images justin bieber tickets brisbane 
reddy77
08-09 08:10 AM
Even I did the same thing, MY PD was current in July Bulletin, So I applied (Premium processing) for 3 years extension based on approved 140 in Jun 2nd week and got the approval in Jun 3rd week for 3 years ...
wallpaper justin bieber fake abs. img
rajeshalex
08-04 02:18 PM
She/her friends can discuss this with her husband. If he supports apply for 485 and wait till the approval of that . She can file divorce after that.
If her husband is not supportive and doesnt want to add her for 485 then there is a special category (I dont remember the exact thing)/something like under certain circumstances ( which is like you are Abandoned by husband without no fault of your own and if you go back your hubbys family is going to harass you ...) This u need to check with a lawyer
Rajesh
If her husband is not supportive and doesnt want to add her for 485 then there is a special category (I dont remember the exact thing)/something like under certain circumstances ( which is like you are Abandoned by husband without no fault of your own and if you go back your hubbys family is going to harass you ...) This u need to check with a lawyer
Rajesh
StuckInTheMuck
05-03 08:17 AM
Updating profile should fill up your information in the tracker.
Will make a not of it.
Thanks a lot.
GO IV GO
Recently I had some trouble updating my profile. The "Additional Information" section has a series of RFE-related (on I-485, I-140, EAD and AP) boxes, where one must enter a valid date in the specified format. Because I did not receive any RFE yet, I tried to get past this page by entering 00/00/0000 ("N/A" did not work), which did not work either, and finally I settled with my PD on all these RFE boxes (which is, of course, incorrect). So, maybe the powers-that-be can fix the problem, and, also remove these wrong entries from my profile?
Thanks.
Will make a not of it.
Thanks a lot.
GO IV GO
Recently I had some trouble updating my profile. The "Additional Information" section has a series of RFE-related (on I-485, I-140, EAD and AP) boxes, where one must enter a valid date in the specified format. Because I did not receive any RFE yet, I tried to get past this page by entering 00/00/0000 ("N/A" did not work), which did not work either, and finally I settled with my PD on all these RFE boxes (which is, of course, incorrect). So, maybe the powers-that-be can fix the problem, and, also remove these wrong entries from my profile?
Thanks.
2011 justin bieber tickets
gcdreamer05
01-21 12:22 PM
ya advisable to get it done in india so that we get for 10 yrs,
Also one more question, does any one know how many days before passport expiry can we apply for renewal?
Is it 1 yr or can we renew even before 1 yr...
Also one more question, does any one know how many days before passport expiry can we apply for renewal?
Is it 1 yr or can we renew even before 1 yr...
more...
akhilmahajan
04-13 08:35 AM
I just checked what I had filed last time and this is what I have selected (c) (09).
Also, can anyone tell me, once they e-File, does it tell you where to send the documents to?
Thanks for the help.
Also, can anyone tell me, once they e-File, does it tell you where to send the documents to?
Thanks for the help.
morchu
07-26 04:36 AM
Check the labor laws. Sometimes the 60 days notice requirement maybe voided by law. Also check the exact terminology in the job contract. Binding you to an employment via any kind of contract is not authorized.
Anyway, even if you send the AC21 letter after this 60 days, it still should be OK. You may not even get an intention to denial letter, because revocation of 140 takes time as well. Even if you get the letter, you can reply to it mentioning your job change, and ac21 invocation, and it should be OK.
In the worst case scenario, you can always file a new LC and 140 with your new employer and still keep the old priority date (even after revocation of old 140, just keep the copy of old 140 approval letter). That way you will be in same exact state in less than a year (PERM takes around 3....4 months, 140 premiumprocess takes less than 2 weeks, and most probably you may not be too far from current, and can file 485).
As a whole, my suggestion would be that, don't let a pending green card process stop your career growth. You never know how LONG you might stay in halt state in your career, if you do that, especially because of the whole GC processe's ultimate uncertainty.
There is always ways out (AC21, newGC process but same priority date etc.)
And in the worst case it may get a bit delay for your final GC approval. But I tend to think, that is OK when compared with a steady career growth.
If you tend to stuck with the same employer, in halt state of your career growth, merely because of GC process, in the end, after getting the GC approval, you will realize that it was foolishness and getting GC a bit earlier was not that important.
Well the above is my personal opinion. Ultimately it is your choice.
-Morchu
My question is:
My I-485 is pending for more than 180 days and I have I-140 approval as well.
I am planning to change job as soon as possible but I have to give 60 days notice before I resign my Job as per our Employment terms and conditions.
If they withdraw my approval I-140 status between 60 days, what is going to happen my I-485 Status? Still is valid my I-140 and Can I use Ac 21 as per UCCIS memos.
�Do I need to send AC 21 first before opting by the New Employer?
Thank you.
Anyway, even if you send the AC21 letter after this 60 days, it still should be OK. You may not even get an intention to denial letter, because revocation of 140 takes time as well. Even if you get the letter, you can reply to it mentioning your job change, and ac21 invocation, and it should be OK.
In the worst case scenario, you can always file a new LC and 140 with your new employer and still keep the old priority date (even after revocation of old 140, just keep the copy of old 140 approval letter). That way you will be in same exact state in less than a year (PERM takes around 3....4 months, 140 premiumprocess takes less than 2 weeks, and most probably you may not be too far from current, and can file 485).
As a whole, my suggestion would be that, don't let a pending green card process stop your career growth. You never know how LONG you might stay in halt state in your career, if you do that, especially because of the whole GC processe's ultimate uncertainty.
There is always ways out (AC21, newGC process but same priority date etc.)
And in the worst case it may get a bit delay for your final GC approval. But I tend to think, that is OK when compared with a steady career growth.
If you tend to stuck with the same employer, in halt state of your career growth, merely because of GC process, in the end, after getting the GC approval, you will realize that it was foolishness and getting GC a bit earlier was not that important.
Well the above is my personal opinion. Ultimately it is your choice.
-Morchu
My question is:
My I-485 is pending for more than 180 days and I have I-140 approval as well.
I am planning to change job as soon as possible but I have to give 60 days notice before I resign my Job as per our Employment terms and conditions.
If they withdraw my approval I-140 status between 60 days, what is going to happen my I-485 Status? Still is valid my I-140 and Can I use Ac 21 as per UCCIS memos.
�Do I need to send AC 21 first before opting by the New Employer?
Thank you.
more...
GooblyWoobly
09-25 03:19 PM
Let me clarify point 3) again
I told it because the same way my spouse received SSN# < 10days but those people will say it take minimum 15days or so.But before you go to SSN office you need proof of EAD approval or best is EAD card,passport handly.
HTH,
No, No. Your answer was perfectly correct. But the OP had asked this:
"Is the there a time frame within which one has to get the SSN#?"
So, I thought he is probably asking if there is any time limit by which you have to get SSN or you don't get SSN at all.
It's better to apply ASAP. In my wife's case, after her H1 came along, we just took two weeks to apply after she started working. The result was, at the end of the month, we were in a legal limbo. The company (one of the big companies in the valley) couldn't pay her because she doesn't have her SSN. The company cannot keep the money as she is legally employed, and has worked. So, not paying her that month will break the H1B terms. Luckily for us, SSN arrived on 29th of that month!!
I told it because the same way my spouse received SSN# < 10days but those people will say it take minimum 15days or so.But before you go to SSN office you need proof of EAD approval or best is EAD card,passport handly.
HTH,
No, No. Your answer was perfectly correct. But the OP had asked this:
"Is the there a time frame within which one has to get the SSN#?"
So, I thought he is probably asking if there is any time limit by which you have to get SSN or you don't get SSN at all.
It's better to apply ASAP. In my wife's case, after her H1 came along, we just took two weeks to apply after she started working. The result was, at the end of the month, we were in a legal limbo. The company (one of the big companies in the valley) couldn't pay her because she doesn't have her SSN. The company cannot keep the money as she is legally employed, and has worked. So, not paying her that month will break the H1B terms. Luckily for us, SSN arrived on 29th of that month!!
2010 justin bieber tickets 2011 new
Siboo
07-30 03:47 PM
but you need to improve
Take it as fun...:D
Take it as fun...:D
more...
amitga
12-06 04:41 PM
I came from India to US on a intercompany transfer on L1 Visa. After 3 yrs I left the company and joined another one on H1B. Now I Joined back the old company and in the mean while my old company sold its Indian subsidiary. I am asking them to file an EB1 for me, but they are telling me that since they have sold the Indian Subsidiary, now they cannot file EB1 based on that company transfer.
In my view the eligibity is determined based on the fact that I originally joined that company on a company transfer.
Please let me know your view.
In my view the eligibity is determined based on the fact that I originally joined that company on a company transfer.
Please let me know your view.
hair justin bieber fake pics. justin bieber fake mustache.
kaisersose
11-27 01:38 PM
Hi,
one of my friend is working for a desi consuting firm. Due to emergency at his place he has to leave to India dusring the labor substition process. Now the consuting firm is saying that they have substituted a labor for him. They did not apply for I140 for him. Please let me know if there is a way to find weather his labor is substituted or not.
Thank you
The short answer is, it does not work. It has been permanently banned following heavy abuse.
Substitution is a process of cutting the queue, by using a Labor approved for someone else earlier. Many people who came ino the US in 2006 on H-1b now have green cards by paying $$$ to some GC shops for old Labors. This came to the notice of DOL and they decided to put an end to it.
one of my friend is working for a desi consuting firm. Due to emergency at his place he has to leave to India dusring the labor substition process. Now the consuting firm is saying that they have substituted a labor for him. They did not apply for I140 for him. Please let me know if there is a way to find weather his labor is substituted or not.
Thank you
The short answer is, it does not work. It has been permanently banned following heavy abuse.
Substitution is a process of cutting the queue, by using a Labor approved for someone else earlier. Many people who came ino the US in 2006 on H-1b now have green cards by paying $$$ to some GC shops for old Labors. This came to the notice of DOL and they decided to put an end to it.
more...
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
hot Justin Bieber Tickets
snram4
01-25 03:09 PM
Even CIR comes most pro immigrants groups will oppose. CIR will not have Guest workers program for low skilled workers because of high unemployment. So Business and pro illegal group will oppose. EB reform will be there in the CIR. But that will come with Grassley's restrictive bill on H1b. So, for that most high skilled group including IV will oppose. So CIR will be opposed by everyone. Status quo will continue till some compromise is reached.
When it is piecemeal people say we want comprehensive reform.
When it is comprehensive reform they say it is too broad to pass .
When it is summer they say Immigration Bill be introduced as early as Winter .
When it is winter they say it immigration bill will be introduced as early as summer .
When it is between spring(between winter and summer) they say now there is not adequate support for the bill.
This is a clear motive of hanging immigration reform like a bone in front of the dog and making him run around it and pay taxes .
When it is piecemeal people say we want comprehensive reform.
When it is comprehensive reform they say it is too broad to pass .
When it is summer they say Immigration Bill be introduced as early as Winter .
When it is winter they say it immigration bill will be introduced as early as summer .
When it is between spring(between winter and summer) they say now there is not adequate support for the bill.
This is a clear motive of hanging immigration reform like a bone in front of the dog and making him run around it and pay taxes .
more...
house Justin Bieber Tickets
morchu
07-26 04:36 AM
Check the labor laws. Sometimes the 60 days notice requirement maybe voided by law. Also check the exact terminology in the job contract. Binding you to an employment via any kind of contract is not authorized.
Anyway, even if you send the AC21 letter after this 60 days, it still should be OK. You may not even get an intention to denial letter, because revocation of 140 takes time as well. Even if you get the letter, you can reply to it mentioning your job change, and ac21 invocation, and it should be OK.
In the worst case scenario, you can always file a new LC and 140 with your new employer and still keep the old priority date (even after revocation of old 140, just keep the copy of old 140 approval letter). That way you will be in same exact state in less than a year (PERM takes around 3....4 months, 140 premiumprocess takes less than 2 weeks, and most probably you may not be too far from current, and can file 485).
As a whole, my suggestion would be that, don't let a pending green card process stop your career growth. You never know how LONG you might stay in halt state in your career, if you do that, especially because of the whole GC processe's ultimate uncertainty.
There is always ways out (AC21, newGC process but same priority date etc.)
And in the worst case it may get a bit delay for your final GC approval. But I tend to think, that is OK when compared with a steady career growth.
If you tend to stuck with the same employer, in halt state of your career growth, merely because of GC process, in the end, after getting the GC approval, you will realize that it was foolishness and getting GC a bit earlier was not that important.
Well the above is my personal opinion. Ultimately it is your choice.
-Morchu
My question is:
My I-485 is pending for more than 180 days and I have I-140 approval as well.
I am planning to change job as soon as possible but I have to give 60 days notice before I resign my Job as per our Employment terms and conditions.
If they withdraw my approval I-140 status between 60 days, what is going to happen my I-485 Status? Still is valid my I-140 and Can I use Ac 21 as per UCCIS memos.
�Do I need to send AC 21 first before opting by the New Employer?
Thank you.
Anyway, even if you send the AC21 letter after this 60 days, it still should be OK. You may not even get an intention to denial letter, because revocation of 140 takes time as well. Even if you get the letter, you can reply to it mentioning your job change, and ac21 invocation, and it should be OK.
In the worst case scenario, you can always file a new LC and 140 with your new employer and still keep the old priority date (even after revocation of old 140, just keep the copy of old 140 approval letter). That way you will be in same exact state in less than a year (PERM takes around 3....4 months, 140 premiumprocess takes less than 2 weeks, and most probably you may not be too far from current, and can file 485).
As a whole, my suggestion would be that, don't let a pending green card process stop your career growth. You never know how LONG you might stay in halt state in your career, if you do that, especially because of the whole GC processe's ultimate uncertainty.
There is always ways out (AC21, newGC process but same priority date etc.)
And in the worst case it may get a bit delay for your final GC approval. But I tend to think, that is OK when compared with a steady career growth.
If you tend to stuck with the same employer, in halt state of your career growth, merely because of GC process, in the end, after getting the GC approval, you will realize that it was foolishness and getting GC a bit earlier was not that important.
Well the above is my personal opinion. Ultimately it is your choice.
-Morchu
My question is:
My I-485 is pending for more than 180 days and I have I-140 approval as well.
I am planning to change job as soon as possible but I have to give 60 days notice before I resign my Job as per our Employment terms and conditions.
If they withdraw my approval I-140 status between 60 days, what is going to happen my I-485 Status? Still is valid my I-140 and Can I use Ac 21 as per UCCIS memos.
�Do I need to send AC 21 first before opting by the New Employer?
Thank you.
tattoo justin bieber fake abs.
kumar1
06-14 03:03 PM
God bless Raj. I am not sure if every story ends like this particular one.
Refer this:
Case Study: Upgrade from EB3 to EB2 (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-06/case_study_upgrade_from_eb3_to_eb2.html)
Refer this:
Case Study: Upgrade from EB3 to EB2 (http://www.imminfo.com/News/Newsletter/2010-06/case_study_upgrade_from_eb3_to_eb2.html)
more...
pictures Justin+ieber+tickets+
sukumar05
10-08 04:57 PM
i am in the same boat..applied for GC in august but not married yet..
From my understanding, i can add my spouse later when she's here and my PD is current but before my gc is approved.
there are two worst case scenarios,
1) If GC gets approved before marriage. there's nothing i can do other than marrying someone, who has her own visa. I know this won't happen.
2) GC may get approved even my PD is not current but after marriage, then I would have 6mo grace period to apply for her. This may happen due to uscis messing up with dates..
Please someone let me know if I am missing something..
From my understanding, i can add my spouse later when she's here and my PD is current but before my gc is approved.
there are two worst case scenarios,
1) If GC gets approved before marriage. there's nothing i can do other than marrying someone, who has her own visa. I know this won't happen.
2) GC may get approved even my PD is not current but after marriage, then I would have 6mo grace period to apply for her. This may happen due to uscis messing up with dates..
Please someone let me know if I am missing something..
dresses justin bieber tickets 2011.
k_sing
09-20 12:17 PM
Responding to latest response:
"Member" does not mean an employee.
As a member I would have access to their proprietary software to do trades ( just like having an account with any other broker)
A member however has no voting rights etc. ( it's a private LLC/trust)
At the end of the year, instead of a 1099 tax form, the trust would provide a share of profits generated by "my stock trades" and it is instead done on K1 tax form, which is treated as income.
About the internet biz:
I would be the only one "owning" / running the biz.. as I own the domain ( it's not a LLC ).
Can I receive income checks in my name ?
thanks!
"Member" does not mean an employee.
As a member I would have access to their proprietary software to do trades ( just like having an account with any other broker)
A member however has no voting rights etc. ( it's a private LLC/trust)
At the end of the year, instead of a 1099 tax form, the trust would provide a share of profits generated by "my stock trades" and it is instead done on K1 tax form, which is treated as income.
About the internet biz:
I would be the only one "owning" / running the biz.. as I own the domain ( it's not a LLC ).
Can I receive income checks in my name ?
thanks!
more...
makeup Justin Bieber Tickets #39;My
p_kumar
11-30 02:24 PM
Can you put the exact working of the status ?
Is it one of the following ?
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
or
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
or
something else.
Canadian_Dream
Does the status 'Document mailed to applicant' mean a RFE?.:eek:
Is it one of the following ?
Current Status: Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident.
or
Current Status: Document mailed to applicant.
or
something else.
Canadian_Dream
Does the status 'Document mailed to applicant' mean a RFE?.:eek:
girlfriend justin bieber fake mustache
fromnaija
03-18 05:11 PM
I Have my EAD card but my spouse was in India when i applied for EAD. That mean she doesn't have EAD card rite now.
Can she get EAD or SSN?
Pls help.....
Unless you submitted I-485 for her she cannot apply for EAD. If you did submit I-485, yes you can apply EAD for her now by submitting form I-765.
Can she get EAD or SSN?
Pls help.....
Unless you submitted I-485 for her she cannot apply for EAD. If you did submit I-485, yes you can apply EAD for her now by submitting form I-765.
hairstyles Justin Bieber FAKE # of
piyu7444
07-03 01:59 AM
it is advisable not to leave the country while H1 extension is pending and you cannot lie to the immigration officer at the port of entry. if they take your I-94 while leaving (if going to Mexico, they generally do not take I-94) then you may have a problem reentering and you may have to wait until H1 extension is approved and then reenter using the new H1 approval.
Mine is not h1 extension but what is called transfer - Company A to company B. Can I not enter using Company A's documents as they did not cancel my h1b and wont cancel it either. Also I will get pay stub from them till jul 15 for work done till jun 20th.
Mine is not h1 extension but what is called transfer - Company A to company B. Can I not enter using Company A's documents as they did not cancel my h1b and wont cancel it either. Also I will get pay stub from them till jul 15 for work done till jun 20th.
murali77
06-16 01:39 AM
Thanks for the reply.
How difficult is to have name changed in SSN ?
and how long does it take.
Thanks.
Murali
How difficult is to have name changed in SSN ?
and how long does it take.
Thanks.
Murali
maximus777
01-14 01:04 PM
How did an EB3 2004 app get approved? Did you port?
0 comments:
Post a Comment