Shenner
06-04 06:19 PM
We have been seeing a lot of these as of late. For example, I represent many companies who are actually agents; ie, a staffing agency who places speech therapists or nurses. The USCIS is now seeking to show that the beneficiary is actually on payroll and that the staffing company is in existence and that the location where the beneficiary will work is actually in existence. They have also been asking for copies of the contracts between the staffing agency and the place where the alien will work. Although it seems like they are asking for a lot, it does make sense in light of the immigration laws for H-1bs. A lot of abuse went on in the past in this visa categories espcially with staffing agencies etc. They would bring in nurses, etc. and then not place them anywhere! These people would pay and get a visa, enter the US, and when they reported for work were told there was no job for them and then they had no place to go. I believe it is in response to these abuses why we are seeing this now.
wallpaper emo love quotes pictures. emo
eb3India
09-25 10:19 AM
Here is the mail from AILA,
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
September 25, 2006
Dear Immigration Advocates-
Your help is STILL needed TODAY! Senate Appropriators will meet late THIS AFTERNOON to decide if enforcement-only bills will be included in the Department of Homeland Security's appropriations package. Urge your Senators to oppose efforts to attach anti-immigration measures to this must-pass bill. Call or email your Senators TODAY - encourage them to weigh-in with Senate Appropriators about this urgent matter.
You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
Email your Senators through Contact Congress on AILA's website. We've already created a sample letter for you to send. All you need to do is enter your zip code, hit send, and your voice will be heard in Congress.
Call your Senators, you can find their telephone numbers in our Congressional Directory and you can use these talking points to help you when you call:
� Congress should stop playing politics with immigration and pass comprehensive immigration reform. These enforcement-only bills will do nothing to enhance border security and will not move us one inch closer to fixing our broken immigration system.
� Attaching these bills to DHS appropriations circumvents the legislative process on an issue of critical national importance; it undermines the intense and unflagging efforts of the Senate to solve this crisis; and it rewards the House for spending the summer attacking the Senate while abdicating its responsibility to the American people.
� Senators should forcefully oppose this effort by the House to nullify the Senate's bi-partison solution. If the Senate acquiesces on these provisions, the House will only be emboldened and will never return to debate comprehensive reform. This will not be "enforcement-first", it will be "enforcement-only."
� For laws to work, they must be realistic and fair. Our current immigration laws are neither: proposals like these that ignore the reality that immigrants come here to work and to be with their families are destined to fail.
� Giving the government unchecked powers to punish immigrants, and making local police chase after immigrants, will only drive undocumented immigrants further underground. It will not fix the problem; it will make matters worse.
We called you to action last week to alert you to an underhanded political strategy from immigration restrictionists to attach three enforcement-only bills to the DHS appropriations bill, a bill that must pass this year. You and your colleagues sent close to 2,000 letters to Congress, but we'll need more letters and phone calls in order to ensure that Senate Appropriators exclude these measures from the bill.
Leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives are working behind closed doors and using procedural mechanisms to attach enforcement-only provisions contained in three bills (H.R. 6094, H.R. 6095, and H.R. 4830) to the Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, a piece of legislation that must pass this year. Although House leaders label these bills "border security" legislation, they are in fact harsh enforcement measures lifted from Rep. Sensenbrenner's H.R. 4437 that endanger due process rights and do little to make our borders more secure. You can find general information about the three bills below and a section-by-section analysis of each one on InfoNet.
If these provisions are attached to the must-pass DHS bill, it will be nearly impossible to defeat them. Our best defense against this backdoor strategy is to put pressure on each U.S. Senator and encourage them to oppose any attempt to attach, or further these three enforcement-only bills. We're working hard in Washington to derail these political machinations, but we can't do it alone. We need your help. Please email or call both of your Senators today.
Over the summer House leadership used dozens of faux hearings to stage public displays of aversion to immigration reform. While they kept the media busy and their restrictionist base roiled, they failed to change the minds of the majority of Americans who support a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system. Nor did they succeed in backing down the U.S. Senators who supported S. 2611, a strong step towards comprehensive immigration reform. Now that House leaders know that the full Senate won't pass their enforcement-only agenda, they have resorted to closed-door politicking. We must fight to prevent the breach of justice that would result from attaching these enforcement-only bills to must-pass legislation.
Please call and email your Senators today. Now is the time for action.
Sincerely,
Marshall
Marshall Fitz
Director of Advocacy, AILA
Email Marshall
The enforcement-only provisions are:
� Sections 101 and 102 of the Dangerous Alien Detention Act contained in H.R. 6094, which seek to legitimize the practice of indefinite detention of aliens awaiting removal, despite Supreme Court decisions requiring elimination of this practice;
� Section 201 of the Criminal Alien Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would expand the use of expedited removal proceedings to individuals already in the United States - even individuals who have resided here for years - in ways that would significantly increase the risk of deporting innocent people;
� Sections 301-303 of the Alien Gang Removal Act contained in H.R. 6094, which would grant unfettered discretion to the executive branch to designate "criminal street gangs" and then strip members of such gangs of virtually all rights;
� Section 101 of H.R. 6095, which gives state and local police authority to investigate, arrest, and detain noncitizens for civil violations of immigration status;
� Sections 301 and 302 of the Ending Catch and Release Act contained in H.R. 6095, which would limit the power of federal courts to grant injunctive relief in civil immigration proceedings, despite acknowledgement by DOJ that such relief does not interfere with efforts to end the practice of catch-and-release.
txh1b
08-17 09:47 AM
When I went for H1B stamping my B1 was cancelled and I was told one can not have more than one visa at the same time.
That is totally wrong on whoever said that to you. One can have B1 and work visas on their passport without any problems and use it based on the nature of the trip. Only conflicting visas will likely be cancelled. Eg would be L1 and H1 at the same time for different employers. The VO could cancel the one that isn't being used.
Either the VO that took your case wasn't well versed with the law or made a mistake.
That is totally wrong on whoever said that to you. One can have B1 and work visas on their passport without any problems and use it based on the nature of the trip. Only conflicting visas will likely be cancelled. Eg would be L1 and H1 at the same time for different employers. The VO could cancel the one that isn't being used.
Either the VO that took your case wasn't well versed with the law or made a mistake.
2011 love quotes tagalog wallpaper.
abhijitp
07-17 06:25 PM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/VisaBulletinUpdate17Jul07.pdf
more...
sam2006
10-01 08:10 PM
Folks
this is a Q for my Friend
He was working at Lehman before the company filed for chapter 11
... He has been told that salary will be paid for 3 months
Right now he is at home and looking for other offers and no H1b transfer has been started
Question is ... Is he OK ( in status ) currently or a H1b transfer has to be done ASAP
thanks
this is a Q for my Friend
He was working at Lehman before the company filed for chapter 11
... He has been told that salary will be paid for 3 months
Right now he is at home and looking for other offers and no H1b transfer has been started
Question is ... Is he OK ( in status ) currently or a H1b transfer has to be done ASAP
thanks
Blog Feeds
11-30 03:21 AM
Department of State Visa Office provided explanation of its monthly determination of employment preference cut-of dates and data used in determining employment based cut-off dates for December 2010.
Each month, the State Department subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified by the Immigration and Nationality Act into monthly allotments based on totals of documentarily qualified Immigrant Visa applicants reported at consular posts and Immigration Offices, grouped by foreign state chargeability, preference category, and priority date.
If there are sufficient numbers in a category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is 3,000 and there is only demand for 1,000, the category will be "Current�. Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for the particular month, the category is "oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number.
For example: If the monthly target is 3,000 and there is demand for 8,000 applicants, then it would be necessary to establish a cut-off date so that only 3,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.
Click here for a detailed chart with to demonstrate the above examples. Download file (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/visa%20allocationnumbers%20explianed%2011-22-2010.pdf)
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/11/visa_bulletin_how_employment_p.html)
Each month, the State Department subdivides the annual preference and foreign state limitations specified by the Immigration and Nationality Act into monthly allotments based on totals of documentarily qualified Immigrant Visa applicants reported at consular posts and Immigration Offices, grouped by foreign state chargeability, preference category, and priority date.
If there are sufficient numbers in a category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is 3,000 and there is only demand for 1,000, the category will be "Current�. Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for the particular month, the category is "oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established. The cut-off date is the priority date of the first documentarily qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a visa number.
For example: If the monthly target is 3,000 and there is demand for 8,000 applicants, then it would be necessary to establish a cut-off date so that only 3,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off would be the priority date of the 3,001st applicant.
Click here for a detailed chart with to demonstrate the above examples. Download file (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/visa%20allocationnumbers%20explianed%2011-22-2010.pdf)
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/11/visa_bulletin_how_employment_p.html)
more...
sunty
07-11 05:18 PM
[QUOTE=PS: The whiners brigade who think USCIS moved EB2 forward to make money out of EAD should know now[/QUOTE]
Maybe I am missing something here...Why do people think its a USCIS conspiracy to move PD forward...If someone's PD is current and he/she gets a 1 year EAD again, they will pay the $360 fee if they filed their I-485 before July 30, 2007, but they don't have to pay the fee again even if they get just a 1 year EAD...only they might have to do is to file the EAD application again next year WITHOUT the fee...
Maybe I am missing something here...Why do people think its a USCIS conspiracy to move PD forward...If someone's PD is current and he/she gets a 1 year EAD again, they will pay the $360 fee if they filed their I-485 before July 30, 2007, but they don't have to pay the fee again even if they get just a 1 year EAD...only they might have to do is to file the EAD application again next year WITHOUT the fee...
2010 love quotes tagalog pictures
Raj Iyer
09-23 03:58 PM
You need an I-140 approval notice. If not, type in the receipt no on USCIS website and obtain the status update which will state that the petition is approved, and see if they accept it. I can't guarantee that that they will accept it., but I have used it in the past in another scenario (MTR) and they have accepted it.
more...
abhishek101
06-02 08:37 AM
I got my H1b Renewed till July 2009 with a passport expiring in August 2006. I submitted my application in March 2006. So there is no issue relating to expiry of passport while applying for H1B.
Also as Krishna pointed out you can apply for a passport reneweal upto one year in advance. For stamping they require you passport to be valid 6 months after your visa expiry but again of you have more than one year left on your passport you can go to US consulate and explain the Indian policy they will stamp the visa on the same passport. Last year I got my H1b Stamped valid till July 2006 on a Passport expiring in August 2006.
Also as Krishna pointed out you can apply for a passport reneweal upto one year in advance. For stamping they require you passport to be valid 6 months after your visa expiry but again of you have more than one year left on your passport you can go to US consulate and explain the Indian policy they will stamp the visa on the same passport. Last year I got my H1b Stamped valid till July 2006 on a Passport expiring in August 2006.
hair makeup love quotes tagalog
royus77
09-02 05:07 PM
Please stop opening new threads which are not related to immigration
more...
malibuguy007
10-01 06:28 PM
Sorry forgot to put the confirmation number in 86FWC-M9PFC
hot quotes about love tagalog
Berkeleybee
03-15 12:09 PM
Much faster if you go directly here
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06259.pdf
Not good for us, if this means that they will stop processing things as they sort this out.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06259.pdf
Not good for us, if this means that they will stop processing things as they sort this out.
more...
house emo love quotes tagalog. love
beppenyc
04-09 03:36 PM
Bush and the others were sure to have a bill by the end of the year 2006, did you see any bill (beside the Bill wall) ?
No, so don`t worry...nothing will happen.
No, so don`t worry...nothing will happen.
tattoo love quotes tagalog part 2.
Norristown
11-07 04:00 PM
My wife's EAD was also sent back even though we haven't moved. She got all her other receipts. I didn't have her name in the mail box. Wondering if it is the reason but again she got all her receipts, ad parole. We called USCIS they opened a Service Request. It will take a month minimum.
more...
pictures love quotes tagalog. love
raysaikat
07-13 02:36 AM
Hi Raysakat
Thanks for the quick and helpful reply. Just to clarify a bit more, can i still file for I-140 with her being primary(as cross chargibility is applied)
You need to be the primary applicant in the I-140 (I am assuming that you are the one whose employer is filing I-140). Then you can use either spouse's country of birth for chargeability (which in your case would be UAE) for I-485 (I-485's are individual: for her I-485, she will use her country of birth; for your I-485, you will use your spouse's country of birth).
while she is on F1 or wold it lead to conflict in visa status?
As I said, once I-485 is filed for her, I believe that her F1 status would cease to exist and her status will become AOS. But you need to get confirmation from a lawyer on that.
SHe does not exits on my PERM application, but she is currently with me on H4, suggesting her intent to immigrate with my PERM application
Thanks
Not sure what you mean. If the PERM application asked you to list your dependents, and if you were married that time, you must have put her name as a dependent.
As for immigration intent: H visa is dual intent. I think she would be fine until I-485 is submitted on her behalf. If she enters the country on F1 visa (therefore expressing non-immigration intent), then it may be wise to wait for 60-90 days after the date of admission before submitting I-485 (and hence expressing immigration intent). I do not know what are the rules/precedence if she changes status in the country and does not travel.
Thanks for the quick and helpful reply. Just to clarify a bit more, can i still file for I-140 with her being primary(as cross chargibility is applied)
You need to be the primary applicant in the I-140 (I am assuming that you are the one whose employer is filing I-140). Then you can use either spouse's country of birth for chargeability (which in your case would be UAE) for I-485 (I-485's are individual: for her I-485, she will use her country of birth; for your I-485, you will use your spouse's country of birth).
while she is on F1 or wold it lead to conflict in visa status?
As I said, once I-485 is filed for her, I believe that her F1 status would cease to exist and her status will become AOS. But you need to get confirmation from a lawyer on that.
SHe does not exits on my PERM application, but she is currently with me on H4, suggesting her intent to immigrate with my PERM application
Thanks
Not sure what you mean. If the PERM application asked you to list your dependents, and if you were married that time, you must have put her name as a dependent.
As for immigration intent: H visa is dual intent. I think she would be fine until I-485 is submitted on her behalf. If she enters the country on F1 visa (therefore expressing non-immigration intent), then it may be wise to wait for 60-90 days after the date of admission before submitting I-485 (and hence expressing immigration intent). I do not know what are the rules/precedence if she changes status in the country and does not travel.
dresses love quotes tagalog part 2.
martinvisalaw
06-29 10:30 AM
Thank you so much Elaine for your quick response..
So am I correct to assume that there is no need to renew the I-94 if one enters using the AP.. I am myself also planning to use my AP for re-entry later this year, but have the H1-B approval valid till 2011, so was a little confused as to if I would be needed to renew my new I-94 if it is issued for 1 year based on AP..
Your H-1B stays valid for as long as it is approved, even if you enter using AP.
So am I correct to assume that there is no need to renew the I-94 if one enters using the AP.. I am myself also planning to use my AP for re-entry later this year, but have the H1-B approval valid till 2011, so was a little confused as to if I would be needed to renew my new I-94 if it is issued for 1 year based on AP..
Your H-1B stays valid for as long as it is approved, even if you enter using AP.
more...
makeup Tumblr Quotes Tagalog okay
hebron
10-07 10:55 AM
LUV IT !!!!! It is high time people came to know more about this self-righteous drumbeater. Another guy who acts like Dobbs is that chesty AZ sheriff. I also wish, people like Tancredo, Grassley, Durbin change their narrow mind towards legal immigration.
girlfriend love quotes tagalog wallpaper.
rajuram
04-23 09:16 PM
Extensions are not allowed. But.... you can always enter Canada before the final date and then come back to the USA to finish your tasks. I have heard that you have to apply for the Canadian equivalent of the GC once you get there, which gets mailed out few days later, so if you have some one there it would be helpful. Also must have a visa to return back to the US.
hairstyles funny quotes tagalog. love
dreeft
10-28 10:43 PM
Sounds complicated. I don't want to rain on your parade, but having more than one person in a freelance "business" (a business is anything that earns money) is very complicated. You have to work out tax and wages.
I'd suggest starting alone and then getting someone to help you, or share work with some else in a similar situation.
I'd suggest starting alone and then getting someone to help you, or share work with some else in a similar situation.
girishvar
08-10 04:44 PM
No Priority Date mentioned or upto 2002 - 51
2003 - 46
2004 - 117
2005 - 140
Upto May 31, 2006 - 70
2003 - 46
2004 - 117
2005 - 140
Upto May 31, 2006 - 70
sk.aggarwal
03-16 06:01 AM
When you get insurance from employer, you pay with pretax money. With online policy you will have to pay with taxed money. Unless it is atleast 30% cheaper than one offerd by employer, I will not go with it. You may be able to get tax deduction later, but it has limits
No comments:
Post a Comment