feedfront
09-21 12:23 PM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Also they sent the RFE to my previous employer's attorney even though my current employer's attorney had sent the new G-28 forms. Can my current attorney respond to the RFE or will the response get rejected because USCIS still has old attorney on file.
Thanks.
Don't worry too much, just follow the instructions and respond. Well, I will suggest to use your current employer and their attorney as paperword will be smooth, efficient and fast.
You can hold your H1 transfer for a week or two till you don't respond.
I think your attorney (whoever you pick to work on RFE) will definitely mention AC-21 to keep it issueless.
I have also switched my employer and not filed AC-21. I've been sent RFE and that's what my attorney will do (I assume). I had asked him before (after switching job) if I needed to file AC21 letter. He said it's not mandatory and added that it can be handled if any RFEs are issued. Well, I did not send AC21 because he was asking for fee and I did not want to DIY project on such important. He's my previous employer's attorney.
I think for these RFEs you don't need great attorney as case is not complex. I think anything will work as long as you've not misused any GC's requirements.
Good Luck!
wallpaper Opel Astra GTC
waiting4gc
07-05 01:43 PM
Order Details - Jul 5, 2007 11:09 AM PDT
Google Order #448537035986231 Print
Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Contribute 100 $100.00
Total: $100.00
Google Order #448537035986231 Print
Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Contribute 100 $100.00
Total: $100.00
hara_patta_for_rico
07-10 08:12 AM
It seems several persons are already discrediting the lawsuit and from the comments I have seen, it is apparent that some have not read the entire complaint.
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
In order to understand how a civil lawsuit works one needs to understand that in a complaint, one makes no legal arguments, does not cite case or precedent law but only cites the simple facts. The other side can respond to the complaint and deny or accept the allegations in part or in whole. Many cases do not go to trial, they end up in settlements or are decided through summary judgement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summary_judgment) (for the plaintiff or the defendants) if the case has undisputable matters of facts and one of the parties petitions for it. Several processes also take place ie Discovery long before an actual trial. I recommend reading the following wikipedia entry to familiarize one at a high level with the processes and rules involved:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Rule_of_Civil_Procedure
To get to the core legal arguments behind the case, one needs to read the counts (they are only stated and not argued/expounded on starting pg 13). Namely those are:
COUNT I: VIOLATION OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution) (constitutional rights issue)
COUNT II: VIOLATION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES ACT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedures_Act)
COUNT III: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACT (http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title4/civ00036.htm)
COUNT IV: EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT (http://www.hhs.gov/dab/guidelines/eaja.html)
COUNT V: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promissory_estoppel#Promissory_estoppel)
There are several laws cited above, its thus puzzling to see requests for one to cite the laws USCIS/DOS is accused of violating when its all there in the lawsuit. The plaintiff has the burden of proving the counts they have stated at the appropriate time and not in the complaint. One does not play all their cards in the initial complaint.
Even more puzzling is the persistent fear that there would be retributory action from USCIS. Judges do not take kindly to such behavior and USCIS would have no chance defending itself on charges of retaliatory actions.
Thank you for getting some sanity into the conversation....atleast some people are realising that actions, especially those perpetrated by Govt Agencies, are watched closely. They will be held accountable, whether one likes it or not . If the lawyers want to profit from all of this, let it be so, as long as the voice of a troubled community is heard in a court of law. That is just the first step....
2011 tattoo Opel Astra H Cosmo
ramaonline
12-26 01:40 PM
there is no concept of employee transfer after 140 approval. once u get 140 approved u can get 3 year incremental h1 extension due to retrogression- portability is also allowed during these 3 years - so u can join any employer. (h1 transfer) also note that if ur current employer does not revoke the 140 u can retain the PD and use it for a new gc application with a new employer, else u must start the LC-140 etc process once again.
more...
shantanup
02-12 05:46 AM
Just a friendly thought from a co-member, If you are motivated to attend the advocacy event, why dont you consider sponsoring your travel? We should try to keep the donated miles/hotel points for on-the-edge members who we will have to try convince at the last moment when we closer to April.
Motivated members who believe in this event should come forward and sponsor themselves and consider it as a contribution to the event. We are not doing anyone else a favor by travelling to DC - this is for our own good.
-Attending the advocacy day.
I see and agree with what you say. I sponsored myself the last 2 times I went for advocacy days but this time the situation is different - I've got my green card already and therefore finding it difficult to justify the expenses to my wife.
Motivated members who believe in this event should come forward and sponsor themselves and consider it as a contribution to the event. We are not doing anyone else a favor by travelling to DC - this is for our own good.
-Attending the advocacy day.
I see and agree with what you say. I sponsored myself the last 2 times I went for advocacy days but this time the situation is different - I've got my green card already and therefore finding it difficult to justify the expenses to my wife.
ak27
01-03 11:35 AM
Hello Everyone,
Wish all of you very happy new year. So far, we have only six members on group. If I may have missed anyone, please send me an email ajay1857@gmail.com.
NJ chapter must be largest... Let us make it..
Thank you..
Wish all of you very happy new year. So far, we have only six members on group. If I may have missed anyone, please send me an email ajay1857@gmail.com.
NJ chapter must be largest... Let us make it..
Thank you..
more...
Suva
08-10 02:06 PM
I am in.
2010 Vand Opel Astra H GTC
logiclife
01-18 01:12 PM
This thread has be closed but the discussion is continued on the newer thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2939
Thanks.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2939
Thanks.
more...
walking_dude
11-17 08:37 PM
Here's mine - NRC2008065496
hair dresses VAUXHALL ASTRA MK5 H
uma001
03-21 01:26 PM
I replied to your message. Pls check it.
more...
kumarc123
10-19 02:28 PM
Just imagine the cowardice of these people!. Online forums already have sufficient anonymity that you dont have to reveal your true name. Despite that people hide behind comment system to give reds (and tell things like "you suck" and what not). I hope the admins shut down this misused feature. Or make the system non-anonymous so that we can drag out these people and take up their comments in open forum.
Hello there,
I cant less concur to what you jsut said, if someone has something to say and critique , they can very well post their response or send a private message.
Anyways the focus is the campaign. Have we decided on what and when we should do this flower campaign?
I request all IV members, to please unite and do something, we all need to be mobile and create more awareness.
Have we all forgotten how much publicity we got in 2007? lets all wait till the election day is over and the right candidate is elected.
Then we should plan a rally.
I am lucky, because I work hard. We all can be lucky as well, all we need to do is, work hard on these rally's. A flower campaign, a rally and maybe someone earlier suggested the EB community should take one day off work and attend that rally. This way, they will understand our Importance
Hello there,
I cant less concur to what you jsut said, if someone has something to say and critique , they can very well post their response or send a private message.
Anyways the focus is the campaign. Have we decided on what and when we should do this flower campaign?
I request all IV members, to please unite and do something, we all need to be mobile and create more awareness.
Have we all forgotten how much publicity we got in 2007? lets all wait till the election day is over and the right candidate is elected.
Then we should plan a rally.
I am lucky, because I work hard. We all can be lucky as well, all we need to do is, work hard on these rally's. A flower campaign, a rally and maybe someone earlier suggested the EB community should take one day off work and attend that rally. This way, they will understand our Importance
hot The interior
andy garcia
09-28 08:21 AM
Which European countries are they from? Their opinion can be relevant in this context if they are from a rich EU country, but less convincing if they are from Albania, for example.
France and Sweden are OK for you.
France and Sweden are OK for you.
more...
house 2010 Opel - Vauxhall Astra
delhirocks
07-01 10:00 PM
When prominent business houses like Microsoft, Google, Cisco, Oracle and organizations like AILA seem powerless when it comes to influencing senators, lawmakers and government organizations like USCIS and DOS, what can IV team do to change the policies. Sorry I did not mean to criticize, but that's the truth, unfortunately!
What is the alternative?
We all resign to our fate�or try to do whatever little we can
What is the alternative?
We all resign to our fate�or try to do whatever little we can
tattoo some of the Opel pictures?
onemorecame
10-22 10:21 AM
Can you please post your timeline here?
RFE : Sep 10 2010,
RFE Received : Oct 01 2010
RFE Repelied : Oct 07 2010
Case approved : Oct 20 2010
Hope this will help
RFE : Sep 10 2010,
RFE Received : Oct 01 2010
RFE Repelied : Oct 07 2010
Case approved : Oct 20 2010
Hope this will help
more...
pictures OPEL | Model: astra h
the_jaguar
11-08 04:46 PM
Central Jersey here..
dresses OPEL Astra H 2004
thomachan72
05-26 08:07 PM
as one member mentioned I am planning to take photocopy (notarized) of my visa and I-94 and carry one copy in the car. I am sure they are not out there to capture H1b/L1 visa holders who are ilegal. They will have to search for years before they can find somebody. There are very very very few it all any of us who might be present ilegally and they very well should know that by now. The should be more concerned about those who come on B1/B2 or other visas like artists etc. These are likely to overstay but 99% of us EB people are legal and very careful to be legal always. But anyway thanks for posting, I am getting my photocopy ASAP.
more...
makeup Opel Astra H
svr_76
06-10 12:51 PM
@hpandey : I dont think that this is any "racist" amendment. I think this amendment is more geared towards the perception that Microsoft (US) (and the simmilars) when firing ppl in US fire citizen and "hire" (H1B ppl immediately). I think if at all it needs improvement on what they mean by "same title" as within the same title people skills/trade would be different.
girlfriend 2010 Opel Astra Interior
PresidentO
11-13 02:28 AM
Spill over does not need to happen every Q. It is purely based on demand and supply. If the visa office sees demand go south ( read really really south) and do not expect the demand to pick up for the rest of the year, yeah then the visa office will move the dated forward using spill over. if the demand is enough, meaning categories that are current are just using fine and CIS has enough backlogs VO does not move dates.
The most pre cautious option is (esp now that there are a shit load of pre adjudicated cases) is to leave the numbers for categories that are current until the final Q and then move the dates so that all current categories got a best shot at the visa number before it goes to the retrogressed. The visa office is pretty savvy and the numbers we saw from USCIS might be way off the real numbers the visa office sees and assigns a visa number for. Based on last 3 years, it seems that the DOS/VO knows the importance of visa numbers.
if you are talking lawsuit because you are frustrated, yeah vent it out. But if you are really serious go ahead and check the INA act and verify whether the INA act actually talks about quarterly allocation. Come up with the ground work, have a point and then think about lawsuit. No point in hallucinating.
Just an F Y I, I havent read all 5 pages of this thread
The most pre cautious option is (esp now that there are a shit load of pre adjudicated cases) is to leave the numbers for categories that are current until the final Q and then move the dates so that all current categories got a best shot at the visa number before it goes to the retrogressed. The visa office is pretty savvy and the numbers we saw from USCIS might be way off the real numbers the visa office sees and assigns a visa number for. Based on last 3 years, it seems that the DOS/VO knows the importance of visa numbers.
if you are talking lawsuit because you are frustrated, yeah vent it out. But if you are really serious go ahead and check the INA act and verify whether the INA act actually talks about quarterly allocation. Come up with the ground work, have a point and then think about lawsuit. No point in hallucinating.
Just an F Y I, I havent read all 5 pages of this thread
hairstyles OPEL Astra h 2007 1, 9 diesel,
downthedrain
02-02 07:09 PM
Here is the text under the attachment section
The record contains a letter from your prospective employer. The letter indicates that you have been employed by XXXXXX company as a Senior Software Engineer. However, the record does not contain any evidence which establishes the salary or compensation package being offered. Therefore you must submit a currently issued letter or other evidence from the prospective permanent employer indicating that the salary or compensation package being offered.
PD Mar 2002
485 RD SEP 2007
The record contains a letter from your prospective employer. The letter indicates that you have been employed by XXXXXX company as a Senior Software Engineer. However, the record does not contain any evidence which establishes the salary or compensation package being offered. Therefore you must submit a currently issued letter or other evidence from the prospective permanent employer indicating that the salary or compensation package being offered.
PD Mar 2002
485 RD SEP 2007
Hope_GC
07-16 08:02 PM
I agree with you..
I've so many hard working American friends... it really make me want to work harder to compete with them, but these bunch of cry babies at Numbers are scared of skilled workers, they don't want to upgrade their skills, they want to work 9-5 and get paid for their incompetencies.
I've so many hard working American friends... it really make me want to work harder to compete with them, but these bunch of cry babies at Numbers are scared of skilled workers, they don't want to upgrade their skills, they want to work 9-5 and get paid for their incompetencies.
gc_check
07-29 01:19 PM
Given the unemployment rate and also the current market condition, it is not really favorable for starting a Green Card process (Labor/PERM) if you belong to one of the field, where there are adequate number of people already available. The recent economic conditions has flooded the market with many people who might qualify, as the requirement is to accept any US Citizen/Perm Resident, if one has the minimum qualification, even if you do not have all that is requested for. Future GC holder might like this provision after GC !! It is now become even difficult to prove that no matching candidate was found. If you are eligible for EB1/EB2 (National Interest Waiver / Exceptional Ability) where you can get a waiver for labor and go for I-140 directly, then you have a better chance. Sadly (IT/Consultants) etc do not come under this, unless you are that exceptional with many patents, etc.. and have a better designation in the organization. Even couple patents would do no good in this case :(. One of the first step for GC, is to prove that it is not adversely affecting the US Citizen/Permanent Residents already in the country and if the HR is sure on this, they can't prove that no US citizen is available, they will not process GC. Remember the TARP Funded companies had restrictions imposed on them. Some of the companies listed are all good corporation that do thins per the law / books. Well, unless it is a small body shop totally rely on Consultants / Non-immigration worked for any reason, big companies will not spend extra $'s to get the Attorney's to be more creative to get through the process. When supply is adequate, they do not care. Unfortunately this causes so much stress / difficulty for the applicant going through the general EB3/EB2 (labor) category and USCIS slow processing and loop holes that were not addressed in the past but addressed now (Labor Sub. / Diff. process window in diff region, when people with later dates go through first,) per country limit, lost visa numbers cause enormous delay and added stress, but irrespective of all this, people still make it through eventually. A little patience and being persistent and take right steps will help regardless. We all know, the system is bad, complaining against it would not change. Work on making some positive influence on the system and even you fail many times, with each failure you go one step closure to achieve your goal. There were some success/relief that was obtained with the efforts of IV and the likes.. some set backs, but things will change for good. Sadly, due to lack of time, some people get affected the most and others not so much. Thatz life and real !!!
In your case, It is sad, they will not do GC as you were told at the time, when they hired you. But the reality in this is country --> Employment @ will and if you go through rest of the documents you have received, you will also see another clause "Either party can terminate the employment relationship, with or without reason with 2 weeks or without notice" depends on the company wording /time might change. Keep trying for alternate option that will help you get what you want.
In your case, It is sad, they will not do GC as you were told at the time, when they hired you. But the reality in this is country --> Employment @ will and if you go through rest of the documents you have received, you will also see another clause "Either party can terminate the employment relationship, with or without reason with 2 weeks or without notice" depends on the company wording /time might change. Keep trying for alternate option that will help you get what you want.
No comments:
Post a Comment