GCBy3000
03-31 10:13 AM
You can take any number of salary hike but not different job duties than specified in the labor. No need to inform the labaor department. Because as per law you cannot have different job duties until you get your gc and max one year beyond that.
I am also stuck in the same boat. Infact, I got promoted with 16k hike and demoted in two months. My attorney got a apology letter signed by my VP for attorney records. It is that serious to change job duties.
I am also stuck in the same boat. Infact, I got promoted with 16k hike and demoted in two months. My attorney got a apology letter signed by my VP for attorney records. It is that serious to change job duties.
wallpaper pretty powerful images.
geniousatwork
09-22 08:46 PM
My AP was approved on Sep2. Still awaiting the AP in mail.
kak1978
06-05 10:50 PM
I saw the same status message yesterday. But it was delivered today morning at 5:40 am!, Weird!!
I dont know if other Folks have seen the same thing. My renewal EAD application has reached Texas (TSC) today June 5th around noon by USPS Express Mail but the status says
Status: Notice Left
We attempted to deliver your item at 11:16 AM on June 5, 2008 in MESQUITE, TX 75185 and a notice was left. A second delivery attempt will be made. If unsuccessful, we will hold it for five business days and then it will be returned to the sender. Information, if available, is updated every evening. Please check again later.
The address where i sent is
USCIS
Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
Any clue what may be going on - this is another round of fun :confused:
I dont know if other Folks have seen the same thing. My renewal EAD application has reached Texas (TSC) today June 5th around noon by USPS Express Mail but the status says
Status: Notice Left
We attempted to deliver your item at 11:16 AM on June 5, 2008 in MESQUITE, TX 75185 and a notice was left. A second delivery attempt will be made. If unsuccessful, we will hold it for five business days and then it will be returned to the sender. Information, if available, is updated every evening. Please check again later.
The address where i sent is
USCIS
Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
Any clue what may be going on - this is another round of fun :confused:
2011 and ackground designs
rsayed
08-22 11:25 AM
i APPLIED ON 7th July...
NO news
I applied on 7th July too - Receipt Date - 8th July - Notice Date - 9th July, 2008.
Paper-filed through my firm's lawyer - nothing so far!
Tried calling USCIS a few times - don't know whom to beleive - once, I was told an IO has not been assigned to my case. The other two times, they said, they're processing cases filed before April 2008 and I'll have to wait another 82-90 days!!!
Which doesn't sound true - coz' I know friends who filed in June/Jul - who got their approvals.
So, I'm compelled to logically arrive at one conclusion - USCIS is in a mess...through and through!!!
It's like the BLACK HOLE - No one knows what goes on in there - once, your app is in - only a miracle can get it out...
Sorry - just venting my frustrations...think I should go jog and drain myself silly...!!! :mad:
NO news
I applied on 7th July too - Receipt Date - 8th July - Notice Date - 9th July, 2008.
Paper-filed through my firm's lawyer - nothing so far!
Tried calling USCIS a few times - don't know whom to beleive - once, I was told an IO has not been assigned to my case. The other two times, they said, they're processing cases filed before April 2008 and I'll have to wait another 82-90 days!!!
Which doesn't sound true - coz' I know friends who filed in June/Jul - who got their approvals.
So, I'm compelled to logically arrive at one conclusion - USCIS is in a mess...through and through!!!
It's like the BLACK HOLE - No one knows what goes on in there - once, your app is in - only a miracle can get it out...
Sorry - just venting my frustrations...think I should go jog and drain myself silly...!!! :mad:
more...
pressman
January 5th, 2005, 04:55 AM
Rob - this is superb street journalism - the selective colouring adds to the impact. Nice job.
Pete
Pete
digitalrain
06-25 05:05 PM
Unfortunately, there are no good solutions to this problem. Humanitarian Parole is possible, but not likely except in extreme cases such as where there is a serious or life threatening illness. You should consider consulting an immigration attorney with expertise in such matters to to determine what if any chance there is for Humanitarian Parole given your family's particular circumstances.
Another strategy might be for your wife to come to the US and immediately apply for asylum in her own right. If she is granted asylum, then she can file an I-730 for your child. This strategy is complicated and could do more harm than good depending again on the particular facts of your situation. Accordingly, before taking any action, I urge you to seek expert legal representation.
Thank you very much for the response.
I have a lawyer,he advised me to ask the US Embassy to issue the kid a Humanitarian Parole,but I'm not sure if these guys know how to process these kind of unusual cases.They told my wife that I have to file a relative petition.As far as I know he is not eligible for derivative asylum since he got born after my asylum approval.
I wonder if she,my wife,can apply for humanitarian parole at the US Embassy?Or do I have to apply for humanitarian parole?
Lawers that I know are expensive and I'm not sure if these guys really know what are they doing.
I would really appreciate any advice from anyone.
Another strategy might be for your wife to come to the US and immediately apply for asylum in her own right. If she is granted asylum, then she can file an I-730 for your child. This strategy is complicated and could do more harm than good depending again on the particular facts of your situation. Accordingly, before taking any action, I urge you to seek expert legal representation.
Thank you very much for the response.
I have a lawyer,he advised me to ask the US Embassy to issue the kid a Humanitarian Parole,but I'm not sure if these guys know how to process these kind of unusual cases.They told my wife that I have to file a relative petition.As far as I know he is not eligible for derivative asylum since he got born after my asylum approval.
I wonder if she,my wife,can apply for humanitarian parole at the US Embassy?Or do I have to apply for humanitarian parole?
Lawers that I know are expensive and I'm not sure if these guys really know what are they doing.
I would really appreciate any advice from anyone.
more...
Almond
07-13 09:17 AM
Damn I am going to be pissed off if he gets a green card before I do.
Pegasus you made my morning. I can't stop laughing at this:D
Pegasus you made my morning. I can't stop laughing at this:D
2010 pretty designs for ackgrounds
ivar
03-12 09:57 AM
After a long 5 years I finally received 485 case approved letter for both my case and my spouse's case. However the online status still shows pending. Is this common?. How long would it take for the online case status to be updated.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
Congratulations !! Enjoy.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
Congratulations !! Enjoy.
more...
mmaxima
08-21 04:24 PM
From http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=56&Itemid=25
"The annual limit for EB visa numbers is 140,000. This number also includes the dependents of an EB applicant. In addition there is a per-country limit set at 7% of the total."
That's provided that India gets 7%. ROW is in retrogression as well. The visa number is divided among all country. 7% rule only apply when visa number is abundant otherwise it's shared.
"The annual limit for EB visa numbers is 140,000. This number also includes the dependents of an EB applicant. In addition there is a per-country limit set at 7% of the total."
That's provided that India gets 7%. ROW is in retrogression as well. The visa number is divided among all country. 7% rule only apply when visa number is abundant otherwise it's shared.
hair design background but it
GcInLimbo
11-17 11:38 AM
Me and my wife both got notice from USCIS with intent to deny citing evidence of continued leagal immigration. Attached the scanned copy removing personal information.[
The mentioned period in the letter that is requesting evidence is the time I applied for H1B renewal. The application had an RFE and we were waiting on response from my employer. My employer replied to the RFE and it was sent to local processing center for further processing. Meanwhile on July 2007, I applied I-485 when they are current which puts us in AOS as the H1B was still pending approval from USCIS. I read some where that you can not stay in U.S with H1B renewal pending beyond 240 days from your previous H1B expiration date. So I applied another H1B with a different company before the 240 days and got that H1B approved after two months of applying.
I am sure I didnt break any rule or stayed illegally during that period as my H1B was pending and moved on to a different company after appying I -485. My previous employer have no issue to continue to support my GC processing.
Where do I stand with regards to this notice? What are my options and how to approach this problem, so that the IO doesn't get confused and deny the application.
I am sure I will go through my lawyer but want to get first hand information and have a clear picture on the path to follow from experienced people here.
I tried to attach the attachment but its failing.
Thanks
The mentioned period in the letter that is requesting evidence is the time I applied for H1B renewal. The application had an RFE and we were waiting on response from my employer. My employer replied to the RFE and it was sent to local processing center for further processing. Meanwhile on July 2007, I applied I-485 when they are current which puts us in AOS as the H1B was still pending approval from USCIS. I read some where that you can not stay in U.S with H1B renewal pending beyond 240 days from your previous H1B expiration date. So I applied another H1B with a different company before the 240 days and got that H1B approved after two months of applying.
I am sure I didnt break any rule or stayed illegally during that period as my H1B was pending and moved on to a different company after appying I -485. My previous employer have no issue to continue to support my GC processing.
Where do I stand with regards to this notice? What are my options and how to approach this problem, so that the IO doesn't get confused and deny the application.
I am sure I will go through my lawyer but want to get first hand information and have a clear picture on the path to follow from experienced people here.
I tried to attach the attachment but its failing.
Thanks
more...
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
hot card / ackground design
lostinbeta
09-05 02:26 AM
I agree that it is trendy, but sometimes it is fun to mess around with trends, learn them, then edit them in your own way.
I don't follow much tutorials. Pretty much everything I use in my images are self done. I probably end up doing it the hard way, but oh well.
I don't follow much tutorials. Pretty much everything I use in my images are self done. I probably end up doing it the hard way, but oh well.
more...
house and ackground designs.
nogc_noproblem
08-06 12:52 PM
CONGRATS!!!
Received an email from CRIS stating that Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident. Those who are tracking approval, check out IV profile/tracker.
Received an email from CRIS stating that Notice mailed welcoming the new permanent resident. Those who are tracking approval, check out IV profile/tracker.
tattoo Pretty script name over
sidm
03-29 02:43 PM
That is good, but what about those whose OPT expired in Dec or Aug last year: can it retroactively activated?
There should be a clause to re-activate OPT for people maintaining legal presence in US, who were affected by last year's H1 lottery and whose OPT expired last year.:confused:
There should be a clause to re-activate OPT for people maintaining legal presence in US, who were affected by last year's H1 lottery and whose OPT expired last year.:confused:
more...
pictures want a nice ackground.
dtekkedil
07-03 10:03 AM
I'll draw a flower and send it, how is that? After all the $$$ spent on the lawyer and this whole fiasco in general, I ain't spendin' a penny more on them:mad:
Maybe a stinky garden weed. It's the thought that counts:D.
LOL!
You wont be spending the money on them... in the end it will be for you! Think of it as an investment :)
Maybe a stinky garden weed. It's the thought that counts:D.
LOL!
You wont be spending the money on them... in the end it will be for you! Think of it as an investment :)
dresses pretty designs for
helph1b
08-28 07:03 AM
Hi Vani,
Even I have not yet received receipt number for the H1 application filed on 7-April-2009 by my employer in NJ USA. I was also given fedex tracking number for the application that was sent on 7-April-2009. But there is really no clue if the packet sent was really mine. So we are hopeless.
Are you still in contact with your employer about the H1 application case?
Let me know if you get any updates.
Even I have not yet received receipt number for the H1 application filed on 7-April-2009 by my employer in NJ USA. I was also given fedex tracking number for the application that was sent on 7-April-2009. But there is really no clue if the packet sent was really mine. So we are hopeless.
Are you still in contact with your employer about the H1 application case?
Let me know if you get any updates.
more...
makeup ackground in your design.
supers789
07-23 03:01 PM
got following from another iv thread..
btw, my fragomen attorney said, it will take 6 to 8 months clear the audit.
Thanks!
-------------------
<i>July 21, 2008
Fragomen and DOL Agree to Return to Normal Processing
For Newly Filed PERM Cases
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Labor (DOL) has agreed that all new PERM applications filed by Fragomen will be processed normally and will not be subject to special audit.
After several weeks of discussions, the Department of Labor (DOL) and Fragomen have reached an interim agreement that will allow all new PERM applications filed by Fragomen to move forward in the normal processing queue without automatic audits. We are still talking with DOL regarding pending applications that have already been thrown into the special audit.
While we continue to have a major disagreement with DOL on its efforts to impede attorney-client communications, we have agreed to comply with DOL's new guidance bulletin, which presents a new and legally questionable interpretation of the PERM regulations regarding attorney actions. Until this interpretation is modified or judicially declared invalid, all immigration attorneys must conduct their representation in accordance with it.
Working with others in the immigration bar and business community, we will continue to pursue broader relief from DOL's misreading of the regulations and we have reserved every legal and equitable right to assert what we believe to be the proper interpretation of those regulations. Not only is this an infringement on employers' First Amendment rights, it contradicts specific language in the Department's regulations stating that employers may consult with counsel at all times "throughout the labor certification process."
If you have any questions about this alert, please contact the Fragomen attorney with whom you usually work.
Copyright � 2008 by Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP</i>
btw, my fragomen attorney said, it will take 6 to 8 months clear the audit.
Thanks!
-------------------
<i>July 21, 2008
Fragomen and DOL Agree to Return to Normal Processing
For Newly Filed PERM Cases
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Department of Labor (DOL) has agreed that all new PERM applications filed by Fragomen will be processed normally and will not be subject to special audit.
After several weeks of discussions, the Department of Labor (DOL) and Fragomen have reached an interim agreement that will allow all new PERM applications filed by Fragomen to move forward in the normal processing queue without automatic audits. We are still talking with DOL regarding pending applications that have already been thrown into the special audit.
While we continue to have a major disagreement with DOL on its efforts to impede attorney-client communications, we have agreed to comply with DOL's new guidance bulletin, which presents a new and legally questionable interpretation of the PERM regulations regarding attorney actions. Until this interpretation is modified or judicially declared invalid, all immigration attorneys must conduct their representation in accordance with it.
Working with others in the immigration bar and business community, we will continue to pursue broader relief from DOL's misreading of the regulations and we have reserved every legal and equitable right to assert what we believe to be the proper interpretation of those regulations. Not only is this an infringement on employers' First Amendment rights, it contradicts specific language in the Department's regulations stating that employers may consult with counsel at all times "throughout the labor certification process."
If you have any questions about this alert, please contact the Fragomen attorney with whom you usually work.
Copyright � 2008 by Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP</i>
girlfriend PRETTY PINK BACKGROUND DESIGN
acecupid
09-06 08:33 PM
Read something interesting on TOI..
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
NRIs treated as Not Required Indians! - India - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/india/NRIs-treated-as-Not-Required-Indians/articleshow/4979439.cms)
Indubhai Amin, a non-resident Indian (NRI) settled in the UK earns interest income of Rs 3 lakh on his non-resident ordinary account bank deposit in
India in the current FY 2009-10. Enjoying his personal exemption limit of Rs 1.60 lakh and the eligible deduction of Rs 1 lakh u/s 80C, Amin is comfortable paying income tax of Rs 4,000 in the first slab of 10 per cent on his effective taxable income of Rs 40,000.
Flat tax of 20% and 30%
A huge shock awaits Amin and millions of NRIs, in regard to taxation of their interest and investment income and capital gains earned in India, proposed to be treated under the draft Direct Tax Code as "income from special sources."
In 2011-12, on the same interest income of Rs 3 lakh, Amin will be required to pay a hefty tax of Rs 60,000 at the flat rate of 20 per cent, without being eligible to claim any basic exemption or other deduction, as provided under rule three of the First Schedule to the Code.
Moreover, all capital gains earned by a non-resident will attract a flat tax of 30 per cent, irrespective of the amount of capital gains. While a resident Indian will be required to pay tax of Rs 3.84 lakh on his taxable income of Rs 25 lakh, an NRI earning equivalent capital gains will be called upon to pay almost double tax of Rs 7.5 lakh.
Hair-raising drafting
New section 13 (2) provides that such �special income� shall be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Ninth Schedule, the drafting of which is literally hair-raising. It provides that the amount of accrual or receipt shall be computed as the taxable income, and no loss, allowance or deduction shall be allowed, as the same shall be presumed to have been granted. The only exception in this regard, in respect of capital gains arising from the transfer of equity shares or units of equity oriented mutual fund chargeable to STT, is quite amusing, as it stands redundant in view of the proposal to abolish STT (a classic instance of incoherent drafting).
The draftsman does not seem to have realized the harsh implications. It means that if an NRI sells a capital asset purchased for Rs 10 lakh at Rs 30 lakh, he will be required to pay tax of Rs 9 lakh at 30 per cent on the gross sale consideration of Rs 30 lakh without any deduction even for the cost of acquisition of Rs 10 lakh (not to mention any benefit of indexation on the same).
Determination of residential status
The residential status of an individual under the Code is proposed to be determined as per the current norms. However, the status of "not ordinarily resident" (NOR) is proposed to be eliminated. Despite the above, Clause 24 of the Sixth Schedule has still provided for exemption in respect of interest earned on foreign currency deposits in the case of NOR. Poor drafting indeed!
The Code has proposed to retain the current exemptions availed by a non-resident in case of interest earned on NRE and FCNR deposits with banks.
Special exemption for returning NRIs
A useful exemption has been provided in case of income earned outside India, if it is not derived from a business controlled from India, in the financial year in which the returning NRI becomes an Indian resident and the immediately succeeding financial year. However, the benefit of the said exemption would be available, only if such individual was a non-resident for nine years immediately preceding the financial year in which he becomes a resident.
Wealth-tax liability for NRIs
Proposed Section 102 of the Code provides for wealth tax liability in the case of the value of all global assets of an individual or HUF. However, an exemption has been provided in case of the value of assets located outside India in case of an individual who is not a citizen of India or an individual or HUF not resident in India. Hence, while returning NRIs who are non-citizens will enjoy wealth-tax exemption for their overseas assets, NRIs with Indian citizenship becoming residents will attract wealth-tax liability on such assets held abroad.
Illogical exemption under wealth-tax
Talking about wealth tax, the Code prescribes an exemption in respect of any house or plot of land belonging to an individual or HUF, if it is acquired before April 1, 2000. It is difficult to understand the logic as to why this exemption has been denied in all cases where such immovable property is acquired after March 31, 2000!
Proposals That Will Hurt the Global Indian Sentiment
Flat Rate of Tax
20% flat tax on interest & other investment income
30% flat tax on all capital gains
Apart from 20% & 30% TDS on above, TDS at a baffling rate of 35% prescribed on all residual income
No Personal Exemption
No personal exemption or deduction allowed in computing the above income treated as �income from special sources�.
Weird Interpretation
Poor drafting leads to such a weird interpretation that transfer of a capital asset may attract 30% tax on gross sale consideration.
What Discrimination!
Ironical but true! Non-Indian sportspersons, say Ricky Ponting or Shoaib Akhtar, required to pay a concessional tax of 10% on their game, advertisement and column earnings in India, thus enjoying a more privileged tax status than our own sons of the soil living abroad.
hairstyles pretty designs for ackgrounds
calboy78
01-09 12:47 PM
which service center? You can ask your employer to ask USCIS as 140 is employer's application.
wandmaker
04-03 06:59 PM
Have had unfortunate turn of events and need your guidance.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
I had a valid approved h1 petition and i-94 for 2005 through company A.
Company filed for extension of h1 in 2007 and received approved h1 and i-94 valid till 2010. Did not travel out of the country at that time.
Filed for AOS 485, EAD, AP in 2007. Traveled and entered US using AP in 2008.
USCIS did inquiry and has revoked 2005 h1 because of incorrect LCA filing by the company. They have also said that because of incorrect LCA filing, I am in violation of h1 status. Attorneys have advised that USCIS will retroactive hold me as 'out-of-status' but not unlawful present as I was working in good faith based on an approved petition and unexpired i-94s.
The 2007 h1 was also filed in similar fashion as the 2005 h1.
Although USCIS has not revoked current 2007-2010 h1, there is a possibility of that happening. The 485 might be denied in that case.
The only option is to get on h4 by applying from consulate in India.
Since I will be now answering yes to question 38 (have you violated terms of US visa, or unlawful present..?) I have also shown as intent to immigrate based on my 485 filing.
I want to know my chances of getting an h4 approved.
You need to add more clarity to bold words... For instance, if your work location in LCA was New York and you worked in San Francisco - Man you are in trouble..... Please post what was incorrect on the LCA and also fill in the profile, if you want the folks to consider responding to your query. My 2 cents.
transpass
08-04 11:10 AM
me too...NSC filer, but transferred to TSC...
RD july 2, PD 12/2005
RD july 2, PD 12/2005
