bbenhill
01-09 04:06 PM
applies to generan legal immigrant population.
How about instead of survey we put it as a sticky note to announce if someone have information that in his/her place is hiring. With that way we can help all people who got laid off and this site can be a networking website.
Please give me green if you like my idea :D
How about instead of survey we put it as a sticky note to announce if someone have information that in his/her place is hiring. With that way we can help all people who got laid off and this site can be a networking website.
Please give me green if you like my idea :D
mbartosik
05-30 01:17 PM
Following this logic only BEC cases are affected.
I use the word "only" caughtiously because there are still a lot in BECs and if it is you it is not a statistic.
If BECs complete processing by year end then all I140s could be issued within a few months of that.
After BEC cases have been processed then what's the problem since PERM is workable?
The only problems I see are:
BEC cases -- it is unacceptable to leave them out in the cold after such a long wait.
Abusive employers cancelling I140 before a new I140 is obtained after moving jobs.
The extension beyond 6th year was only ever intended to allow for the labor certification backlog.
Unfortunately the law makers acted too late and many had to leave some years ago before 7th year extensions were allowed. I hope they don't make up for that by acting too soon now (before BECs complete processing).
If the BECs complete their job, why would there be a need for 7th year extensions?
I use the word "only" caughtiously because there are still a lot in BECs and if it is you it is not a statistic.
If BECs complete processing by year end then all I140s could be issued within a few months of that.
After BEC cases have been processed then what's the problem since PERM is workable?
The only problems I see are:
BEC cases -- it is unacceptable to leave them out in the cold after such a long wait.
Abusive employers cancelling I140 before a new I140 is obtained after moving jobs.
The extension beyond 6th year was only ever intended to allow for the labor certification backlog.
Unfortunately the law makers acted too late and many had to leave some years ago before 7th year extensions were allowed. I hope they don't make up for that by acting too soon now (before BECs complete processing).
If the BECs complete their job, why would there be a need for 7th year extensions?
perm2gc
12-22 06:08 PM
Efren Hernandez III, Director of the Business and Trade Services Branch at INS in Washington, D.C. announced in late December 2001 that the INS does not recognize or provide any "grace period" for maintaining status after employment termination. Mr. Hernandez explained this strict interpretation by reasoning that there is no difference between H1B holders and other non-immigrants, like students, to justify a stay in the U.S. beyond the explicit purpose of their admission. Mr. Hernandez admits that this may cause hardship to some terminated or laid off H1B workers, but believes that the INS position is legally justified.
Although the INS' strict interpretation of the law may have legal justification, the result to others seems harsh and unreasonable, considering the fact that the lay off or termination is completely beyond the control of the H1B worker. This strict INS position may also appear to be contrary to the purpose of allowing H1B workers admission to the U.S. since they helped to fill a critical need in our economy when the U.S. was suffering acute shortages of qualified, skilled workers. Perhaps, it would be more fair if the INS were to allow a reasonable grace period, perhaps 60 days, as mentioned in the June 19, 2001 INS Memo.
H1B workers should not be equated to other non-immigrants. For example, H1Bs can be distinguished from students. Students, in most cases, have exclusive control over whether they can maintain their status. Generally they determine whether they remain in school and satisfy the purpose of their admission to the U.S. If they choose not to remain in school, or they do not maintain certain passing grades or do not have sufficient funds, then they are no longer considered to be students maintaining their status and should return to their home countries. On the other hand, H1B workers enter the U.S. to engage in professional employment based on the needs of U.S. employers. They do not have exclusive control over whether they are laid off.
Although we are in a soft economy with massive employee cutbacks in a variety of fields, many of these H1B workers are able to find new employment within reasonable timeframes. Some companies, at least, are in need of these workers. Salaries have dropped in many cases and recruitment of workers from outside the U.S. has significantly slowed; but, to a large extent, the need for these existing workers remains. It would benefit U.S. companies and suit the purpose of the H1B visa program to allow a reasonable grace period for these laid-off H1B workers to seek new employment within a realistic time frame.
Adding to the woes of H1B workers, Mr. Hernandez addressed the issue of extensions of stay following brief status lapses. In short, the regulations require that an individual be in status at the time an extension of status is requested. Failure to maintain status will result in the H1B petition being granted, if appropriate, without an extension of stay. No I-94 card will be attached to the approval notice. Instead, the beneficiary will be directed to obtain a visa at a U.S. consulate in a foreign country and, only afterward, will return to lawful H1B status by re-entering the U.S. Although INS has a regulation that allows the Service to overlook brief lapses in status, extraordinary circumstances are required. Mr. Hernandez stated that even very short lapses in status are not justified in the context of terminated H1B workers, absent extraordinary circumstances.
Mr. Hernandez specifically negated the existence of a ten-day grace period following employment termination. There are ten-day grace periods allowed in three other instances. These are (a) the H1B worker can be admitted to the U.S. up to 10 days prior to the validity of his/her petition; (b) the H1B worker has a ten-day grace period following the expiration of the period of admission; and (c) in the case of denials of extensions, the H1B worker is given up to ten days to depart the U.S. Unfortunately, termination of employment is not covered by any of these exceptions. Some find it hard to see why a terminated H1B worker should be treated any differently from the H1B worker whose period of H1B admission has expired. There is far less warning and predictability in cases of layoffs or of other terminations.
Rumors are also circulating about a 30-day grace period should INS deny an H1B petition or extension of status and require the person to depart the U.S. There is also a 60-day time frame, proposed by the INS itself in the June 19, 2001 Memo, analyzing the American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act (AC21). In this memo, the INS discussed the law allowing a person to be eligible for H1B extensions beyond 6 years if the person previously held either H1B status or had an H1B visa. The INS surmised that the law envisioned that one who previously held H1B status should be entitled, possibly up to 60 days, to the benefits of that section of AC21. Efren Hernandez clarified that none of these grace periods applies in the case of an H1B worker who is terminated or laid off
Although the INS' strict interpretation of the law may have legal justification, the result to others seems harsh and unreasonable, considering the fact that the lay off or termination is completely beyond the control of the H1B worker. This strict INS position may also appear to be contrary to the purpose of allowing H1B workers admission to the U.S. since they helped to fill a critical need in our economy when the U.S. was suffering acute shortages of qualified, skilled workers. Perhaps, it would be more fair if the INS were to allow a reasonable grace period, perhaps 60 days, as mentioned in the June 19, 2001 INS Memo.
H1B workers should not be equated to other non-immigrants. For example, H1Bs can be distinguished from students. Students, in most cases, have exclusive control over whether they can maintain their status. Generally they determine whether they remain in school and satisfy the purpose of their admission to the U.S. If they choose not to remain in school, or they do not maintain certain passing grades or do not have sufficient funds, then they are no longer considered to be students maintaining their status and should return to their home countries. On the other hand, H1B workers enter the U.S. to engage in professional employment based on the needs of U.S. employers. They do not have exclusive control over whether they are laid off.
Although we are in a soft economy with massive employee cutbacks in a variety of fields, many of these H1B workers are able to find new employment within reasonable timeframes. Some companies, at least, are in need of these workers. Salaries have dropped in many cases and recruitment of workers from outside the U.S. has significantly slowed; but, to a large extent, the need for these existing workers remains. It would benefit U.S. companies and suit the purpose of the H1B visa program to allow a reasonable grace period for these laid-off H1B workers to seek new employment within a realistic time frame.
Adding to the woes of H1B workers, Mr. Hernandez addressed the issue of extensions of stay following brief status lapses. In short, the regulations require that an individual be in status at the time an extension of status is requested. Failure to maintain status will result in the H1B petition being granted, if appropriate, without an extension of stay. No I-94 card will be attached to the approval notice. Instead, the beneficiary will be directed to obtain a visa at a U.S. consulate in a foreign country and, only afterward, will return to lawful H1B status by re-entering the U.S. Although INS has a regulation that allows the Service to overlook brief lapses in status, extraordinary circumstances are required. Mr. Hernandez stated that even very short lapses in status are not justified in the context of terminated H1B workers, absent extraordinary circumstances.
Mr. Hernandez specifically negated the existence of a ten-day grace period following employment termination. There are ten-day grace periods allowed in three other instances. These are (a) the H1B worker can be admitted to the U.S. up to 10 days prior to the validity of his/her petition; (b) the H1B worker has a ten-day grace period following the expiration of the period of admission; and (c) in the case of denials of extensions, the H1B worker is given up to ten days to depart the U.S. Unfortunately, termination of employment is not covered by any of these exceptions. Some find it hard to see why a terminated H1B worker should be treated any differently from the H1B worker whose period of H1B admission has expired. There is far less warning and predictability in cases of layoffs or of other terminations.
Rumors are also circulating about a 30-day grace period should INS deny an H1B petition or extension of status and require the person to depart the U.S. There is also a 60-day time frame, proposed by the INS itself in the June 19, 2001 Memo, analyzing the American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act (AC21). In this memo, the INS discussed the law allowing a person to be eligible for H1B extensions beyond 6 years if the person previously held either H1B status or had an H1B visa. The INS surmised that the law envisioned that one who previously held H1B status should be entitled, possibly up to 60 days, to the benefits of that section of AC21. Efren Hernandez clarified that none of these grace periods applies in the case of an H1B worker who is terminated or laid off
krishna_brc
08-04 01:54 PM
She applied for second AP before travelling. My question is does she have to return before first AP expires OR can I mail her the second AP when it gets approved?
I think it is safer to come back on old AP.
I think it is safer to come back on old AP.
more...
pcjandyala
07-21 11:31 PM
http://infopass.uscis.gov/ .Please follow the instructions on the screen. Choose "You need information or other services " option.
Wish you all the best.
Wish you all the best.
arjun007
02-01 04:39 PM
I got a Multiple Entry Stamp.. ( last week of jan 2008)
The consulate officer who interviewed me did mention that they will try to get the passport back to me next day by 3 pm but there are chances that it might take a few days...
The next day I went to pick up my passport at 3 and it was not ready..The security guy said -> "because of the new system, the stamping is taking a while. But most of the guys have got it the next day by 5 pm.. the worst case was an H1 candidate who had to comeback after 2 days for his passport...But that was the only blip ..."
I would suggest booking ur tickets as if you were to get the passport the next day, but also buy the 52$ insurance (if you buy it on Orbitz) so that you can easily cancel and re-book it...
Also I read in several posts about who could go to halifax for stamping. Its true that only revalidation candidates should schedule but
It does not matter what employer name is printed on your existing expired VISA . You just need an existing H1 approval ( stamped) which is being extended. In my case I had only an expired stamp from my first company but I had transferred the H1 Visa to 2 employers since then without their stamp.
So this stamping was for my 3rd employer.
The consulate officer who interviewed me did mention that they will try to get the passport back to me next day by 3 pm but there are chances that it might take a few days...
The next day I went to pick up my passport at 3 and it was not ready..The security guy said -> "because of the new system, the stamping is taking a while. But most of the guys have got it the next day by 5 pm.. the worst case was an H1 candidate who had to comeback after 2 days for his passport...But that was the only blip ..."
I would suggest booking ur tickets as if you were to get the passport the next day, but also buy the 52$ insurance (if you buy it on Orbitz) so that you can easily cancel and re-book it...
Also I read in several posts about who could go to halifax for stamping. Its true that only revalidation candidates should schedule but
It does not matter what employer name is printed on your existing expired VISA . You just need an existing H1 approval ( stamped) which is being extended. In my case I had only an expired stamp from my first company but I had transferred the H1 Visa to 2 employers since then without their stamp.
So this stamping was for my 3rd employer.
more...
Googler
06-18 05:10 PM
Our beloved DHS secretary Chertoff says on June 14, 2007:
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/speeches/sp_1181915713176.shtm
"know Secretary Gutierrez is also dedicated, as am I, to working very hard with members of Congress. We've been up there probably more than in our own offices over the last couple months, trying to make sure that members understand that comprehensive reform, while not perfect, offers the best chance to get all the sectors of the economy what they need in terms of work, offers the opportunity to deal humanely with what is a continuing social problem, and from my standpoint, offers us the best opportunity to maximize our efforts on national security, because, as I have said time and again, when I have agents out hunting illegal lettuce pickers, waiters and housekeepers, they're not chasing drug dealers, criminals and terrorists. I, frankly, think the drug dealers, criminals and terrorists are the biggest threat to this country."
Then why the hell are law abiding scientists, tech workers, students et al being subjected to these kafka-esque name checks?? Seriously. I think we should start bombarding Congressional offices and Chertoff et all with phone calls. Now that the Ombudsman's data is out, USCIS and FBI can no longer say what they have been saying all these years, that the scale of the problem is miniscule.
Instead in CIR Section 531 (COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS) takes away the right for courts to rule on writs of mandamus filings:
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
Sen. Obama and Rep. Gutierrez introduced the Citizen Promotion Act in March 2007. The bill has a provision that asks for a namecheck to be completed in 90 days (also includes mumbo jumbo about GAO studying the problem, but the results are already in thanks to the Ombudsman).
See
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1379:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.795:
We should enlist the co-sponsors of these bills to kill Sec 531 (k) and when CIR finally dies, to pass an amended version of the Citizen Promotion Act.
http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/speeches/sp_1181915713176.shtm
"know Secretary Gutierrez is also dedicated, as am I, to working very hard with members of Congress. We've been up there probably more than in our own offices over the last couple months, trying to make sure that members understand that comprehensive reform, while not perfect, offers the best chance to get all the sectors of the economy what they need in terms of work, offers the opportunity to deal humanely with what is a continuing social problem, and from my standpoint, offers us the best opportunity to maximize our efforts on national security, because, as I have said time and again, when I have agents out hunting illegal lettuce pickers, waiters and housekeepers, they're not chasing drug dealers, criminals and terrorists. I, frankly, think the drug dealers, criminals and terrorists are the biggest threat to this country."
Then why the hell are law abiding scientists, tech workers, students et al being subjected to these kafka-esque name checks?? Seriously. I think we should start bombarding Congressional offices and Chertoff et all with phone calls. Now that the Ombudsman's data is out, USCIS and FBI can no longer say what they have been saying all these years, that the scale of the problem is miniscule.
Instead in CIR Section 531 (COMPLETION OF BACKGROUND AND SECURITY CHECKS) takes away the right for courts to rule on writs of mandamus filings:
"(k) Prohibition of Judicial Enforcement- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no court may require any act described in subsection (i) or (j) to be completed by a certain time or award any relief for the failure to complete such acts."
Sen. Obama and Rep. Gutierrez introduced the Citizen Promotion Act in March 2007. The bill has a provision that asks for a namecheck to be completed in 90 days (also includes mumbo jumbo about GAO studying the problem, but the results are already in thanks to the Ombudsman).
See
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:H.R.1379:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.795:
We should enlist the co-sponsors of these bills to kill Sec 531 (k) and when CIR finally dies, to pass an amended version of the Citizen Promotion Act.
martinvisalaw
07-15 12:27 PM
Required documents for H1B Visa renewal lists the previous employers experience letter...
Please advise me....
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Where are you reading this? As I mentioned, an experience letter should not be needed for a H-1B visa application.
Please advise me....
Thanks,
Sangeetha K
Where are you reading this? As I mentioned, an experience letter should not be needed for a H-1B visa application.
more...
sina
04-16 10:28 AM
Hi Hope2007,
Did you talk to your attorney? How were you able to do so?
My attorney says I can do so, I have asked him how.
Our corporate office handles all and I do not have any information about this. I hope my attorney is correct and I do not find myself in trouble after I change location.
Please post hope2007 if you know how this is possible.
Thanks
Did you talk to your attorney? How were you able to do so?
My attorney says I can do so, I have asked him how.
Our corporate office handles all and I do not have any information about this. I hope my attorney is correct and I do not find myself in trouble after I change location.
Please post hope2007 if you know how this is possible.
Thanks
gc_aspirant_prasad
12-07 08:42 PM
Most Project managers who get their GC in EB1 category are here on L1 A visa.
more...
Templarian
12-08 03:24 PM
Congratulations guys. :tini:
congratulation to all winner... especially to winner who use the "stargate"[...]Thank You :fab:
congratulation to all winner... especially to winner who use the "stargate"[...]Thank You :fab:
thediablo
05-30 03:19 PM
oh MAN! THIS SUCKS
i think Soul site really sucks. :D
i think Soul site really sucks. :D
more...
eastindia
01-06 09:44 AM
I understand that this bill many not pass or even move any forward. I thought two senior senators from both parties showing interest in this topic is a great opportunity for IV to present our case in a different light. We have been clamoring about the difficulties we are facing because of the present delay in green card processing. Unfortunately this is only our problem and no one else really has to be bothered about it. If we present our case in a mutually beneficial point of view perhaps some of the politicians will have little more interest in our situation. Remember JFK’s famous words…”Ask not what the country can do for you….” If we write to Senators Kerry and Lugar now, even if the bill does not pass, they will consider our situation slightly differently next time CIR or another immigration bill is introduced in the congress. I think IV ought to present our case in all different angles possible rather than the one way approach of expecting mercy in our situation. Most importantly, I think the premise of the proposed Kerry/Lugar bill is very much applicable the folks in IV. Aren’t many people in this forum waiting for an opportunity to do some business on their own? That is how new immigrants in America have always been. We shouldn’t be any different. I am sure we cannot bring in the capital that senators are looking for. But why don’t they view us slightly differently?
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
If it is a great opportunity, why dont everyone work on it. Start with investing in IV and taking part in it. IV is you and me.
75% of us in this forum do not qualify for the legislation being proposed here!
You are saying we folks cannot even invest 100K into business?
Even if I agree with you for a second. According to you out of 50 thousand IV members 10 thousand members qualify for this legislation. 10 thousand is a very big number.
Where are these ten thousand members? Even if these 10 thousand members invest $25 per month to lobby this bill it will be 250K per month to lobby. This is a huge amount and they can lobby this bill easily. The problem I see in IV is that out of 50 thousand people only 50 people have $25 per month to invest to lobby their own issues. Rest everyone is just sitting here and only contributing opinions.
ram_ram
11-01 07:05 PM
Legally speaking, You should not change the Metro Location for which the labor is applied. Exemption is Consulting companies can specify alternate location as 'Various client locations as specified by the employer'. Primary location would be the Head Office. So it all depends on what is specified in the labor.
Hello
My PD is March 2006 and my 6th year on H1B ends in March 2007. My LC was approved in March 2006 and I-140 got approved in July 2006. My company has relocated me to a different state. (same job, same title and company)
I have updated INS about my address change by sending AR-11. Would the job location change (from CA to NJ) have any impact on my GC processing?
Could you please advice if you info on this?
Regards
Hello
My PD is March 2006 and my 6th year on H1B ends in March 2007. My LC was approved in March 2006 and I-140 got approved in July 2006. My company has relocated me to a different state. (same job, same title and company)
I have updated INS about my address change by sending AR-11. Would the job location change (from CA to NJ) have any impact on my GC processing?
Could you please advice if you info on this?
Regards
more...
cgs
11-21 09:19 AM
just sent a mail to cbs.
BumbleBee
08-16 04:42 PM
Please be aware that experience gained at sponsoring employer can not be counted towards fulfilling minimum qualification requirement for labor certification. You must prove your qualification to the job prior to joining the sponsoring employer... minor details.
So if you are planning to file a new EB2 application with same employer, just count your experience till the point you joined the company, anything afterwards is not admissible.
BumbleBee
So if you are planning to file a new EB2 application with same employer, just count your experience till the point you joined the company, anything afterwards is not admissible.
BumbleBee
more...
sobers
07-14 12:28 AM
The 45 member New Democrat Coalition supports the main tenets of high skilled immigration. In fact, recently a group of 16 House Democrats sent a letter to Hastert and Pelosi about this matter.
http://www.house.gov/tauscher/ndc/Letters%20on%20Site/NDC%20high%20skilled%20immigration%20letter-signed.pdf
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ca10_tauscher/highskilledworkers.html
We need to start a lobbying effort to get Democrats to co-sponsor the Hosue SKIL Bill and make this a truly bi-partsan effort and get it moving. Currently all the 11 sponsors/co-sponsors are Republicans.
IV Admin: Can we have a web fax campaign targetting members of the New Democrat coalition? Suggestions welcome.
http://www.house.gov/tauscher/ndc/Letters%20on%20Site/NDC%20high%20skilled%20immigration%20letter-signed.pdf
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ca10_tauscher/highskilledworkers.html
We need to start a lobbying effort to get Democrats to co-sponsor the Hosue SKIL Bill and make this a truly bi-partsan effort and get it moving. Currently all the 11 sponsors/co-sponsors are Republicans.
IV Admin: Can we have a web fax campaign targetting members of the New Democrat coalition? Suggestions welcome.
GCHope2011
02-05 06:31 AM
Hi EveryOne,
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
Congrats ivar - you are now a free man!!
My humble request - please do contribute to the cause that held you back for so long. If not financially, then through your efforts in advocacy & legislator meetings - every little bit counts.
I got my Green card in mail yesterday. I want to thank IV and everyone for all the support during this GC journey. I wish everyone all the best for their green card process. I wish everyone gets to file 485 irrespective of priority dates and ultimately get their green cards. This is a question to Admin, i have a recursive donation going on, I would like to make a one time donation and stop the recursive donation.
Thanks.
Congrats ivar - you are now a free man!!
My humble request - please do contribute to the cause that held you back for so long. If not financially, then through your efforts in advocacy & legislator meetings - every little bit counts.
logiclife
08-03 05:37 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?
If the letter looks altered and if the ink and shade of your addition looks different from ink/shade of other text, then yes, they would doubt. If they doubt, they will follow procedure and verify the document's authenticity. I am not sure, check with lawyer but I think they will do that via RFE/inquiry. In that case, if you have LIN number, then case status will be updated and you will know that "Something" from USCIS is headed to your employer/lawyer for inquiry or verification. The online status info wont tell you what it is, but you will know if something from USCIS is on the way for inquiry/RFE.
Check all info I provided here with a lawyer. I am not a lawyer.
If that happens, you may want to really get a good attorney to provide you with options.
You should have asked on forums or a lawyer if you even needed to alter the letter. Coz really, the employer need to provide a letter saying that job offer is still valid. If roles/resp are required and if they are missing, USCIS will send RFE for that. And then you can correct it.
But if you get caught in this, then its going to be bad news.
I am worried if USCIS will be sending the copy of the experience letter for verification?
If the letter looks altered and if the ink and shade of your addition looks different from ink/shade of other text, then yes, they would doubt. If they doubt, they will follow procedure and verify the document's authenticity. I am not sure, check with lawyer but I think they will do that via RFE/inquiry. In that case, if you have LIN number, then case status will be updated and you will know that "Something" from USCIS is headed to your employer/lawyer for inquiry or verification. The online status info wont tell you what it is, but you will know if something from USCIS is on the way for inquiry/RFE.
Check all info I provided here with a lawyer. I am not a lawyer.
If that happens, you may want to really get a good attorney to provide you with options.
You should have asked on forums or a lawyer if you even needed to alter the letter. Coz really, the employer need to provide a letter saying that job offer is still valid. If roles/resp are required and if they are missing, USCIS will send RFE for that. And then you can correct it.
But if you get caught in this, then its going to be bad news.
eb3India
05-15 09:45 AM
being current means nothing, belive me, I filed 485 in March 2004 when everything was current for almost an year, we need IV reform the system to better work for Highly skilled professionals,
I know in coming months many of us might get GC, including many in IV-core team, but I would like to IV go further after getting GC to continue their effort to put a closure by passing SKILL as a law which is our goal
I know in coming months many of us might get GC, including many in IV-core team, but I would like to IV go further after getting GC to continue their effort to put a closure by passing SKILL as a law which is our goal
Alabaman
07-14 08:26 AM
Not trying to sound pessimistic� but I am tired of hearing about the so called SKIL bill without any sort of timeline attached to it. For all I care it seems to me that it might just lay dormant in the house for one, two or even five years without any consideration. Any one with more info should please throw more light.
No comments:
Post a Comment