ingegarcia
08-30 12:29 PM
You are missing the crux of my message; buying education for a GC is not the purpose of the SKIL bill. It is intended to retain foreign workers who willfully enrolled in a U.S advance degree program to pursue higher studies, and as oh! By the way that also helps you to get your GC quicker; it�s not the other way around .
I read SKIL bill and it refers to "Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees". I Do not see why an online master degree does not fit in here. Maybe I am missing something :)
This is an excerpt of Section 201.
Section 201. United States Educated Immigrants. Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience
in the United States from the annual green card (i.e. immigrant visa) cap.
I read SKIL bill and it refers to "Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees". I Do not see why an online master degree does not fit in here. Maybe I am missing something :)
This is an excerpt of Section 201.
Section 201. United States Educated Immigrants. Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience
in the United States from the annual green card (i.e. immigrant visa) cap.
wallpaper tribal tattoos - love life
texcan
01-06 04:33 PM
The officer retains one of the original AP the first time. The other one that is handed over to you is stamped. So next time, you show the one that is stamped to enter and you will not have to give them any more copies.
Now my experience may be different, but i believe there are some differences in the process.
My AP Experience:
No secondary check, i told officer that we are using AP. He said fine,
took both copies , stamped with AOS stamp and gave back both copies.
I donot think he made a copy for himself or even kept one original.
I was worried about re-entry as my wife had status change and had not gone back home after status change; and then this 485 filing.
But overall it was very sweet.
I must say there were few others going thru AP process at Chicago with us, and no one had to go to another room for screening or Finger printing.
My gut feeling is, we had our FP for 485 done earlier this year in US so they may not need another FP. The FP when using AP might be for people who have not gone thru FP for 485.
my 2 cents,
AP is easy no worries, as long as you have right papers ( AP ) you are good.
We were not asked for anything other than AP.
HTH
Now my experience may be different, but i believe there are some differences in the process.
My AP Experience:
No secondary check, i told officer that we are using AP. He said fine,
took both copies , stamped with AOS stamp and gave back both copies.
I donot think he made a copy for himself or even kept one original.
I was worried about re-entry as my wife had status change and had not gone back home after status change; and then this 485 filing.
But overall it was very sweet.
I must say there were few others going thru AP process at Chicago with us, and no one had to go to another room for screening or Finger printing.
My gut feeling is, we had our FP for 485 done earlier this year in US so they may not need another FP. The FP when using AP might be for people who have not gone thru FP for 485.
my 2 cents,
AP is easy no worries, as long as you have right papers ( AP ) you are good.
We were not asked for anything other than AP.
HTH
up_guy
04-12 10:59 PM
I also have the same question "Please provide information concerning your eligibility status:", what should I provide in that text box.
Please suggest.
when I check 2 yrs old EAD application my attorney had used (c)(0)(9)
Is that right or it should be (c)(9) or
it should be (c) (09)
Please help folks
I put application date as when ever I signed the form and dated it. I think its no big deal, if you attach copy of previous EAD...
Please suggest.
when I check 2 yrs old EAD application my attorney had used (c)(0)(9)
Is that right or it should be (c)(9) or
it should be (c) (09)
Please help folks
I put application date as when ever I signed the form and dated it. I think its no big deal, if you attach copy of previous EAD...
2011 erase a tattoo.
Jaime
08-06 12:12 PM
Yeah, why not? As long as Legals ALSO get green cards!
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
more...
ha002
06-15 06:05 PM
I am on F1 -OPT and my husband wants to apply for EAD...we are totally confused..i ma talking to my present compnay lawyers and my husbands compnay lawyers, they said it should be OK.... But i am not convinced.... they say there is alwys arisk involved..but it is a chance that we have to take.... i will keep you posted when i make a decision..lot of my frinds are in teh same position..so will tell you about otehr facts which i come across
Mahatma
02-19 09:01 AM
Consult a good lawyer.
Is your spouse a US citizen? Do you want to use I-130 based greencard option?
After getting I-485 and parole etc., you are legally protected but still it is better to avoid international travel, until it is absolutely essential (deatth etc. but certainly not pleasure trips..).
As you had J1 before, it may be possible to non-cap H1 if that helps with your current job. Your status on J1 was good upto Oct 01, 2007. Current law could pardon up to 180 days of out-of-status days. Beyond that it will be 3 year bar.
Your priority should be:
1. How to avoid this 180 day situation
2. How to maintain status
-by EAD only
-or by H1 (cap or non-cap)
3. How to attain GC
-By I-130 only or
are there other options
If your spouse is a citizen, usually GC will be done in 1 or 2 years.
You need to map out prudent course of actions. Consult lawyer, ask questions, take charge of your unique situation and avoid the mistakes (unwarranted international travel, problem with law enforcement etc.).
Again, a good lawyer will be your best advisor.
Is your spouse a US citizen? Do you want to use I-130 based greencard option?
After getting I-485 and parole etc., you are legally protected but still it is better to avoid international travel, until it is absolutely essential (deatth etc. but certainly not pleasure trips..).
As you had J1 before, it may be possible to non-cap H1 if that helps with your current job. Your status on J1 was good upto Oct 01, 2007. Current law could pardon up to 180 days of out-of-status days. Beyond that it will be 3 year bar.
Your priority should be:
1. How to avoid this 180 day situation
2. How to maintain status
-by EAD only
-or by H1 (cap or non-cap)
3. How to attain GC
-By I-130 only or
are there other options
If your spouse is a citizen, usually GC will be done in 1 or 2 years.
You need to map out prudent course of actions. Consult lawyer, ask questions, take charge of your unique situation and avoid the mistakes (unwarranted international travel, problem with law enforcement etc.).
Again, a good lawyer will be your best advisor.
more...
babu123
06-15 02:00 PM
You can also get a letter from your collegue that worked with that company with all ur job duties mentioned. That serves your purpose I guess.
2010 WRECKING BALM: the tattoo
vxg
04-19 08:16 PM
I am getting promoted to a manager's position. This postion requires the same technical knowledge and has the same job resposibilities. Apart from this, it has people management responsibilities. My lawyer said that since it is in the same devision and just added responsibilities it is fine. We just have to put the new position while applying for the next H1B.
It is not clear from the previous posts if this is a problem.
Being project lead and going to managing projects can be considerred as gradual change by someone or complete different job by another.
My question is since GC is for the future job why should it matter what the current job is so long it is in the similar technology area or part of the company.
I have done the same i got promoted to manager within same divison and same responsibilities with added resposnibilities. The lawyer said it is OK because the job responsbilities are same. Adding new responsibilities does not hurt. About salary your salary at the time of i-140 filing should greater than or equal to the salary decsribed in LC application.
It is not clear from the previous posts if this is a problem.
Being project lead and going to managing projects can be considerred as gradual change by someone or complete different job by another.
My question is since GC is for the future job why should it matter what the current job is so long it is in the similar technology area or part of the company.
I have done the same i got promoted to manager within same divison and same responsibilities with added resposnibilities. The lawyer said it is OK because the job responsbilities are same. Adding new responsibilities does not hurt. About salary your salary at the time of i-140 filing should greater than or equal to the salary decsribed in LC application.
more...
mps
08-15 05:02 PM
You need to read AC21 carefully
On exploring this topic further, I found that, at times, DOL conducts an audit to check if the employer paid the proffered wage to the beneficiary after GC approval. In case of a violation, DOL bans the employer from processing further H1�s or GC�s.
On rare occasions, USCIS revokes previously approved GC�s in case of fraud.
Also during naturalization, USCIS checks the duration of employment with the GC position after I-485 approval. Naturalization might be denied if the duration of employment is very short.
On exploring this topic further, I found that, at times, DOL conducts an audit to check if the employer paid the proffered wage to the beneficiary after GC approval. In case of a violation, DOL bans the employer from processing further H1�s or GC�s.
On rare occasions, USCIS revokes previously approved GC�s in case of fraud.
Also during naturalization, USCIS checks the duration of employment with the GC position after I-485 approval. Naturalization might be denied if the duration of employment is very short.
hair few unique tattoo styles
dixie
08-21 08:49 PM
1. To be fair to all, Ask all h1b's to gain 2 - 3 years of US experience, before filing for GC. (2 years of Paystub at the minumum and or tax returns).
What sort of "fairness" do you hope to achieve by delaying new GC applicants ? Given the current pace of visa number availability, it is going to be 2015 or so before a 2006 PD for EB-3 becomes current and USCIS gets to it. Does that not already take care of "fairness" with respect to older applicants ?
For a new GC applicant who is looking at another 8-9 years wait to file 485 (I am one of them and there are plenty on this forum) it is more important than ever to lock a PD asap. Even assuming it is in larger interest of all of us, how will you educate an average lawmaker of all these intricacies ? We are having a tough time as it is distinguishing ourselves from the illegals.
What sort of "fairness" do you hope to achieve by delaying new GC applicants ? Given the current pace of visa number availability, it is going to be 2015 or so before a 2006 PD for EB-3 becomes current and USCIS gets to it. Does that not already take care of "fairness" with respect to older applicants ?
For a new GC applicant who is looking at another 8-9 years wait to file 485 (I am one of them and there are plenty on this forum) it is more important than ever to lock a PD asap. Even assuming it is in larger interest of all of us, how will you educate an average lawmaker of all these intricacies ? We are having a tough time as it is distinguishing ourselves from the illegals.
more...
GCMan007
03-12 11:50 AM
I have updated my profile..IV has been a source of strength in my Journey..i wish good things happen at USCIS and hard working legal immigrants like us get the GC quickly
hot Just Tattoo
xbohdpukc
03-06 06:29 AM
Totally disagree. Only a small %age of employers pay the fees, rest is all borne by the applicant. This includes universities, companies etc. There are so many components of fees that everything is not covered by employer.
Do most of the companies cover EAD (every year), Adv. parole (every year), I 485 etc.. fees. The arguemnt given by USCIS (read their website) for I 485 increase is that it will be processed in 6 months and therfore no need to apply for EAD and AP fees. The argument is fallible is that it does not counts retrogression adn name check, it is simply assumed everyone will get their I485 processed in 6 months.
They are not using technology (because they can't hire more H1b and softwarre professional) but using the excessive money to support theeri old fashioned systems.
What a mess 180% fees increase on most of the applications?
I guess I am that lucky that my employer pays all the fees afterall. I also think it's a good idea to make it mandatory for the employers to carry the burden of the fees, at least through the I-485 filing process. Then if they refuse -- they definitely don't need a foreign laborer that much as they claim, it's only fair.
But then again, opposition to the fees increase coming from the most well off group of prospective immigrants doesn't really pass a laugh test, especially with such immigration opponents as Sen. Sessions and Co. "If you are saying that you are here to contribute to our country and its economy -- start with the fees, please". I think that voicing too much opposition to the fees increase will only further alienate the coming immigration debate. We don't need it, it's gonna be tough enough without a cat fight over the fees matter.
Do most of the companies cover EAD (every year), Adv. parole (every year), I 485 etc.. fees. The arguemnt given by USCIS (read their website) for I 485 increase is that it will be processed in 6 months and therfore no need to apply for EAD and AP fees. The argument is fallible is that it does not counts retrogression adn name check, it is simply assumed everyone will get their I485 processed in 6 months.
They are not using technology (because they can't hire more H1b and softwarre professional) but using the excessive money to support theeri old fashioned systems.
What a mess 180% fees increase on most of the applications?
I guess I am that lucky that my employer pays all the fees afterall. I also think it's a good idea to make it mandatory for the employers to carry the burden of the fees, at least through the I-485 filing process. Then if they refuse -- they definitely don't need a foreign laborer that much as they claim, it's only fair.
But then again, opposition to the fees increase coming from the most well off group of prospective immigrants doesn't really pass a laugh test, especially with such immigration opponents as Sen. Sessions and Co. "If you are saying that you are here to contribute to our country and its economy -- start with the fees, please". I think that voicing too much opposition to the fees increase will only further alienate the coming immigration debate. We don't need it, it's gonna be tough enough without a cat fight over the fees matter.
more...
house tattoo Piercings, Tattoos
visafreedom
07-03 02:09 AM
Please read, sign and observe
http://www.petitiononline.com/aos485/petition.html
To: U,S. Congress American Government
USCIS/DOS has made fun of a set of highly skilled immigrant workers of America. They issued a bulletin in June 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html) declaring all classes of employment-based visa priority dates current from July 1, 2007 and then pulled the carpet under everyone's feet by issuing a bulletin in July 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) which declared all July applications ineligible.
The June bulletin caused a frenzy of activity amongst the applicants which ranged from applicants cancelling their travel plans and rushing to file their petitions to applicants tying the nuptial knot and cancelling their plans of higher studies. This act is mockery and disrespect of such skilled workers, causing them huge emotional and mental trauma. It also represents a huge economic loss in terms of time and resources consumed for readiness in filing the applications that involved the individuals, their employers and the attorneys representing them.
As a mark of protest we would like to observe July 13, 2007 as "NO WORK DAY". We demand justice from America and the American Governement. We believe our voices will only be heard when our presence (and importance) is made conspicuous by our absence. So, all those who believe in this are urged to refrain from going to work on Friday July 13, 2007.
Sincerely,
http://www.petitiononline.com/aos485/petition.html
To: U,S. Congress American Government
USCIS/DOS has made fun of a set of highly skilled immigrant workers of America. They issued a bulletin in June 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html) declaring all classes of employment-based visa priority dates current from July 1, 2007 and then pulled the carpet under everyone's feet by issuing a bulletin in July 2007 (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html) which declared all July applications ineligible.
The June bulletin caused a frenzy of activity amongst the applicants which ranged from applicants cancelling their travel plans and rushing to file their petitions to applicants tying the nuptial knot and cancelling their plans of higher studies. This act is mockery and disrespect of such skilled workers, causing them huge emotional and mental trauma. It also represents a huge economic loss in terms of time and resources consumed for readiness in filing the applications that involved the individuals, their employers and the attorneys representing them.
As a mark of protest we would like to observe July 13, 2007 as "NO WORK DAY". We demand justice from America and the American Governement. We believe our voices will only be heard when our presence (and importance) is made conspicuous by our absence. So, all those who believe in this are urged to refrain from going to work on Friday July 13, 2007.
Sincerely,
tattoo Types of Heart Tattoos and
dtekkedil
07-02 11:52 PM
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
Director U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20529
more...
pictures Lips Tattoo For You
psaxena
01-27 06:56 PM
I am in scottsdale
Lets fight this together.
Lets fight this together.
dresses The tattoo could have a circle
sanju
08-31 12:10 PM
I think we all should VOTE in this poll.
You will waste your time if you vote in Lou Dobbs polls. His pools are rigged. These polls start in the loo as they begin by giving 100,000 votes to his ideological point of view and 0 votes in support of the opposite view. Hence the disclaimer to the pools. I suggest that we simply ignore him and don't participate in his pool. It would be one less human being giving Lou Dobbs no value, making him inconsequential one person at a time.
You will waste your time if you vote in Lou Dobbs polls. His pools are rigged. These polls start in the loo as they begin by giving 100,000 votes to his ideological point of view and 0 votes in support of the opposite view. Hence the disclaimer to the pools. I suggest that we simply ignore him and don't participate in his pool. It would be one less human being giving Lou Dobbs no value, making him inconsequential one person at a time.
more...
makeup Feb 28 2008Eyeball Tattoos
go_guy123
09-15 12:52 PM
Hi All,
Pardon my ignorance, but after seeing the initial steps of the CIR, I feel there's some hope for the Employment based immigrants, but no one seems to be discussing anything positive about it. Am I missing something here? :confused:
Thanks
I think you are new to EB issues. EB reform has been tried since 2004 and it has failed each time. CIR has been tried since 2006 and it has failed many times. CIR has almost no chance given the political realities that Democratic party/Obama is getting tied up with healthcare.
Pardon my ignorance, but after seeing the initial steps of the CIR, I feel there's some hope for the Employment based immigrants, but no one seems to be discussing anything positive about it. Am I missing something here? :confused:
Thanks
I think you are new to EB issues. EB reform has been tried since 2004 and it has failed each time. CIR has been tried since 2006 and it has failed many times. CIR has almost no chance given the political realities that Democratic party/Obama is getting tied up with healthcare.
girlfriend Tattoo - Tribal Tattoo Designs
anurakt
01-03 11:13 AM
I pledge $120 every month as soon as it is available......
hairstyles Free Tattoo Ink Font Download
Euclid
02-11 02:11 PM
Hi,
My OPT was approved and I received the approval notice. But the card itself
has been lost in mail. I have applied for a replacement card.
I am aware of something called the "I-9 receipt rule" wherein the receipt for
the replacement of a lost document can be used in place of the document itself
for a period of 90 days.
Does this apply to my case? In other words, can I use the receipt of the replacement
request to work for upto 90 days?
Thanks in advance!
PS: I am aware that I cannot start working based on the approval notice itself.
My OPT was approved and I received the approval notice. But the card itself
has been lost in mail. I have applied for a replacement card.
I am aware of something called the "I-9 receipt rule" wherein the receipt for
the replacement of a lost document can be used in place of the document itself
for a period of 90 days.
Does this apply to my case? In other words, can I use the receipt of the replacement
request to work for upto 90 days?
Thanks in advance!
PS: I am aware that I cannot start working based on the approval notice itself.
WillIBLucky
11-17 11:54 AM
Yes, 2007 will be the best chance we would have. After that its all political stunt as we saw this year before elections.
I sincerely hope I am wrong in this assumption.
I sincerely hope I am wrong in this assumption.
ronnie0479
08-15 11:54 PM
Hi -
Does anyone have good or bad experiences with Indian immigration officers in the airport with AP while coming back to US?
I mean, do these guys know what an AP is?
Is it better to get the H1B stamping done?
I am sure folks on this forum will be going to India for the winter vacations, so any responses would benefit a lot of people..
what has indian immigration officer to do with AP and US immagration.....
Does anyone have good or bad experiences with Indian immigration officers in the airport with AP while coming back to US?
I mean, do these guys know what an AP is?
Is it better to get the H1B stamping done?
I am sure folks on this forum will be going to India for the winter vacations, so any responses would benefit a lot of people..
what has indian immigration officer to do with AP and US immagration.....
No comments:
Post a Comment