rameshvaid
05-26 04:59 PM
I was in the same situation last month. I live in minnesota had 485 receipt from july 2007, EAD for myself but no EAD for wife, so i wished the 485 will do. DMV said the same crap that since 485 has no expiration date, they only accept 485 that is not older than 6 months old (with the wild assumption that any 485 is approved or denied within 6 months). I got infopass appointment with USCIS, got letter that my case is still pending, and they laughed in DMV saying they know my case is still pending, they have some kind of access to USCIS database. After a lot of arguing and going up to managers in DMV, they agreed to give me and wife 6 months driving license and told me you have to find another immigration document next time (meaning apply for EAD for urself and wife)
Sorry if this does not help you much.
My son and wife too had EAD's expiring in Aug, 2010.. Had no option but to get the DL for three months and applied for another renewal of EAD's.. What a crap..$ after $.. Did the letter from USCIS you got after infopass help or not??
Sorry if this does not help you much.
My son and wife too had EAD's expiring in Aug, 2010.. Had no option but to get the DL for three months and applied for another renewal of EAD's.. What a crap..$ after $.. Did the letter from USCIS you got after infopass help or not??
wallpaper SEMA 2010: 2011 Corvette Z06x
Blog Feeds
07-08 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)
We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).
The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)
No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.
Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?
The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�
While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.
Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)
Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.
Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.
The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)
immigrant2007
07-19 09:05 PM
It doesn't matter if the I-140 was revoked by the prev employer, still the PD is yours to keep provided that I-140 was approved. One should also be cautious about the revocation, if the approved I-140 was revoked by USCIS itself as a fraudulent filing then no benefits from that I-140! Otherwise you are good.
The new company's offer is like any other job for you, if you qualify for the job and the company likes you and your skills they are going to offer the market salary and the position can even be a manager, then you might qualify for EB1!
Hi Rajenk
thanks for the information
The new company's offer is like any other job for you, if you qualify for the job and the company likes you and your skills they are going to offer the market salary and the position can even be a manager, then you might qualify for EB1!
Hi Rajenk
thanks for the information
2011 track-ready Corvette Z06X,
stupendousman11
09-24 01:43 PM
EB2 India from NC.
Filed EAD renewal at TSC (my 485, however, is pending at NSC) on Aug 6. RD Aug 7. No LUDs since the notice was issued.
EAD CPO email on 9/23 :)
Wife's EAD (applied together) still pending. No LUDs either.
Filed EAD renewal at TSC (my 485, however, is pending at NSC) on Aug 6. RD Aug 7. No LUDs since the notice was issued.
EAD CPO email on 9/23 :)
Wife's EAD (applied together) still pending. No LUDs either.
more...
chanduv23
12-24 02:25 PM
Please post your own blog sites here if you have written articles about immigration and have any videos, cartoons, PSA etc....
mrsr
07-17 05:47 PM
Murthy is big time crap
more...
shana04
08-15 05:29 PM
Congrats on your green. You have done so much for IV and community and it is great to know that your levels of commitment is still the same
Is your Name check and FP cleared?
Is your Name check and FP cleared?
2010 Chevrolet corvette Z06X
return_to_india
01-19 05:34 PM
Is $500 what your wife pays from her pocket (and employer pays the rest) or is this the actual cost of buying insurance?
In the former case, expect the actual cost under COBRA to be significantly higher.
I think you mixed part of reply with "chaks7" info.
I pay $500 . Don't know how much the employer pays.
In the former case, expect the actual cost under COBRA to be significantly higher.
I think you mixed part of reply with "chaks7" info.
I pay $500 . Don't know how much the employer pays.
more...
nandakumar
01-18 07:50 PM
^^^^
hair 2010 Chevrolet Corvette Z06X
eilsoe
10-03 12:14 PM
yeah, check my post "What grids can look like" in the "Drawing and design" threads...
THAT looks weird... notice how the grid pattern fits perfectly with a mosaic render...! :)
THAT looks weird... notice how the grid pattern fits perfectly with a mosaic render...! :)
more...
chandra140
10-13 01:48 PM
I got the 140 denial notice.
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
hot Camaro SSX amp; Corvette Z06X
rinkurazdan
05-31 11:17 AM
Keep the cash rolling...for that will only save us from the gross injustice.
more...
house 2010 Chevrolet Corvette Z06X
terpcurt
January 6th, 2005, 09:00 PM
of the technique....
on the back layer, use gaussian blur, then erase, getting a sharper than background coloured bit.
add some saturation....
whadddya think?
Robhttp://images8.fotki.com/v146/photos/1/173093/1080432/2flower-vi.jpg
I see what your getting at...... yep... I do like that too.... still have a lot to learn :D
on the back layer, use gaussian blur, then erase, getting a sharper than background coloured bit.
add some saturation....
whadddya think?
Robhttp://images8.fotki.com/v146/photos/1/173093/1080432/2flower-vi.jpg
I see what your getting at...... yep... I do like that too.... still have a lot to learn :D
tattoo Chevrolet Corvette Z06X
shaikhshehzadali
12-28 09:14 AM
I can see it in my browser. Good news for NSC as most of the dates moved significantly. Expecting to get news on my I-140 by May 2008 or earlier.
Which world are u? These dates are there online for more than 2 weeks now.
Which world are u? These dates are there online for more than 2 weeks now.
more...
pictures -Corvette-Z06x-Track-Car-
USDream2Dust
07-27 01:20 PM
I am liking the answers. Also looks like my PD is sept 2006 and it would be a while before they approve my case. Meaning I can take off for couple of month go on vacation, come back, look for job, find a decent job and start working.
when in far future they approve me I need a letter from my new employer stating that I am working (not from original employer right?)
when in far future they approve me I need a letter from my new employer stating that I am working (not from original employer right?)
dresses 2010 Chevrolet Corvette Z06X
beemboy
05-31 10:11 AM
This is my first time $200 contribution for this great organization. Keep up the good work guys!!
Google Checkout #778027030093989
Google Checkout #778027030093989
more...
makeup Camaro SSX and Corvette Z06X
STAmisha
06-19 03:37 PM
Finally This Is My Turn To Rejoice. My Lawyer Email Me Saying That She Got Off From Phone From Dol And My Lc Is Approved.
1)how Long It Takes For The Physical Paper To Arrive? Do We Need That Physical Paper To File For 140 And 485?
2)the Online Status Still Shows "in Process"
Gurus, Please Help Me
1)how Long It Takes For The Physical Paper To Arrive? Do We Need That Physical Paper To File For 140 And 485?
2)the Online Status Still Shows "in Process"
Gurus, Please Help Me
girlfriend 2011 Chevrolet Corvette Z06X
![Corvette Z06x. [VIDEO] Corvette Z06X and](http://www.corvetteblogger.com/images/content/110710_1.jpg "[VIDEO] Corvette Z06X and")
dpp
01-07 08:25 PM
B. Provisions in Cases of Revocation of the Approved Form I-140
Subject: Guidance for Processing Form I-485 in Accordance with Section 106(c) of AC21
As discussed above, if an alien is the beneficiary of an approved Form I-140 and is also the beneficiary of a Form I-485 that has been pending 180 days or longer, then the approved Form I-140 remains valid with respect to a new offer of employment under the flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21.
Accordingly, if the employer withdraws the approved Form I-140 on or after the date that the Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 shall remain valid under the provisions of �106(c) of AC21. It is expected that the alien will have submitted evidence to the office having jurisdiction over the pending Form I-485 that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupational classification as the offer of employment for which the petition was filed. Accordingly, if the underlying approved Form I-140 is withdrawn, and the alien has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the adjudicating officer must issue a Notice of Intent to Deny the pending Form I-485. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i). If the evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment submitted in response to the Notice of Intent to Deny is timely filed and it appears that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, the BCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485. If the applicant responds to the Notice of Intent to Deny, but has not established that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485. If the alien does not respond or fails to timely respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485.
If approval of the Form I-140 is revoked or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 is no longer valid with respect to a new offer of employment and the Form I-485 may be denied. If at any time the BCIS revokes approval of the Form I-140 based on fraud, the alien will not be eligible for the job flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21 and the adjudicating officer may, in his or her discretion, deny the attached Form I-485 immediately. In all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide, and the employer must have had the intent, at the time the Form I-140 was approved, to employ the beneficiary upon adjustment. It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
Subject: Guidance for Processing Form I-485 in Accordance with Section 106(c) of AC21
As discussed above, if an alien is the beneficiary of an approved Form I-140 and is also the beneficiary of a Form I-485 that has been pending 180 days or longer, then the approved Form I-140 remains valid with respect to a new offer of employment under the flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21.
Accordingly, if the employer withdraws the approved Form I-140 on or after the date that the Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 shall remain valid under the provisions of �106(c) of AC21. It is expected that the alien will have submitted evidence to the office having jurisdiction over the pending Form I-485 that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupational classification as the offer of employment for which the petition was filed. Accordingly, if the underlying approved Form I-140 is withdrawn, and the alien has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the adjudicating officer must issue a Notice of Intent to Deny the pending Form I-485. See 8 CFR 103.2(b)(16)(i). If the evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment submitted in response to the Notice of Intent to Deny is timely filed and it appears that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, the BCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485. If the applicant responds to the Notice of Intent to Deny, but has not established that the new offer of employment is in the same or similar occupation, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485. If the alien does not respond or fails to timely respond to the Notice of Intent to Deny, the adjudicating officer may immediately deny the Form I-485.
If approval of the Form I-140 is revoked or the Form I-140 is withdrawn before the alien’s Form I-485 has been pending 180 days, the approved Form I-140 is no longer valid with respect to a new offer of employment and the Form I-485 may be denied. If at any time the BCIS revokes approval of the Form I-140 based on fraud, the alien will not be eligible for the job flexibility provisions of �106(c) of AC21 and the adjudicating officer may, in his or her discretion, deny the attached Form I-485 immediately. In all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide, and the employer must have had the intent, at the time the Form I-140 was approved, to employ the beneficiary upon adjustment. It should be noted that there is no requirement in statute or regulations that a beneficiary of a Form I-140 actually be in the underlying employment until permanent residence is authorized. Therefore, it is possible for an alien to qualify for the provisions of �106(c) of AC21 even if he or she has never been employed by the prior petitioning employer or the subsequent employer under section 204(j) of the Act.
hairstyles 2011 Chevrolet Corvette Z06X
EndlessWait
12-14 09:49 AM
So while you delayed to renew the EAD... you possibly were in US working on H1B. My situation is a little different, I am planning to leave the country for a year... so
1) Wanted to check if I can stay out of US for that long while AoS in pending...is there any such restriction that you can be away for only 2 months.
2) That potentially means I won't be getting paid in US... so no payroll for that much time, Is there any restriction on how many payslips I can miss.
Any help in this regard....
i checked with my attorney..AOS is for ppl who are inside US and waiting. You should see if you can transfer case to consuellor processing
1) Wanted to check if I can stay out of US for that long while AoS in pending...is there any such restriction that you can be away for only 2 months.
2) That potentially means I won't be getting paid in US... so no payroll for that much time, Is there any restriction on how many payslips I can miss.
Any help in this regard....
i checked with my attorney..AOS is for ppl who are inside US and waiting. You should see if you can transfer case to consuellor processing
summitpointe
04-16 02:53 PM
Open an MTR ASAP. It sometimes takes lot of time(may be one year) for final decision.
As your H1B is valid for another one year, just to have a support talk with your attorney about filing a PERM labor ASAP.
As your H1B is valid for another one year, just to have a support talk with your attorney about filing a PERM labor ASAP.
pd_recapturing
04-30 06:46 PM
I have done interfiling myself with PD of March 2000, no luck yet. Interfile is a matter of luck, there is no guarantee that the letter you send will reach your file. Also USCIS does not give any confirmation that received your interfile and will transfer the PD. All depends on when they process your case and see your interfile, they may take action.
I had sent my interfile January sent by Fax and also by Fedex, followed up with a phone call numerous times. Not discouraging, but wanted to share my experience.
Jai, Whats the fax # ? I am also in same boat. Have sent 3 letters so far. This is very frustrating. I do not know how come lawyers say that interfiling is easy and way to go rather than filing a new 485 ...
I had sent my interfile January sent by Fax and also by Fedex, followed up with a phone call numerous times. Not discouraging, but wanted to share my experience.
Jai, Whats the fax # ? I am also in same boat. Have sent 3 letters so far. This is very frustrating. I do not know how come lawyers say that interfiling is easy and way to go rather than filing a new 485 ...
No comments:
Post a Comment