ashiqman
06-24 03:04 PM
I work for a very small start-up American firm. The company has been in business since 1 year. Even I have been with the company (full-time) for approximately the same amount of time. Unfortunately, the company has not been able to make any revenues in this 1 year. I am planning to visit India in May and if I do, I will have to get my H1 restamped, since my old visa has expired. In this forum, I have seen some instances of rejection/hold on H1B stamping. Taking that into account and given the situation of my company (although genuine and still having enough funds to run), is it worth taking the risk? I will be appearing for an interview in Mumbai. Any info in this regard will be really helpful to me. Thanks in advance.
1985 chevy truck. 1985 Chevy Scottsdale - Back
rockrocky
01-14 10:53 PM
I have used Hopeforhaiti.com to donate.
it is truly heart breaking to see the footage of the aftermath. I hope God gives them strength and courage to deal with the situation and the country rebuilds itself.
~R
it is truly heart breaking to see the footage of the aftermath. I hope God gives them strength and courage to deal with the situation and the country rebuilds itself.
~R
1985 chevy truck. Pictures of 1985 Chevy
anilsal
10-30 04:31 PM
I was reading the USA Today articles and I have a suggestion...guys please try to do spell check before you submit to such forums. It looks bad on us especially when we call ourselves skilled immigrants.
One glaring error that I saw was this guy with a MBA from Stanford Univ and he wrote it as "Standford Univ"......Is there a univ called "Standford"???? I tried googling it but did not find it...I hope it was not somebody from our group....
That even applies to discussion on IV. If law makers have a look at the IV forums (after they have been appraised of the existence of IV) and see lots of posts that lack basic grammatical skills and in urgent need of spell checks, then you know, what goes on in their mind(s).
Simple spelling mistakes are fine, but if a post needs spell checks a lot, either the person who posted does not care or needs a good spellchecker.
Good that you brought this issue up. Are we not talking of Skilled Immigration? If yes, then let us all do some homework (run a spell checker, to make sure things are going to appear nice for readers).
Sorry if I appear rude. We are in this fight together and we need to come out successful :)
One glaring error that I saw was this guy with a MBA from Stanford Univ and he wrote it as "Standford Univ"......Is there a univ called "Standford"???? I tried googling it but did not find it...I hope it was not somebody from our group....
That even applies to discussion on IV. If law makers have a look at the IV forums (after they have been appraised of the existence of IV) and see lots of posts that lack basic grammatical skills and in urgent need of spell checks, then you know, what goes on in their mind(s).
Simple spelling mistakes are fine, but if a post needs spell checks a lot, either the person who posted does not care or needs a good spellchecker.
Good that you brought this issue up. Are we not talking of Skilled Immigration? If yes, then let us all do some homework (run a spell checker, to make sure things are going to appear nice for readers).
Sorry if I appear rude. We are in this fight together and we need to come out successful :)
1985 chevy truck. Trucks 1985 Chevy S10
ita
05-16 03:50 PM
Hi all, I need your advice and opinions about my situation.
H1b – Started on Oct 07
PERM is approved and my PD is April 6, 2006 (PERM)
i140 and i485 July 2007 (Received by USCIS Texas Center September 10, 2007)
AP and EAD received September 2007
My company lawyer just emails me to ask about renewing my EAD/AP. My company paid for my first EAD/AP and I paid for my wife EAD/AP. Now, I will have to pay both of them since I think they know that it is not main process for my GC sponsorship. They only pay for the green card process.
I do not plan to change my job and do not plan to travel outside US (unless there is a family emergency). My wife and children are all in the US. My wife does not plan to work/travel. So do I need to renew my EAD/AP?
It is nice to have AP since I can travel if I have to travel outside US for Family emergency but for EAD, I do not think that I won’t need it.
Is there any benefit to have EAD in my situation?
If I do not renew my EAD and AP, will I affect my GC / any immigration process in the future, such as renewing my H1b?
For example, if I do not renew this year, can I apply again next year?
Thank you
Read Somewhere on IV before that renewal is better than letting them expire ..
H1b – Started on Oct 07
PERM is approved and my PD is April 6, 2006 (PERM)
i140 and i485 July 2007 (Received by USCIS Texas Center September 10, 2007)
AP and EAD received September 2007
My company lawyer just emails me to ask about renewing my EAD/AP. My company paid for my first EAD/AP and I paid for my wife EAD/AP. Now, I will have to pay both of them since I think they know that it is not main process for my GC sponsorship. They only pay for the green card process.
I do not plan to change my job and do not plan to travel outside US (unless there is a family emergency). My wife and children are all in the US. My wife does not plan to work/travel. So do I need to renew my EAD/AP?
It is nice to have AP since I can travel if I have to travel outside US for Family emergency but for EAD, I do not think that I won’t need it.
Is there any benefit to have EAD in my situation?
If I do not renew my EAD and AP, will I affect my GC / any immigration process in the future, such as renewing my H1b?
For example, if I do not renew this year, can I apply again next year?
Thank you
Read Somewhere on IV before that renewal is better than letting them expire ..
more...
1985 chevy truck. Lifted 1985 Chevy Truck
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
1985 chevy truck. 2006 Gator Drag Custom Truck
gc_rip
07-06 12:52 PM
Thanks Ann,
This is really helpful.
To understand it carefully, as long as the new company can provide me a future job offer, when the PD is current the GC can be approved.
In this case,
1. Should I transfer my H1B with the new company, or it's not required? My job offer will be from the Indian company, and not the US company.
2. In case of business travel, until the PD is current, if I don't have AP renewed which visa should I travel on? As I won't be paid directly from the US counterpart of the company, I am not sure if I can travel using H1 for short time.
Could traveling on B1 visa consider it as abandonment of GC process?
Thanks,
-Raj
This is really helpful.
To understand it carefully, as long as the new company can provide me a future job offer, when the PD is current the GC can be approved.
In this case,
1. Should I transfer my H1B with the new company, or it's not required? My job offer will be from the Indian company, and not the US company.
2. In case of business travel, until the PD is current, if I don't have AP renewed which visa should I travel on? As I won't be paid directly from the US counterpart of the company, I am not sure if I can travel using H1 for short time.
Could traveling on B1 visa consider it as abandonment of GC process?
Thanks,
-Raj
more...
1985 chevy truck. Dustin#39;s 1985 Chevy 4x4 pick
prom2
07-22 12:00 AM
New fee is 1010 (I-485 + FP) + $305 (AP) + $340 (EAD) = $1655
First year EAD and AP are Included. Not Life long EAD/AP. Wishful thinking in your part Nothing comes free here.
You guys are wrong.
1) The new fee for I-485 is a package fee (includes EAD and AP)
2) EADs and APs are included as long your adjustement application is pending.
Read the last paragraph here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
First year EAD and AP are Included. Not Life long EAD/AP. Wishful thinking in your part Nothing comes free here.
You guys are wrong.
1) The new fee for I-485 is a package fee (includes EAD and AP)
2) EADs and APs are included as long your adjustement application is pending.
Read the last paragraph here:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/FinalUSCISFeeSchedule052907.pdf
1985 chevy truck. Chevy truck enthusiasts
locomotive36
11-15 09:44 AM
With only 3 days to go for voting, lets do our best to ensure that Narayanan Krishnan wins.
Please take a minute to vote and vote many times as possible. Please share with family and friends!
Thankyou and God Bless!
Please take a minute to vote and vote many times as possible. Please share with family and friends!
Thankyou and God Bless!
more...
1985 chevy truck. mud riding truck until one
Brightsider
11-16 03:31 PM
Guys,
Am trying to find out the relevant parts of HR 2892 that extends that benefit to EB cases.
Havent been able to find it?
Apart from Shusterman's commentary, I havent seen anything about the extension of benefits of the 'widow's penalty' to EB cases.
Maybe I am not looking at the right doc.
But those of you who have been able to see it in the statute/law, could you please point it out .....by sending the url, or noting the section/article of the law or any other way.
Many thanks
Am trying to find out the relevant parts of HR 2892 that extends that benefit to EB cases.
Havent been able to find it?
Apart from Shusterman's commentary, I havent seen anything about the extension of benefits of the 'widow's penalty' to EB cases.
Maybe I am not looking at the right doc.
But those of you who have been able to see it in the statute/law, could you please point it out .....by sending the url, or noting the section/article of the law or any other way.
Many thanks
1985 chevy truck. and my 87 Chevy pickup.
rajarao
09-08 10:03 PM
I got the same mail and kept me thinking about it; Just another way USCIS keeps us on our toes and in suspense, since the years of wait is not sufficient.....; Anyway, looks things are moving. Great Job by IV and the teams, starting from July 2007 visa bulletin; the community is great and good source of information. I will do my best to continue my support for IV as before and to all the immigrants or waiting to be one. Good luck to everyone.
more...
1985 chevy truck. collinswill#39; 1985 Chevrolet
mmanurker
08-06 11:29 AM
Mine is not labor substitution though. My lawyer never received the original hardcopy of the labor certification.
I am also in the same boat. Mine is also not a labor substitution and my lawyer never recieved the original hardcopy of the labor. So he said we cannot file for I-140 premium processing and my 140 application is pending since March'2007. My labor PD is Dec'2003 got approved from Dallas BEC in Dec'2006.
I am also in the same boat. Mine is also not a labor substitution and my lawyer never recieved the original hardcopy of the labor. So he said we cannot file for I-140 premium processing and my 140 application is pending since March'2007. My labor PD is Dec'2003 got approved from Dallas BEC in Dec'2006.
1985 chevy truck. Custom 1985 Chevy C10
chanduv23
12-09 08:17 AM
Good morning
Bumpppppppppp
Bumpppppppppp
more...
1985 chevy truck. chevy trucks for sale.
cal97
08-15 08:01 PM
I am in the same boat. Filed I-485 with an EB2 approved I-140 P.D June 2004. DBEC approved my EB3 LC with PD 2001.
This is what I know can be done:
1. File I-140 and I-485 for the older LC. USCIS may later ask you to withdraw
one case.
2. File for a new I-140 for the older LC, wait for it to be approved and then
file for substitution of I-140. Then the EB2 will get the older PD. This is the
I-140 porting process that my attorney explained to me.
3. File for I-140 and after approval file for CP.
I have opted for the last option. My attorney has filed for my EB3 I-140 and asked for CP. Since I-140 approvals are taking so long and with no PP I do not expect anything for a year more atleast. Again, you have an option to port the I-140 to EB2 if you do not want to go through the CP route after the older PD I-140 is approved.
Hope this helps.
HI!
I have approved EB-2/I-140(PD October'2005) & also approved labor(EB-3)(PD October'2003). I have filed for I-485 last month. According to my lawyer, he has asked USCIS to port EB-3 priority date to EB-2 (by giving required documents+ letters +forms etc). Will USCIS approve this porting?
Regards,
USA2007
This is what I know can be done:
1. File I-140 and I-485 for the older LC. USCIS may later ask you to withdraw
one case.
2. File for a new I-140 for the older LC, wait for it to be approved and then
file for substitution of I-140. Then the EB2 will get the older PD. This is the
I-140 porting process that my attorney explained to me.
3. File for I-140 and after approval file for CP.
I have opted for the last option. My attorney has filed for my EB3 I-140 and asked for CP. Since I-140 approvals are taking so long and with no PP I do not expect anything for a year more atleast. Again, you have an option to port the I-140 to EB2 if you do not want to go through the CP route after the older PD I-140 is approved.
Hope this helps.
HI!
I have approved EB-2/I-140(PD October'2005) & also approved labor(EB-3)(PD October'2003). I have filed for I-485 last month. According to my lawyer, he has asked USCIS to port EB-3 priority date to EB-2 (by giving required documents+ letters +forms etc). Will USCIS approve this porting?
Regards,
USA2007
1985 chevy truck. 1985 Chevrolet C10 Custom
Dhundhun
07-10 06:30 PM
On I-797 from Y it doesn't have I-94 number on it anywhere. since its through consular processing.
In order to work with Y, i have to get stamped first then only pay stubbs are generated. This was the understanding, when owner of Y ,company Y Attorney and myself were in the conference call discussion.
Basically the H-1B with company Y required Change of Status (COS). I am not familiar with this type of situation - whether you can get change of status done in USA or not. If not I think this is a case, which requires Visa to be stamped in home country.
Could somebody throw more infromation on this? Thanks
In order to work with Y, i have to get stamped first then only pay stubbs are generated. This was the understanding, when owner of Y ,company Y Attorney and myself were in the conference call discussion.
Basically the H-1B with company Y required Change of Status (COS). I am not familiar with this type of situation - whether you can get change of status done in USA or not. If not I think this is a case, which requires Visa to be stamped in home country.
Could somebody throw more infromation on this? Thanks
more...
1985 chevy truck. 1985 Chevy Pulling Truck BIG
vasired
08-15 03:14 PM
485 RD:6/29
485 ND:7/25
FP ND: 8/8
FP Date:9/4
485 ND:7/25
FP ND: 8/8
FP Date:9/4
1985 chevy truck. btshoup#39; 1985 Chevrolet C10
newlife2
09-20 12:12 AM
Guys, I was just laid off and have efiled i539 3 days after the termination date for a status change to F2. Now working on the application letter. Do you think I should mention the layoff in the letter?
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
I guess I will mention it in the letter to explain the whole situation and hope everything will be all right. Let me know if anybody disagrees asap, I will mail out the stuff with in next two days.
If I do mention it:
Con: The layoff might quickly catch the eyes of the immigration officer and if he want to check my status, he could find out the 3 days OOS.
Pro: My previous job was well paid. By mentioning it, I give the reason that why I want to stay at home as F2 instead of keeping the well paid job.
I guess I will mention it in the letter to explain the whole situation and hope everything will be all right. Let me know if anybody disagrees asap, I will mail out the stuff with in next two days.
more...
1985 chevy truck. Big Red: 1985 Chevy silverado
cat555
07-08 11:14 PM
One bad day, my employer just realized that I was overpaid $8000 over 2 years. When I was with the company, I was told it was accountant mistake and I don't have to pay anything. It was all verbal so I don't have any witness.
After 2 months, I quit with 2 weeks notice.
Now he wants $8000 back or he won't pay my last 2 weeks.
I am on EAD and don't know what to do?
Can anybody advice?
After 2 months, I quit with 2 weeks notice.
Now he wants $8000 back or he won't pay my last 2 weeks.
I am on EAD and don't know what to do?
Can anybody advice?
1985 chevy truck. 1965 Chevrolet Pickup Truck
inskrish
07-17 02:07 AM
Your post resembles one of those ads with deceptive fine print! Do you work for an advertising company by any chance?
People providing all the red dot's........don't be so uptight or high strung. Don't you see the GCK's hidden talent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
GCKabhayega posted seven messges, and got eight 'red dots'. This is certainly a new record in the history of IV.:confused:
People providing all the red dot's........don't be so uptight or high strung. Don't you see the GCK's hidden talent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:)
GCKabhayega posted seven messges, and got eight 'red dots'. This is certainly a new record in the history of IV.:confused:
1985 chevy truck. 1957 Chevy Truck (350)
ras
02-11 08:03 PM
http://www.thedegreepeople.com/eb-petition.html
So go ahead on sign in the petition. Dont know how far it goes but atleast it does something good.
So go ahead on sign in the petition. Dont know how far it goes but atleast it does something good.
duncanidaho
02-17 10:51 PM
Stuk,
You'll be stuck forever if your 140 gets denied after you use AC21. If the 140 gets denied, your 485 will be denied automatically and your EAD becomes invalid. At this point, you have the option of filing a motion to reopen the 140 case and/or applying for an H1(that is not subject to quota), provided you have not spent more than 180 days in the US after your 140/485 are denied.
In all likelihood your H1 will be approved, but you need to go to your home country to get the visa stamped and reenter to start work. When you go for stamping to your home country there a a good chance that your stamping might be denied because you have shown 'intent to immigrate' by applying for 140/485 earlier. Granted, H1B in and of itself is a dual intent visa but you will be at the mercy of the visa officer at the consulate and the odds are stacked up against you.
So, be very very careful if you exercise AC21 prior to your 140 approval.
The best alternative is to ask your new employer to file for premium H1b transfer.
You'll be stuck forever if your 140 gets denied after you use AC21. If the 140 gets denied, your 485 will be denied automatically and your EAD becomes invalid. At this point, you have the option of filing a motion to reopen the 140 case and/or applying for an H1(that is not subject to quota), provided you have not spent more than 180 days in the US after your 140/485 are denied.
In all likelihood your H1 will be approved, but you need to go to your home country to get the visa stamped and reenter to start work. When you go for stamping to your home country there a a good chance that your stamping might be denied because you have shown 'intent to immigrate' by applying for 140/485 earlier. Granted, H1B in and of itself is a dual intent visa but you will be at the mercy of the visa officer at the consulate and the odds are stacked up against you.
So, be very very careful if you exercise AC21 prior to your 140 approval.
The best alternative is to ask your new employer to file for premium H1b transfer.
buvane
09-10 07:32 PM
extended review = "we got your money , now dont bother us"
also means nothing is happening to your case!
Thanks!!! This is exactly what they are doing...Other side of funny part do you have any clue on how to come out of this to get my case picked up??
also means nothing is happening to your case!
Thanks!!! This is exactly what they are doing...Other side of funny part do you have any clue on how to come out of this to get my case picked up??
No comments:
Post a Comment