ask my lawer to do all necessary paper works to meet my job role and job description are same kind and meets AC21 portability) .
Q2: Lot of new companies asking to show my self incorporated LLC certificate in which my name should be displayed in order to work for them via 1099/w2 basis.
In this case, what exactly I should do to work any company in US on 1099/w2 basis?
(Assume that I already opened LLC on my wife's EAD and 100% owned, and my name
is not listed in the company llc certificate).
Q3: In case if I joined my wife's company through AC21 under same job role/name that I'm doing ,
How can I work for other company on 1099/w2 basis?
How can I work for other company on Contract-to-contract basis?
As this is very critical step and helps lot of people, please help advise BEST possible options with step by step advise to avoid any other status changes and get smooth GC process run which is already in process.
Thanks appreciated.
Imind
Start new LLC with wife's EAD and work on 1099/w2 to any company :
GETTING HARD TO GET IT JOB WITH H1Bs. Asking ONLY accept work on 1099/W2 with EAD/GC with Self Incorporated company LLC Certificate :
I have following questions on starting LLC on wife's EAD :
My 1-140 is approved and I-485 is pending (i140 and 485 both completed 180 days) and me and my wife both have EAD and AP. My current status is H1B with the current employer who filed for GC.
Q1: As current market crisis, lot of companies asking to work on 1099 or on their W2 basis.
(lot of IT jobs listed for only EAD/GC ....NO H1Bs like that...became hard to find IT job with H1B ).
For getting job purpose only, can I open LLC (100% owned by wife's name) on wife's name only and can I work for my wife's company through AC21 with my EAD (I'll ask my lawer to do all necessary paper works to meet my job role and job description are same kind and meets AC21 portability) .
Q2: Lot of new companies asking to show my self incorporated LLC certificate in which my name should be displayed in order to work for them via 1099/w2 basis.
In this case, what exactly I should do to work any company in US on 1099/w2 basis?
(Assume that I already opened LLC on my wife's EAD and 100% owned, and my name
is not listed in the company llc certificate).
Q3: In case if I joined my wife's company through AC21 under same job role/name that I'm doing ,
How can I work for other company on 1099/w2 basis?
How can I work for other company on Contract-to-contract basis?
As this is very critical step and helps lot of people, please help advise BEST possible options with step by step advise to avoid any other status changes and get smooth GC process run which is already in process.
Thanks appreciated.
Imind
more...
vxg
10-31 03:33 PM
Query on Advance Parol. Send Clear Copies of Passports and I 94 Cards.
Question? Does I need to send all I 94 Cards of each H1B and all copies of passports with all pages.
I appreciate your suggestions..
I had the same query for my wife. I sent color copies of passport front and back, latest visa, I-94, DL and EAD all in color. Keep me posted how long it took for you to get approval after you sent the docs.
Question? Does I need to send all I 94 Cards of each H1B and all copies of passports with all pages.
I appreciate your suggestions..
I had the same query for my wife. I sent color copies of passport front and back, latest visa, I-94, DL and EAD all in color. Keep me posted how long it took for you to get approval after you sent the docs.
surabhi
08-17 04:02 PM
I think this might be the case where "Waiver of Signature" was not opted in case of express mail.
In that case, USPS has to deliver only if a signatory is available. This is obscure option on the Express Mail address sheet. For PO Box addresses like in this case, it is advisable to opt for waiver for obvious reasons.
In this situation, I guess nothing much to do except wait I guess.
In that case, USPS has to deliver only if a signatory is available. This is obscure option on the Express Mail address sheet. For PO Box addresses like in this case, it is advisable to opt for waiver for obvious reasons.
In this situation, I guess nothing much to do except wait I guess.
more...
Dhundhun
06-08 01:34 AM
My Job ad says: Sr Business analyst wanted ... with MS/MBA or foreign equivalent with 5 yrs exp.
I have
BSc in physics - 3 yr India degree
PG diploma in Instrumentation - 1 Yr India PG diploma
PG dip in marketing mgmt - 1 Yr India PG dip (E learning)
PG dip in buiness admin - 1 Yr India PG dip (E learning)
MBA - 3 Yr India PG degree (E learning)
6 yrs in healthcare, 2 yrs in sales, 5 yrs as Business analyst with Indian s/w vendor. 13 yrs in total.
Does my job ad allow me to qualify for EB2? Will I have any issues at my I-140 stage? Pls share your thoughts
If 5 yr exp. is there, then the required exp. should match. Can you match requirement list and show matching previous exp.? If so it should be EB2 - if not then I-140 will not be approved.
This is the place lawyers provide better advise - how to match (req. vs exp.), so that they can defend case in case of RFE.
As such the job req. seems to be EB2. It has no relationship with individual. Individual have to match it.
I have
BSc in physics - 3 yr India degree
PG diploma in Instrumentation - 1 Yr India PG diploma
PG dip in marketing mgmt - 1 Yr India PG dip (E learning)
PG dip in buiness admin - 1 Yr India PG dip (E learning)
MBA - 3 Yr India PG degree (E learning)
6 yrs in healthcare, 2 yrs in sales, 5 yrs as Business analyst with Indian s/w vendor. 13 yrs in total.
Does my job ad allow me to qualify for EB2? Will I have any issues at my I-140 stage? Pls share your thoughts
If 5 yr exp. is there, then the required exp. should match. Can you match requirement list and show matching previous exp.? If so it should be EB2 - if not then I-140 will not be approved.
This is the place lawyers provide better advise - how to match (req. vs exp.), so that they can defend case in case of RFE.
As such the job req. seems to be EB2. It has no relationship with individual. Individual have to match it.
poorslumdog
09-02 01:28 PM
Hi there,
I have been arrested for shoplifting. Finger printed,and produced in court. The case has been dismissed as I did not do it on purpose. I got the document from the court that case is DISMISSED. 1. Is it good to do the "Case Expungement"?
2. Does the port of entry officer sees the arrest even I expunge the case?
3. any other scenarios I might encounter?
Any suggestions are highly appreciated
Thank you
You shameless idiot...you are back again.
I have been arrested for shoplifting. Finger printed,and produced in court. The case has been dismissed as I did not do it on purpose. I got the document from the court that case is DISMISSED. 1. Is it good to do the "Case Expungement"?
2. Does the port of entry officer sees the arrest even I expunge the case?
3. any other scenarios I might encounter?
Any suggestions are highly appreciated
Thank you
You shameless idiot...you are back again.
more...
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
gccube
06-01 03:23 PM
Because the PDs are valid for the whole month I guess the date of filing should not matter it as long as it is before 30th June, I think.
Do you think it does affect us in some way?
Do you think it does affect us in some way?
more...
HereIComeGC
04-11 12:26 PM
dude do not hang-up. It is just another innovative way by USCIS to check your patience. The message changes to 5-10 minutes and then someone does talk to you ... :)
Thank you Dude and Lasantha. ALso Lasantha - Congrationtions on your GC. I will tolerate the annoying message and grind it out.
Thank you Dude and Lasantha. ALso Lasantha - Congrationtions on your GC. I will tolerate the annoying message and grind it out.
looivy
10-06 02:07 AM
Hi IV Team,
Excellent job building up this team of notable advisors.
Thanks.
Excellent job building up this team of notable advisors.
Thanks.
more...
papajon
06-18 02:23 PM
Sorry to hear that. I don't know the answer to your original question but I hope you have a way of extending your H1?
The lawyer said H1 can be extended while the appeal is still pending.
The lawyer said H1 can be extended while the appeal is still pending.
pnjbindia
01-15 09:23 AM
i got frustrated and applied for PP .... came back in 3 days... they are rediculous..
gmpa
01-17 01:20 PM
My H1 and family's H4 non-premium extensions were applied on 10/12/07 and approved from Vermont last week on 1/10/08. Approvals not yet physically received. These extensions were on the basis of approved I-140 and retrogressed EB-3 PD.
makino_a55
01-08 01:00 PM
Good luck for us ; And to all the hard working guys ; i would like to help out in the best way ; i am mostly a follower not a leader ; please let me know if i can be of any help ; I live in Oregon, Portland ; i shall request my other friends to contribute for the cause.
Thanks
Anil.
Thanks
Anil.
EndlessWait
02-25 04:14 PM
has anyone heard about the following? don't quite know where it is originally coming from. it's from here (http://www.greencardapply.com/news/news09/news09_0210.htm)
2/10/2009
When the alien beneficiary voluntarily departs from the employment in an hostile environment to get a new job, and the USCIS obtains an evidence, either before 180 days or after 180 days of filing of I-140 and I-485, the foreign worker may face a risk of denial or revocation of the petition, because of the evidence of such alien's intent not to work for the employer for the petitioned job, and the AC-21 rule is not available for alien beneficiaries with evidence of actively searching for new employment. In this case, foreign workers who had departed from the employment, not because of the layoff, or because of the alien's decision to change employment.
Such adverse evidence can also haunt after the foreign workers obtaining the Green Card as the law allows the USCIS to initiate the Green Card revocation proceeding before the immigration courts under the law that the USCIS can revoke a Green Card, should they belatedly find and establish such adverse evidence after the approval of a Green Card, which should have formed a basis for the adjudicator to deny the I-485 applications had the adjudicator known the facts and evidence.
The issues here involve in most cases hostile employers or other third parties who possess such evidence, and offer to the USCIS to hurt such foreign workers. Usually such denial or revocation is preceded by the USCIS' initiation of a notice of intent to deny or revoke (NOID or NOIR) when such action is taken before the Green Card is approved, but when a revocation proceeding is initiated after the green card approval, they file revocation proceeding before an immigrant court as such alien is entitled to a hearing and decision by an immigrant judge.
u sound like a desperate desi BS.
2/10/2009
When the alien beneficiary voluntarily departs from the employment in an hostile environment to get a new job, and the USCIS obtains an evidence, either before 180 days or after 180 days of filing of I-140 and I-485, the foreign worker may face a risk of denial or revocation of the petition, because of the evidence of such alien's intent not to work for the employer for the petitioned job, and the AC-21 rule is not available for alien beneficiaries with evidence of actively searching for new employment. In this case, foreign workers who had departed from the employment, not because of the layoff, or because of the alien's decision to change employment.
Such adverse evidence can also haunt after the foreign workers obtaining the Green Card as the law allows the USCIS to initiate the Green Card revocation proceeding before the immigration courts under the law that the USCIS can revoke a Green Card, should they belatedly find and establish such adverse evidence after the approval of a Green Card, which should have formed a basis for the adjudicator to deny the I-485 applications had the adjudicator known the facts and evidence.
The issues here involve in most cases hostile employers or other third parties who possess such evidence, and offer to the USCIS to hurt such foreign workers. Usually such denial or revocation is preceded by the USCIS' initiation of a notice of intent to deny or revoke (NOID or NOIR) when such action is taken before the Green Card is approved, but when a revocation proceeding is initiated after the green card approval, they file revocation proceeding before an immigrant court as such alien is entitled to a hearing and decision by an immigrant judge.
u sound like a desperate desi BS.
No comments:
Post a Comment