royus77
07-17 10:59 PM
The link is not working
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/UpdateDirectFiling062107.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/UpdateDirectFiling062107.pdf
wallpaper Hello kitty: cake form italy
Marphad
01-12 12:21 PM
I concur with you, Marphad.
Its illegal to mail passport cross border.
My bad! You are right.
Its illegal to mail passport cross border.
My bad! You are right.
Green.Tech
09-16 03:37 PM
Will call the rest during my next break :)
Thanks abqguy!
Thanks abqguy!
2011 Occasion Cakes
gsc999
01-25 03:02 PM
Good work. Thanks for doing this.
I am happy to inform all of you in NORCAL that the permit to conduct a signature/letter campaign at Fremont BART is with us!!!
NOTE: This cannot be used by another member at another station-- this is a non-transferrable permit SOLELY for the campaign at Fremont at the said times, but you can request a similar permit for any BART station!
Now, I need at least ONE other member to be there on a weekday evening of your choice (I am planning to go there EVERY weekday evening for 2 weeks) and help me conduct this campaign!
PLEASE.... this is the last call.. don't let us down!
I am happy to inform all of you in NORCAL that the permit to conduct a signature/letter campaign at Fremont BART is with us!!!
NOTE: This cannot be used by another member at another station-- this is a non-transferrable permit SOLELY for the campaign at Fremont at the said times, but you can request a similar permit for any BART station!
Now, I need at least ONE other member to be there on a weekday evening of your choice (I am planning to go there EVERY weekday evening for 2 weeks) and help me conduct this campaign!
PLEASE.... this is the last call.. don't let us down!
more...
bec
12-05 11:51 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/12/05/india.threat.airport/index.html
Its on CNN too - Indian airports on alert.
Now, don't say don't post CNN news, its bull-shit and pro-republican.
I'll post any news link I want, wherever I want.
Its on CNN too - Indian airports on alert.
Now, don't say don't post CNN news, its bull-shit and pro-republican.
I'll post any news link I want, wherever I want.
zoooom
03-17 01:40 PM
As far as I know there is no limitation on the size of the company. As long as they are a stable and sound company you are good to go.
more...
nyckings
10-15 03:41 PM
Is this her first time into US? if so, i guess they are trying to make sure your h1b is still valid. Since they see that you entered on AP, it might be confusing them. I am assuming you work for the same h1 employer who also sponsored your GC. Now all attorneys have told us that the law says you can resume your h1b once you are back on AP but lot of IO's don't care about it. Now you can just send an employer/personal letter stating that you are currently in the same job for which your H1 is approved and also have a I140 pending/approved for the same. Mention that you are still on H1b while you entered using your AP. Hence you never got your H1b visa stamped at the consulate. It shouldn't be a problem unless you are trying to get H$4 via a H1b from a former employer while you are working on EAD for someone else.
I think the same. As my latest passport shows no visa except the AP entry stamp, they are confused how did I travel to India earlier. My wife explained them that I used AP, but they still believe that a visa page is missing in the supporting docs. So they have retained the passport and asked to submit 'current copy of husband's visa'. Now I am going to write a personal letter explaining the same and attaching the original I-797 which has my I-94.
I think the same. As my latest passport shows no visa except the AP entry stamp, they are confused how did I travel to India earlier. My wife explained them that I used AP, but they still believe that a visa page is missing in the supporting docs. So they have retained the passport and asked to submit 'current copy of husband's visa'. Now I am going to write a personal letter explaining the same and attaching the original I-797 which has my I-94.
2010 Hello Kitty Cake
53885
05-14 07:53 PM
They dont want to loose visa numbers for this year. 2 years movement guarantees that those eligible can file 485 & EAD. If next month USCIS receives 50,000 applications the dates could move back.
It was a quite surprise to me. Almost more than a year EB3 did not move for more than a month all of a sudden it moved 2 years..
It was a quite surprise to me. Almost more than a year EB3 did not move for more than a month all of a sudden it moved 2 years..
more...
Blog Feeds
01-26 08:40 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
hair Hello Kitty Cake
shana04
07-21 09:05 AM
Friends / Gurus,
Please advice or suggest.
Here is my situation, filed I 485 in July 2007 and No FP done.
Called USCIS in Mar 2008 and opened a SR and got SR for my self in hard copy and an email for my wife that some one contacted about your case for FP and a notice will be mailed to with specific time and date.
And I waited this long and no notice has arrived for me and dates are current in Aug 2008.
Today (July 21 2008) I called USCIS and used the following menus.
2-6-1-(Enter Receipt Number)-1-1-3-1
And a representative has greeted very well and asked bunch of questions and asked to answer yes or no (no details just yes or no)
Then she said as the Background Clearance has not been done for my case, they would not send the FP. And to open a SR I have to wait at least 441 days from Receipt date of I485 to open SR.
When I asked about my wife's case, she replied the same in no FP has done then probably she has not got her background clearance yet. so need to wait for 441 days for her case too.
Then I said my dates are current and if no FP done then I would loose my chance and she replied that until background clearance is done no FP will be sent and they would not touch the case until then.
Friends / Gurus, any advice or please let me know how to follow up on this. I do not want to loose this opportunity.
Thanks in advance.
Shana
Please advice or suggest.
Here is my situation, filed I 485 in July 2007 and No FP done.
Called USCIS in Mar 2008 and opened a SR and got SR for my self in hard copy and an email for my wife that some one contacted about your case for FP and a notice will be mailed to with specific time and date.
And I waited this long and no notice has arrived for me and dates are current in Aug 2008.
Today (July 21 2008) I called USCIS and used the following menus.
2-6-1-(Enter Receipt Number)-1-1-3-1
And a representative has greeted very well and asked bunch of questions and asked to answer yes or no (no details just yes or no)
Then she said as the Background Clearance has not been done for my case, they would not send the FP. And to open a SR I have to wait at least 441 days from Receipt date of I485 to open SR.
When I asked about my wife's case, she replied the same in no FP has done then probably she has not got her background clearance yet. so need to wait for 441 days for her case too.
Then I said my dates are current and if no FP done then I would loose my chance and she replied that until background clearance is done no FP will be sent and they would not touch the case until then.
Friends / Gurus, any advice or please let me know how to follow up on this. I do not want to loose this opportunity.
Thanks in advance.
Shana
more...
Libra
10-12 10:22 AM
LUD 10/03/06 before getting RFE, after submitting RFE documents there were two LUD's 10/04/07 and 10/05/07.
Naresh/Libra,
What was the LUD on your I-140 before you got the RFE ?
In my case, the RD is 10/06 and LUD is 10/26/2006. But, no updates after that.
gxr
Naresh/Libra,
What was the LUD on your I-140 before you got the RFE ?
In my case, the RD is 10/06 and LUD is 10/26/2006. But, no updates after that.
gxr
hot err, Hello Kitty Cake.
ivgclive
07-25 10:00 AM
Wait a minute....
So, it does not matter whether you have GC or not,
Dealing with USCIS and paying lawyers are part of rest of your life....
So, it does not matter whether you have GC or not,
Dealing with USCIS and paying lawyers are part of rest of your life....
more...
house Hello Kitty Cupcakes ― House
anilsal
08-05 08:34 PM
To capture unused visa numbers we need to make DC rally big, so lets go to DC on sept 13th and make it big success.......
Nice....;)
Also we need everyone to help out in spreading IV work at the local level (state level). Plus IV welcomes contributions. :)
Nice....;)
Also we need everyone to help out in spreading IV work at the local level (state level). Plus IV welcomes contributions. :)
tattoo 2 Tier Hello Kitty amp; Zara
kookoo
08-03 05:31 PM
I know what I did was wrong. But what should I do now?
I am worried if USCIS will be sending the copy of the experience letter for verification?
I am worried if USCIS will be sending the copy of the experience letter for verification?
more...
pictures TNBT: cake pops
anilsal
07-16 07:21 AM
i guess I am going to be in trouble in case I have to get a new PCC. I will try and get a new one when I reach India. Also update to my status is that chennai consulate has sent a letter to my local address in India about the interview appointment date.
The reason consulates in the US take 50 days for PCC is that they send the request to regional Passport Office in India who take like 45 days. So you may probably apply at PP office in India and get the clearance.
The reason consulates in the US take 50 days for PCC is that they send the request to regional Passport Office in India who take like 45 days. So you may probably apply at PP office in India and get the clearance.
dresses Hello Kitty Cake
GC_1000Watt
12-04 06:12 PM
1> just carried the usual documents required, job letter, tax returns, I-129, LCA, Paystubs etc. I also carried whatever documentation I could find for my previous employers like experience letter, last few paystubs etc. Also original of degrees/transcripts.
2> I stayed at Hotel Real Del Rio which is less than a minute walk from the consulate. It's right behind the consulate infact. Very nice hotel; courteous staff. Recommended you do booking through expedia ($70), although expedia will not charge your credit card but you can carry the printout which will get you that rate. If you book directly with the hotel, the rate's much higher (close to $100)
3> YEs, I got the tourist visa for mexico. Although nobody checked it anywhere, but I believe entering any country without valid visa/paperwork is illegal. Getting a mexican visa was very easy. You just go to the consulate/embassy, tell them you want to go to the US consulate in Tijuana for H-1b stamping. They issue you within the hour stamped. Cost about $36. Just get your H-1b petition with you for proof, and the appointment confirmation.
4> The validity of H-1b depends on the validity of the petition I-797. Whatever period you have that for, will be stamped.
5> He just asked me for job letter, asked me if I've applied for GC (I have), asked me that don't I have to work with them for a certain time (to which I replied I did and after I was eligible I changed employers using AC-21). He just read the job duties in my H-1B petition (most likely to check for any TAL related stuff). He remarked that inspite of my experience, my close-to-six-figure salary is a bit above slavery (to which I replied that I do get other benefits such as 401k, paid time-off, health/medical insurance etc.). He just asked some other questions such as what was my major in masters, how long I've been in US, had I worked in India, if so how long. I replied all of them. It appears he put that in the comments screen on his PC. And then he said he's approving it.
It was basically a bar-like casual conversation I had with him. Within a few seconds of my start of the interview with IO, I knew he'll approve my visa. so it was pretty cool all along the way.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I will get back to you if I will have any further questions.
2> I stayed at Hotel Real Del Rio which is less than a minute walk from the consulate. It's right behind the consulate infact. Very nice hotel; courteous staff. Recommended you do booking through expedia ($70), although expedia will not charge your credit card but you can carry the printout which will get you that rate. If you book directly with the hotel, the rate's much higher (close to $100)
3> YEs, I got the tourist visa for mexico. Although nobody checked it anywhere, but I believe entering any country without valid visa/paperwork is illegal. Getting a mexican visa was very easy. You just go to the consulate/embassy, tell them you want to go to the US consulate in Tijuana for H-1b stamping. They issue you within the hour stamped. Cost about $36. Just get your H-1b petition with you for proof, and the appointment confirmation.
4> The validity of H-1b depends on the validity of the petition I-797. Whatever period you have that for, will be stamped.
5> He just asked me for job letter, asked me if I've applied for GC (I have), asked me that don't I have to work with them for a certain time (to which I replied I did and after I was eligible I changed employers using AC-21). He just read the job duties in my H-1B petition (most likely to check for any TAL related stuff). He remarked that inspite of my experience, my close-to-six-figure salary is a bit above slavery (to which I replied that I do get other benefits such as 401k, paid time-off, health/medical insurance etc.). He just asked some other questions such as what was my major in masters, how long I've been in US, had I worked in India, if so how long. I replied all of them. It appears he put that in the comments screen on his PC. And then he said he's approving it.
It was basically a bar-like casual conversation I had with him. Within a few seconds of my start of the interview with IO, I knew he'll approve my visa. so it was pretty cool all along the way.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I will get back to you if I will have any further questions.
more...
makeup hello kitty face cake
Rishi123
11-09 12:23 PM
Dear Friends :
Appreciate if you could provide some insight to my situation.
I had filed my labor certification from company (A) ( Based on future employment ) .
PD Sep/04
I did not work for the company (A)
My labor certification has got approved and now I am preparing to file I-140.
In the mean while my current employer (B) had approved to file my GC- ( PERM labor ) will get it filed in beginning of 2007.
Should I file my I-140 from company (A) in order to retain PD...I am told that once the I-140 gets approved from (A ) the priority date can get transferred to the company B when ever that I-140 stage reaches.
Is this a recommended course ? would there be flags raised when I file PERM labor & subsequent I-140 for company (B)..I came across items on the I-140 form that asks " has any Immigration visa petition ever being filed behalf of this person"..Not sure what are the implications if one confirms the same.
I am not able to get a clearer picture.
You help will be highly appreciated
Rishi
Appreciate if you could provide some insight to my situation.
I had filed my labor certification from company (A) ( Based on future employment ) .
PD Sep/04
I did not work for the company (A)
My labor certification has got approved and now I am preparing to file I-140.
In the mean while my current employer (B) had approved to file my GC- ( PERM labor ) will get it filed in beginning of 2007.
Should I file my I-140 from company (A) in order to retain PD...I am told that once the I-140 gets approved from (A ) the priority date can get transferred to the company B when ever that I-140 stage reaches.
Is this a recommended course ? would there be flags raised when I file PERM labor & subsequent I-140 for company (B)..I came across items on the I-140 form that asks " has any Immigration visa petition ever being filed behalf of this person"..Not sure what are the implications if one confirms the same.
I am not able to get a clearer picture.
You help will be highly appreciated
Rishi
girlfriend Hello Kitty Cake Kit Special
rameshvaid
09-16 11:17 PM
Done ...
RV
RV
hairstyles Hello Kitty Cupcakes
sumansk
10-03 10:04 PM
I am sure you are a latest filers...so just relax and forget abt it for many yrs to come unless there is a serious effort by the Govt. to reduce backlog...till then elax and dotn let your blood boil over it leading to deterioration in health and wealth....
NJOY !!!
NJOY !!!
eb3retro
02-24 03:49 PM
To whom it may concern, please, help us. Everything we ever learned from the U.S. about truth and justice is suddenly being deprived of any meaning by the U.S. itself. The hardest part for us is believing that everything we�ve based our lives on � the American way, has no merit.
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
crap..who are you.???
I was deported from the United States of America on February 18, 2005. I lived there nearly 30 years since I was 20 months old, when my mother crossed the Rio Grande into the country with me illegally. I was given an opportunity to become legal under the NACARA law but was to afraid of being deported like Maricela Soza was under the same law and didn�t go through with the entire process. I have both a husband and a son who are U.S. citizens but I am permanently prohibited by Immigration law from immigrating to the United States, while at the same time I am allowed to visit. Due to my drug convictions amounting to possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. It�s Immigration law�s contradicting policies which I find disturbing.
U.S. Immigration is concerned with their citizens� welfare but it is denying my husband�s and my son�s requests to have me back by their side for good. Although Immigration law will value my wish to receive admission into the United States. Needless to say I prefer returning, immigrating and remaining in the country by my family�s side. That�s not taking into account the fact that I am still homesick and continue experiencing culture shock in Nicaragua. What the Department of Homeland Security is doing to my family and I is cruel, inhumane and unpatriotic. No free country�s government has any business deciding how families should be formed or whose personal choice is agreeable or not. Like that of my son�s and husband�s choice to overlook my shortcomings and begin our lives over together again.
The 212(d)(3) Waiver allows a visitor�s visa into the U.S. to be issued to an Alien like me if I show evidence of rehabilitation such as becoming a practicing professional with a U.S. job offer. Sometimes with lone proof of a bank savings account, school registration and satisfactory travel record. On the other hand there isn�t one waiver available for United States Citizens who wish to rebuild their lives with an Alien deported for any drug charge(s) of possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana. Not only are Andrew�s(my son) and Thomas�(my husband) needs being ignored but my needs are being placed before their own. An act I dare name TREASON.
How much more is the United States citizens� welfare secured if an Alien with an undesirable drug history enters the United States merely to visit and not to immigrate? Shouldn�t all United States citizens� needs and rights within and from their country � such as my husband�s and my son�s, come before any Alien�s need or right to receive admission into the U.S., including my own? Also, shouldn�t Family-Based Immigration take first place over �Alien travel� for any reason?
I regret to say it�s these types of injustices with devastating consequences to the recipient�s and his/her immediate relatives� personal lives remaining raveled, much more unacknowledged that play a large role in the cause for conflict concerning disloyalty and unpopularity among U.S. citizens and foreign nationals inside and outside of the United States. I trust that once this oversight is brought to DHS�s attention they will not knowingly continue punishing my husband and my son for loving me, an Alien who once stumbled while attempting to survive in the U.S.. I�m afraid to imagine how many individuals involved in cases like my family�s and mine go on thinking that the U.S. is a bad country for having the audacity to pass judgment on them. I�ve had to believe there�s a glitch somewhere in immigration law caused by simple human error. I can�t accept that the U.S. I grew to know as a loving, Christian country with caring values is intentionally causing my loved ones and I grief. It goes without saying that as much as the United States has a duty to protect its citizens it also has a duty to be equally diplomatic toward foreigners and not continue persecuting the one or the other long after any condemning sentence has been exacted and executed. I know the United States of America will do right by my son, my husband, me, and the rest of its citizens and foreign nationals in our predicament.
We want the 212(d)(3) Non-Immigrant Visas Waiver made into an Immigrant Visas Waiver for Immediate Relatives of U.S. Citizens to make sure United States citizens receive competent protection from the Department of Homeland Security and adequate protection from the United States of America. I believe a Waiver should be available to me for my deportation charge including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana so my husband and son can claim me and I can immigrate to the U.S.. But immigration law only makes such a Waiver available to Foreign Nationals who wish to travel to the U.S.(and who also have the same charge as me: deportation including possession of more than one count of 30 grams of marijuana). My husband�s and my son�s Freedom Of Belief civil liberty is being violated because their belief is being discriminated against. I am not able to immigrate to the U.S. because immigration law doesn�t allow me a Waiver enabling my husband or son to claim me successfully. If I had a Waiver available to me they wouldn�t have to be at this crossroads making their case public in the courts, therefore their Right To Privacy is also being violated as a result of their belief being discriminated against. Please, help bring justice to these afflicted, we need your input. How should we proceed?
crap..who are you.???
eager_immi
02-09 12:09 PM
Ok, since immigration is taking a back seat because of the IRAQ war, please explain how does it make him a wonderful president? He is responsible for so many lives bc of the war. If he did not spend billions of tax payer money on iraq, when there were no weapons of mass distruction and/or saddam was not an imminent danger to the united states, don't you think we would have better use of our tax payer's dollars.
Just beacuse he is pro immigration does not make him the best president (he cannot pass the bill on his own u know, eventhough "he is the decider"). What is the point he can be pro immigration for all people care but his republican party is not too thrilled with him and will not pass an amnesty bill. What has he done for the enviornment? He believes that there is nothing called global warming. So please just because he is pro-illegals, pro free trade does not qualify him as the best president.
Bush is for immigration reform.
I see people disliking him, but to be fair to him, that man had some very good ideas when he became the president. He was unlucky that 9-11 happened when he was just 9 months into presidency and inexperienced, but his response was good, and it was wrong for him to go into Iraq as the reasons were all wrong. That was a huge mistake, probably in-expereince, wrong advisors, oil lobby, and some of the fear from 9-11, all contributed to that decision.
Overall, he has done more in terms of changing things, and has started debates on more controversial issues than anyone before. He has done more for the world trade, es[ecially countries like India, China and Brazil. He has gone beyond racial and gender factors, as reflected in choice of his staff and advisors.
Debates have to be started before anything happens and sometime it takes years, even after the presidency is over.
It's easy to blame him for everything as he is the face we see. I am not a Bush supporter, but actually a huge Clinton fan, but I think we tend to be overly unfair to the man. He has an office that comes with blames, sometimes decisions are not easy and you could go wrong either way. I think he tends to err on side of doing more than less, while Clinton was opposite and kept things stable, but also didnot start changes or lay grounds for change to take place.
As a president I think he has probably done more, or sets things in motion, more than Clinton did. Sometimes things need changing, and initial in-stability goes with the change.
Just beacuse he is pro immigration does not make him the best president (he cannot pass the bill on his own u know, eventhough "he is the decider"). What is the point he can be pro immigration for all people care but his republican party is not too thrilled with him and will not pass an amnesty bill. What has he done for the enviornment? He believes that there is nothing called global warming. So please just because he is pro-illegals, pro free trade does not qualify him as the best president.
Bush is for immigration reform.
I see people disliking him, but to be fair to him, that man had some very good ideas when he became the president. He was unlucky that 9-11 happened when he was just 9 months into presidency and inexperienced, but his response was good, and it was wrong for him to go into Iraq as the reasons were all wrong. That was a huge mistake, probably in-expereince, wrong advisors, oil lobby, and some of the fear from 9-11, all contributed to that decision.
Overall, he has done more in terms of changing things, and has started debates on more controversial issues than anyone before. He has done more for the world trade, es[ecially countries like India, China and Brazil. He has gone beyond racial and gender factors, as reflected in choice of his staff and advisors.
Debates have to be started before anything happens and sometime it takes years, even after the presidency is over.
It's easy to blame him for everything as he is the face we see. I am not a Bush supporter, but actually a huge Clinton fan, but I think we tend to be overly unfair to the man. He has an office that comes with blames, sometimes decisions are not easy and you could go wrong either way. I think he tends to err on side of doing more than less, while Clinton was opposite and kept things stable, but also didnot start changes or lay grounds for change to take place.
As a president I think he has probably done more, or sets things in motion, more than Clinton did. Sometimes things need changing, and initial in-stability goes with the change.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar