Maverick1
09-26 12:25 PM
Hi All,
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
I have been following the data for a while and I see a surge in EAD approvals. There are boatload of approvals from 9/24 and 9/25 (Some still pouring in).
If your case reached June21 (Not Jul 21st ?) , you can request an appointment at the local office and they can request a temp EAD card for you. Or since 90 days is over , you may call the 1 800 number.
Hi,
I filed (along with Wife and son) at NSC on july 2nd.
Got the Receiptts with Date Aug-28 for 485 for all of US.
Also Finished the Finger Printing on 25-Sep-2007.
When can I expect my receipts for EAD and AP?.
Anyone in the same boat?
Thanks,
alex...
AS I stated above there are quite a few approvals lately, but there are a bunch still waiting .
Question for those who got EAD and AP : Did your LUD on these applications change on line when your EAD/AP is approved ?
NSC received my I765 applications on June 21st. I am still waiting for my EAD. I have seen many people from NSC got their approval for the same time frame. Is there anypone in the same boat. Is this something I should be worried about.
Thanks!
I have been following the data for a while and I see a surge in EAD approvals. There are boatload of approvals from 9/24 and 9/25 (Some still pouring in).
If your case reached June21 (Not Jul 21st ?) , you can request an appointment at the local office and they can request a temp EAD card for you. Or since 90 days is over , you may call the 1 800 number.
Hi,
I filed (along with Wife and son) at NSC on july 2nd.
Got the Receiptts with Date Aug-28 for 485 for all of US.
Also Finished the Finger Printing on 25-Sep-2007.
When can I expect my receipts for EAD and AP?.
Anyone in the same boat?
Thanks,
alex...
AS I stated above there are quite a few approvals lately, but there are a bunch still waiting .
Question for those who got EAD and AP : Did your LUD on these applications change on line when your EAD/AP is approved ?
martinvisalaw
03-17 11:50 AM
1. If my PD is current, Will I eligible to apply I-485 using Employer A I-140 approved? No, not legally. You cannot base the 485 on a job offer that no longer exists. If there is a chance that Co. A will rehire you in the same position, and they will provide a letter saying that, you could file. However, there really must be an intention to be in that position when the 485 is approved or you are committing fraud.
2. What are the documents needed from employer A, if I want apply I-485?
See previous answer.
3. All my friends telling me, I can apply I-485, Is it true?
See previous answer.
2. What are the documents needed from employer A, if I want apply I-485?
See previous answer.
3. All my friends telling me, I can apply I-485, Is it true?
See previous answer.
hanu0913
10-08 03:12 PM
Your sentences are confusing. Please no offense.
You can file your wife's I-485(derivative adjustment) once the PD is current. So just relax and keep on looking Visa Bulletin every month to check if the priority dates are current.
My case : got GC on June. Filed wife's case in June and she has an EAD.
All the best.
so here is exact question , what about if i get GC approval before my PD gets current?
You can file your wife's I-485(derivative adjustment) once the PD is current. So just relax and keep on looking Visa Bulletin every month to check if the priority dates are current.
My case : got GC on June. Filed wife's case in June and she has an EAD.
All the best.
so here is exact question , what about if i get GC approval before my PD gets current?
desi3933
06-19 10:07 AM
If there is sufficient time left on H1B, can one go for stamping at consulate although I485 is filed.
Yes. H1-B stamping has nothing to do with I-485 filing.
Please do some research before posting any question. Thanks!
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
Yes. H1-B stamping has nothing to do with I-485 filing.
Please do some research before posting any question. Thanks!
Please check and verify details with your attorney/lawyer. This is NOT a legal advice.
----------------------------------
Permanent Resident since May 2002
more...
ita
01-15 07:13 PM
So If we find a job where they are willing to do H1 then will it be like getting the H1 for first time? ...like part of the yearly quota where H1 starts from October or will it be like just file for H1 and start working with the receipt in hand.
Also is there is difference between new H1 b and transferring H1B , from the perspective of the company(that's willing to do H1) . I mean , will the companies hesitate if they have to file for new H1 as against when they have to file for transfer ?
Thank you.
Once you switch jobs using AC 21, you are no longer on H1-B (even though you still have H1-b date that has not expired).
Your next H1-B will be considered a new H1-B and not a transfer.
You will be able to use remaining H1-B time. There is no difference whether the employer revokes or not revoke your H1 as you are no longer on H1-B.
Also is there is difference between new H1 b and transferring H1B , from the perspective of the company(that's willing to do H1) . I mean , will the companies hesitate if they have to file for new H1 as against when they have to file for transfer ?
Thank you.
Once you switch jobs using AC 21, you are no longer on H1-B (even though you still have H1-b date that has not expired).
Your next H1-B will be considered a new H1-B and not a transfer.
You will be able to use remaining H1-B time. There is no difference whether the employer revokes or not revoke your H1 as you are no longer on H1-B.
knnmbd
08-30 12:36 PM
I read SKIL bill and it refers to "Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees". I Do not see why an online master degree does not fit in here. Maybe I am missing something :)
This is an excerpt of Section 201.
Section 201. United States Educated Immigrants. Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience
in the United States from the annual green card (i.e. immigrant visa) cap.
All I was trying to say is that only "accredited" programs might be eligible, and I am not too sure how many online Master's fall in to this bracket, but not too many I guess, except for some of them offered from top-notch schools.
Again, this is just speculation as no one has yet seen the nuances of the bill.
This is an excerpt of Section 201.
Section 201. United States Educated Immigrants. Exempts U.S.-educated professionals with advanced degrees and those who have been awarded a medical specialty certification based on post-doctoral training and experience
in the United States from the annual green card (i.e. immigrant visa) cap.
All I was trying to say is that only "accredited" programs might be eligible, and I am not too sure how many online Master's fall in to this bracket, but not too many I guess, except for some of them offered from top-notch schools.
Again, this is just speculation as no one has yet seen the nuances of the bill.
more...
ghost
02-07 03:31 PM
Thank for the reply. I hope the suggestions will be acted on and implemented at the earliest. It's frustrating to see that the priority dates haven't moved by a single day in last 6 months, something really needs to be done and I will do my support IV with anything.
Thanks for your commitment...if you are frustrated by no movement in 6 months then imagine the plight of folks on this forum who have no priority date movement since Jan 2002 (9 years and counting)....most of them have literally became dormant with the long wait and some of them have become cynical and skeptical of the entire process and quite frankly about IV...it's hard to motivate and make them commit to supporting IV. There are few brave souls who refuse to give up and are fighting for the greater benefit of the entire community!
Thanks for your commitment...if you are frustrated by no movement in 6 months then imagine the plight of folks on this forum who have no priority date movement since Jan 2002 (9 years and counting)....most of them have literally became dormant with the long wait and some of them have become cynical and skeptical of the entire process and quite frankly about IV...it's hard to motivate and make them commit to supporting IV. There are few brave souls who refuse to give up and are fighting for the greater benefit of the entire community!
wandmaker
08-17 02:14 AM
Thanks for the valuable inputs.
Applying for premium processing with Company C seems to be best option. However sometimes premium processing takes more than 15 days to get a result. Since Company B has indicated that they will terminate my employment by the end of this month (less than 15 days from now), I may not have the option of resigning from Company B, before getting Company C's approval.
If B terminates my employment, and my transfer to C is still Pending, what will happen in such a case ?
You can start working for Employer C as and when you have the receipt notice for C's transfer. Just make sure, you file for transfer before termination. You have all the documents that is required for H1 transfer, dont worry about it.
Applying for premium processing with Company C seems to be best option. However sometimes premium processing takes more than 15 days to get a result. Since Company B has indicated that they will terminate my employment by the end of this month (less than 15 days from now), I may not have the option of resigning from Company B, before getting Company C's approval.
If B terminates my employment, and my transfer to C is still Pending, what will happen in such a case ?
You can start working for Employer C as and when you have the receipt notice for C's transfer. Just make sure, you file for transfer before termination. You have all the documents that is required for H1 transfer, dont worry about it.
more...
perm2gc
12-06 04:59 PM
There are two ways to satisfy the requirements for an EB-1-1 immigrant visa. The first is receiving a major, internationally recognized award. Fortunately for those who haven�t won the Nobel Prize yet, the second set of standards is not as difficult to achieve.
The INS regulations (8 C.F.R. � 204.5(h)(3)) require that a petitioner fulfill at least three of the following ten standards:
1. Receipt of a lesser nationally or internationally recognized prize for achievement in your field. This could include a medical fellowship, a Fulbright award, or a Caldecott award.
2. Membership in associations in your field that require "outstanding achievement" of their members. This standard is relatively vague. Associations that are open to all members of a given profession can be considered, but associations that limit membership to only the most accomplished members of the profession are certainly more valuable.
3. Material published about you in major trade publications or other major media. The material must concern your work in the field. Publications could range from journals specific to your field, like The Journal of Otolaryngology, to major newspapers, like The New York Times. You are not limited to print; a story about you on "60 Minutes" might also fulfill this requirement.
4. Serving as a judge of others in your field either individually or on a panel. Sitting on the Nobel Prize Committee would fulfill the requirement, as would participating in the peer review process of a scientific article or acting as a member of a thesis review committee.
5. Original, scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in your field. This standard is wide open. Basically, the INS will base its judgment of your contribution on the letters of support that others in the field submit. So letters from recognized authorities in your field who consider your contributions original and significant will satisfy this requirement.
6. Authorship of scholarly articles in your field. This refers to articles that you wrote concerning your work rather than material written about you by others, as is the case with standard 3 above. Again, the publications can range from major trade journals to mass media. Although the regulations refer specifically to "articles," other forms of publication such as visual media should fulfill this requirement.
7. Display of your work in exhibitions or showcases. The regulations do not mention how prestigious the exhibition must be.
8. Performing a critical or leading role for organizations that have a distinguished reputation. This could be acting as curator for the Metropolitan Museum of Art or serving as an essential researcher for an important laboratory.
9. Commanding a high salary in your field. The regulation requires that your salary or remuneration be high in relation to others in the field, so a teacher need not make as much as a professional football player.
10. Commercial success in the performing arts. This can be demonstrated by box office receipts from your films or plays, sales of your record, or selling your video documentary to a network for a notable sum.
Satisfying three out of the ten criteria does not guarantee that the INS will grant you EB-1-1 classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. The INS looks for quality as well as quantity. As in so many other aspects of immigration law, comprehensive documentation of your qualifications is all important.
The INS regulations (8 C.F.R. � 204.5(h)(3)) require that a petitioner fulfill at least three of the following ten standards:
1. Receipt of a lesser nationally or internationally recognized prize for achievement in your field. This could include a medical fellowship, a Fulbright award, or a Caldecott award.
2. Membership in associations in your field that require "outstanding achievement" of their members. This standard is relatively vague. Associations that are open to all members of a given profession can be considered, but associations that limit membership to only the most accomplished members of the profession are certainly more valuable.
3. Material published about you in major trade publications or other major media. The material must concern your work in the field. Publications could range from journals specific to your field, like The Journal of Otolaryngology, to major newspapers, like The New York Times. You are not limited to print; a story about you on "60 Minutes" might also fulfill this requirement.
4. Serving as a judge of others in your field either individually or on a panel. Sitting on the Nobel Prize Committee would fulfill the requirement, as would participating in the peer review process of a scientific article or acting as a member of a thesis review committee.
5. Original, scientific, scholarly, artistic, athletic, or business-related contributions of major significance in your field. This standard is wide open. Basically, the INS will base its judgment of your contribution on the letters of support that others in the field submit. So letters from recognized authorities in your field who consider your contributions original and significant will satisfy this requirement.
6. Authorship of scholarly articles in your field. This refers to articles that you wrote concerning your work rather than material written about you by others, as is the case with standard 3 above. Again, the publications can range from major trade journals to mass media. Although the regulations refer specifically to "articles," other forms of publication such as visual media should fulfill this requirement.
7. Display of your work in exhibitions or showcases. The regulations do not mention how prestigious the exhibition must be.
8. Performing a critical or leading role for organizations that have a distinguished reputation. This could be acting as curator for the Metropolitan Museum of Art or serving as an essential researcher for an important laboratory.
9. Commanding a high salary in your field. The regulation requires that your salary or remuneration be high in relation to others in the field, so a teacher need not make as much as a professional football player.
10. Commercial success in the performing arts. This can be demonstrated by box office receipts from your films or plays, sales of your record, or selling your video documentary to a network for a notable sum.
Satisfying three out of the ten criteria does not guarantee that the INS will grant you EB-1-1 classification as an alien of extraordinary ability. The INS looks for quality as well as quantity. As in so many other aspects of immigration law, comprehensive documentation of your qualifications is all important.
maddipati1
01-08 07:54 PM
i went for stamping in india in Feb'09. Mine wasn't in PIMS. They said that my visa is issued but will get the PP with stamp after PIMS clearance and it might take upto 2 weeks. but luckily i got it in 3 days.
those whose I-797 was approved around the same time when PIMS was introduced ( i think Oct'07 ), should be careful about this.
i read somewhere that, they messed up initial data transfer during PIMS launch. so the I-797s that got approved around the same time are more likely to be missed. mine was approved exactly in the same month PIMS was implemented and surely it wasn't in PIMS.
funny story now ( but painful then )..
i was aware and prepared for this when i went for stamping. i was at the window of initial screening officer. he took my dox and verified in their system and started writing 'not in PIMS' on top of my app. i was looking at it and i said 'aah! is it not in PIMS?'. he was surprised ( that i knew about PIMS etc) and gave me a look. now, i told to myself 'dude! shut up' :D
minumum precaution u should take is, take the visa appointment on the first couple of days of ur visit, to have buffer for PIMS.
but, i read, there is another type of delay that's the nemsis of pink 221(g) or something like that. this is for people who work in sensitive industries like defense, biotech, chemical etc. that surely take a long time, coz they need clearance from washington.
those whose I-797 was approved around the same time when PIMS was introduced ( i think Oct'07 ), should be careful about this.
i read somewhere that, they messed up initial data transfer during PIMS launch. so the I-797s that got approved around the same time are more likely to be missed. mine was approved exactly in the same month PIMS was implemented and surely it wasn't in PIMS.
funny story now ( but painful then )..
i was aware and prepared for this when i went for stamping. i was at the window of initial screening officer. he took my dox and verified in their system and started writing 'not in PIMS' on top of my app. i was looking at it and i said 'aah! is it not in PIMS?'. he was surprised ( that i knew about PIMS etc) and gave me a look. now, i told to myself 'dude! shut up' :D
minumum precaution u should take is, take the visa appointment on the first couple of days of ur visit, to have buffer for PIMS.
but, i read, there is another type of delay that's the nemsis of pink 221(g) or something like that. this is for people who work in sensitive industries like defense, biotech, chemical etc. that surely take a long time, coz they need clearance from washington.
more...
dpp
07-11 11:06 AM
I485 premium would be way too complicated, unless it takes longer than 14 days. The agency is suppose to do much more checks before granting legal residency, so it may be difficult for them to process i485s in 14 days. Jusy my thoughts.
Why not? USCIS already approved 60K 485 applications in 2 weeks time. How come they cannot do the same with some extra money (i.e. premium processing). They can do anything if want to do.
Why not? USCIS already approved 60K 485 applications in 2 weeks time. How come they cannot do the same with some extra money (i.e. premium processing). They can do anything if want to do.
stirfries
12-01 08:02 PM
It sometimes take longer than few days. During my years of getting AP's every year there are times I had my AP in hand within 3 days to almost 20 days. I am confident you will get your AP document much before the end of the month. Good luck with your travel plans.
Thanks SS777 !!!
I am optimistic as well !!! I am just hoping that I receive the documents by end of this week !
But at the same time, I wouldn't want to sit idle, just hoping !!! :)
I am going to try whatever options that might be available, to speed up the document receipt, if it is possible !!!
Probably, I can set up an appointment with InfoPass, sometime next week, and see what they have to say about this...
The scary part is, I have read several posts by other users who had reported the loss of document once it has been mailed out by USCIS. I hope I do not fall into that category and I want to be aware of the next course of action, if indeed, I fall into that category.
Cancelling my Tickets is the last option that I have in my mind !!!
The things that we have to go through to get a GC !!!! :)
Thanks SS777 !!!
I am optimistic as well !!! I am just hoping that I receive the documents by end of this week !
But at the same time, I wouldn't want to sit idle, just hoping !!! :)
I am going to try whatever options that might be available, to speed up the document receipt, if it is possible !!!
Probably, I can set up an appointment with InfoPass, sometime next week, and see what they have to say about this...
The scary part is, I have read several posts by other users who had reported the loss of document once it has been mailed out by USCIS. I hope I do not fall into that category and I want to be aware of the next course of action, if indeed, I fall into that category.
Cancelling my Tickets is the last option that I have in my mind !!!
The things that we have to go through to get a GC !!!! :)
more...
abhijitp
06-21 02:48 PM
Also : 140 gets rejected in following cases:
1. Degree compatability
2. Exp + degree in EB2
3. Financial ability of firm - this only with bad records
i dont see any other reason why 140 should be rejected i am not over optimistic but any one can comment on these it would great.
BigBoy, it can get an RFE bcos of insufficient evidence to support "EB-2". A rejection can also happen for trivial reasons e.g. my labor cert was first rejected for a typo (incorrect date), and we had to re-file a week later.
I spoke to my attorney/HR and they are ok to premium process my first I-140 (which is categorized incorrectly as EB-3 by the paralegal, although the covering letter for that I-140 clearly says EB-2.)
But my Successor in interest application cannot be premium processed as the original labor app was attached to the first I-140. Apparently there is a rule you can only premium process an I-140 which has the original labor cert attached.
When I asked my attorney if USCIS will return the original labor cert at the end of the first I-140 decision, she said NO, it is not returned!! Is this true? I was hoping to at least get hold of that original labor cert, so that if the I-140 is somehow rejected then I could use the original labor cert to file a new I-140 successor in interest application under premium processing.
Comments/suggestions welcome.
Thanks!
Abhijit
1. Degree compatability
2. Exp + degree in EB2
3. Financial ability of firm - this only with bad records
i dont see any other reason why 140 should be rejected i am not over optimistic but any one can comment on these it would great.
BigBoy, it can get an RFE bcos of insufficient evidence to support "EB-2". A rejection can also happen for trivial reasons e.g. my labor cert was first rejected for a typo (incorrect date), and we had to re-file a week later.
I spoke to my attorney/HR and they are ok to premium process my first I-140 (which is categorized incorrectly as EB-3 by the paralegal, although the covering letter for that I-140 clearly says EB-2.)
But my Successor in interest application cannot be premium processed as the original labor app was attached to the first I-140. Apparently there is a rule you can only premium process an I-140 which has the original labor cert attached.
When I asked my attorney if USCIS will return the original labor cert at the end of the first I-140 decision, she said NO, it is not returned!! Is this true? I was hoping to at least get hold of that original labor cert, so that if the I-140 is somehow rejected then I could use the original labor cert to file a new I-140 successor in interest application under premium processing.
Comments/suggestions welcome.
Thanks!
Abhijit
bharol
07-05 02:00 AM
Is this for sport or for self-protection, if you don't mind me asking. What kind of gun would it be? Just curious.
For self protection.
However I have no clue about Guns... I am thinking about asking the Gun store owner and get more info about them.
For me Guns are like a computer is to my 90 years old Grandpa!
For self protection.
However I have no clue about Guns... I am thinking about asking the Gun store owner and get more info about them.
For me Guns are like a computer is to my 90 years old Grandpa!
more...
anu_t
06-16 01:11 AM
http://grassley.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.View&PressRelease_id=5428
GRASSLEY CONTINUES WORK TO CLOSE H-1B AND L VISA LOOPHOLES
WASHINGTON -- Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin today continued their quest to ensure that American workers are protected, and that companies who bring in foreign workers are complying with the law.
The Senators today sent a letter to Emilio Gonzalez, the director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, asking more questions about how the agency is addressing fraud and abuse in the H-1B visa program.
Earlier this month, the Senators sent letters to the top 9 foreign-owned companies to determine the companies' usage of H-1B visas. Today's letter comes on the heels of responses received from several of the foreign companies.
"From the responses we've received thus far, it�s evident that American workers are in the minority at these companies. I expect Citizenship and Immigration Services to take a hard look at their recruiting methods to make sure they are complying with the law," Grassley said. "We cannot just increase the annual allocation of visas without understanding how companies are using them."
"We've begun to question how many companies are complying with H-1B visa requirements," Durbin said. "I look forward to hearing back from Director Gonzalez on what the government is doing to enforce the law."
At this time, Grassley and Durbin will not be releasing the information received from the companies.
Here is a copy of the letter to Gonzalez.
June 13, 2007
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20529
Dear Director Gonzalez:
Recently, we asked the foreign-based companies who obtain the most H-1B visas to answer questions regarding their workforce, wages, recruitment efforts, and usage of H-1B visas in the United States. Our letters were intended to learn more about how some companies are using the H-1B visa program. We remain concerned that the H-1B and L visa programs are facilitating the displacement of Americans by cheaper foreign workers. We continue our effort to understand how the H-1B and L visa programs are being used by U.S. and foreign-based companies, and therefore request that you provide details related to these programs.
Under current law, H-1B-dependent employers are required to attest that they have not displaced comparable workers in the United States before hiring a foreign worker. They must also make a good faith effort to recruit Americans first.
The responses to our letters to foreign-based H-1B users have led us to question how many companies are currently defined as H-1B-dependent, and if these employers who depend on H-1B visa holders are being adequately monitored for compliance with H-1B program requirements. While we understand that the Department of Labor has primary jurisdiction over H-1B dependent employers, we would like to understand your agency�s role in ensuring compliance with laws regarding displacement and recruitment.
We have also become concerned about the use of L visas by companies who also use large numbers of H-1B visas. Many companies are allowed to bring in L visa workers through a Ablanket petition,@ which is approved by USCIS. While the blanket petition is meant to simplify the process, we fear that some foreign workers may be approved for visas by the Department of State without proper oversight by USCIS, which has primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with L visa program requirements.
In order to better understand the nature of the L visa program, we need to have access to better statistics. We would like to know how many L visas are approved each year, and what companies use the program. We would also like to know more about the use of the blanket petition for L visa holders, and USCIS=s ability to monitor individual visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on a blanket petition.
Finally, we are concerned about the level of fraud monitoring of the H-1B and L visa programs. While we understand that the Fraud Detection and National Security unit is analyzing and writing an assessment of the H-1B program, we are concerned that abuse of both programs is not being addressed adequately. Given that the immigration bill before the Senate includes a provision to allow USCIS to divert special funds to other operations, we would like to know how many dollars have been used specifically for H-1B and L fraud efforts. We also seek more details about how these investigations are being handled within the Department.
Given these concerns, we respectfully ask that the following answers be provided to us by Wednesday, June 20, 2007.
H-1B Dependent Employers
$ Please explain the process of identifying employers as H-1B dependent employers pursuant to INA Section 212(n)(3).
$ How many companies are defined by USCIS to be AH-1B dependent@ employers?
$ How are these H-1B dependent employers being monitored, if at all, by USCIS?
Blanket L Visa Petitions
$ How many L visas have been approved each year since 2000?
$ Please provide lists of companies that have used the L visa program for each of the two most recently available years, and how many visas each company has obtained in each year.
$ Since USCIS has primary jurisdiction over blanket petitions and visa policies, what role has been delegated to the Department of State and how is your agency ensuring that aliens under the blanket petition are being properly screened before entering the U.S.?
$ What role, if any, does USCIS play in monitoring the approval of L visas covered by blanket petitions?
$ Please provide an explanation of USCIS=s ability to track individual L visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on visas covered by a blanket petition.
Investigations of Fraud and Abuse
$ Annually, what has been the total amount of funds deposited into the Fraud Prevention and Detection Account under INA Section 286(v) since it was established? Of this amount, what amount has been provided to the Department of Homeland Security under 286(v)(2)(B)?
$ How have the funds provided pursuant to 286(v)(2)(B) been used in FY2005, FY2006, and thus far in FY2007? How many funds have not been expended in a given year?
$ How does USCIS plan to spend the remaining funds left in FY2007?
$ How many total fraud and abuse referrals have been sent to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the last two years? How many of these referrals, to your knowledge, have been pursued? How many referrals, to your knowledge, are pending? Please provide any further details about specific cases or referrals to ICE that may be helpful to understanding the process within the Department.
$ Please provide examples of recent investigative referrals to ICE dealing with H-1B or L visas. Please explain any referrals in the last two years that have not been pursued or that have been closed, and provide information on how many are currently pending.
While we anticipate your concerns about providing such information to us by Wednesday, June 20th, we must stress the fact that the U.S. Senate is considering comprehensive legislation that would change immigration policies for years to come. The H-1B and L visa programs must be better understood before further action is taken on this bill. We appreciate your cooperation in providing us with input in the next week.
Please contact XXXXXXXX if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator United States Senator
GRASSLEY CONTINUES WORK TO CLOSE H-1B AND L VISA LOOPHOLES
WASHINGTON -- Senators Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin today continued their quest to ensure that American workers are protected, and that companies who bring in foreign workers are complying with the law.
The Senators today sent a letter to Emilio Gonzalez, the director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, asking more questions about how the agency is addressing fraud and abuse in the H-1B visa program.
Earlier this month, the Senators sent letters to the top 9 foreign-owned companies to determine the companies' usage of H-1B visas. Today's letter comes on the heels of responses received from several of the foreign companies.
"From the responses we've received thus far, it�s evident that American workers are in the minority at these companies. I expect Citizenship and Immigration Services to take a hard look at their recruiting methods to make sure they are complying with the law," Grassley said. "We cannot just increase the annual allocation of visas without understanding how companies are using them."
"We've begun to question how many companies are complying with H-1B visa requirements," Durbin said. "I look forward to hearing back from Director Gonzalez on what the government is doing to enforce the law."
At this time, Grassley and Durbin will not be releasing the information received from the companies.
Here is a copy of the letter to Gonzalez.
June 13, 2007
The Honorable Emilio T. Gonzalez
Director
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20529
Dear Director Gonzalez:
Recently, we asked the foreign-based companies who obtain the most H-1B visas to answer questions regarding their workforce, wages, recruitment efforts, and usage of H-1B visas in the United States. Our letters were intended to learn more about how some companies are using the H-1B visa program. We remain concerned that the H-1B and L visa programs are facilitating the displacement of Americans by cheaper foreign workers. We continue our effort to understand how the H-1B and L visa programs are being used by U.S. and foreign-based companies, and therefore request that you provide details related to these programs.
Under current law, H-1B-dependent employers are required to attest that they have not displaced comparable workers in the United States before hiring a foreign worker. They must also make a good faith effort to recruit Americans first.
The responses to our letters to foreign-based H-1B users have led us to question how many companies are currently defined as H-1B-dependent, and if these employers who depend on H-1B visa holders are being adequately monitored for compliance with H-1B program requirements. While we understand that the Department of Labor has primary jurisdiction over H-1B dependent employers, we would like to understand your agency�s role in ensuring compliance with laws regarding displacement and recruitment.
We have also become concerned about the use of L visas by companies who also use large numbers of H-1B visas. Many companies are allowed to bring in L visa workers through a Ablanket petition,@ which is approved by USCIS. While the blanket petition is meant to simplify the process, we fear that some foreign workers may be approved for visas by the Department of State without proper oversight by USCIS, which has primary responsibility for ensuring compliance with L visa program requirements.
In order to better understand the nature of the L visa program, we need to have access to better statistics. We would like to know how many L visas are approved each year, and what companies use the program. We would also like to know more about the use of the blanket petition for L visa holders, and USCIS=s ability to monitor individual visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on a blanket petition.
Finally, we are concerned about the level of fraud monitoring of the H-1B and L visa programs. While we understand that the Fraud Detection and National Security unit is analyzing and writing an assessment of the H-1B program, we are concerned that abuse of both programs is not being addressed adequately. Given that the immigration bill before the Senate includes a provision to allow USCIS to divert special funds to other operations, we would like to know how many dollars have been used specifically for H-1B and L fraud efforts. We also seek more details about how these investigations are being handled within the Department.
Given these concerns, we respectfully ask that the following answers be provided to us by Wednesday, June 20, 2007.
H-1B Dependent Employers
$ Please explain the process of identifying employers as H-1B dependent employers pursuant to INA Section 212(n)(3).
$ How many companies are defined by USCIS to be AH-1B dependent@ employers?
$ How are these H-1B dependent employers being monitored, if at all, by USCIS?
Blanket L Visa Petitions
$ How many L visas have been approved each year since 2000?
$ Please provide lists of companies that have used the L visa program for each of the two most recently available years, and how many visas each company has obtained in each year.
$ Since USCIS has primary jurisdiction over blanket petitions and visa policies, what role has been delegated to the Department of State and how is your agency ensuring that aliens under the blanket petition are being properly screened before entering the U.S.?
$ What role, if any, does USCIS play in monitoring the approval of L visas covered by blanket petitions?
$ Please provide an explanation of USCIS=s ability to track individual L visa holders who are allowed entry into the United States on visas covered by a blanket petition.
Investigations of Fraud and Abuse
$ Annually, what has been the total amount of funds deposited into the Fraud Prevention and Detection Account under INA Section 286(v) since it was established? Of this amount, what amount has been provided to the Department of Homeland Security under 286(v)(2)(B)?
$ How have the funds provided pursuant to 286(v)(2)(B) been used in FY2005, FY2006, and thus far in FY2007? How many funds have not been expended in a given year?
$ How does USCIS plan to spend the remaining funds left in FY2007?
$ How many total fraud and abuse referrals have been sent to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the last two years? How many of these referrals, to your knowledge, have been pursued? How many referrals, to your knowledge, are pending? Please provide any further details about specific cases or referrals to ICE that may be helpful to understanding the process within the Department.
$ Please provide examples of recent investigative referrals to ICE dealing with H-1B or L visas. Please explain any referrals in the last two years that have not been pursued or that have been closed, and provide information on how many are currently pending.
While we anticipate your concerns about providing such information to us by Wednesday, June 20th, we must stress the fact that the U.S. Senate is considering comprehensive legislation that would change immigration policies for years to come. The H-1B and L visa programs must be better understood before further action is taken on this bill. We appreciate your cooperation in providing us with input in the next week.
Please contact XXXXXXXX if you have any questions regarding this matter. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Charles E. Grassley Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator United States Senator
jsb
11-14 12:11 PM
Well, are you sure I would need to work for this "future employer" for 6 months?
AC21 does not have a limit on the number of times you switch employers. Technically, if you were working for Employer A at the time of the RFE and submit a EVL from Employer A, you could then switch to Employer B immediately on AC21. In this scenario, I haven't worked with A for 6 months.
Is this scenario different because A is not a future employer?
With LC, I-140 and I-485 process, intentions of employee/employer relationship are expected to be bonafide, otherwise it would be fraud. Although a lot of people mention here, and some attorneys suggest, to work for 6 months for the sponsoring employer, there doesn't appear to be any law on that. Circumstances can change any time (AC21 supports that). Therefore, six month, or whatever period you may want to fix, is merely to strength the case that the sponsorship was bonafide. AC21 guidelines are quite lenient in that matter.
Bottomline is whatever happened, or you can provide, to support that there was no fraudulent intent, you are fine. If situation is not clear, and someone decides to contend, courts may come into picture.
Some people mention that six-month working could haunt you at citizenship time, but I doubt that. USCIS have a lot of other things to look at. If you have been a good citizen until then you should be fine.
AC21 does not have a limit on the number of times you switch employers. Technically, if you were working for Employer A at the time of the RFE and submit a EVL from Employer A, you could then switch to Employer B immediately on AC21. In this scenario, I haven't worked with A for 6 months.
Is this scenario different because A is not a future employer?
With LC, I-140 and I-485 process, intentions of employee/employer relationship are expected to be bonafide, otherwise it would be fraud. Although a lot of people mention here, and some attorneys suggest, to work for 6 months for the sponsoring employer, there doesn't appear to be any law on that. Circumstances can change any time (AC21 supports that). Therefore, six month, or whatever period you may want to fix, is merely to strength the case that the sponsorship was bonafide. AC21 guidelines are quite lenient in that matter.
Bottomline is whatever happened, or you can provide, to support that there was no fraudulent intent, you are fine. If situation is not clear, and someone decides to contend, courts may come into picture.
Some people mention that six-month working could haunt you at citizenship time, but I doubt that. USCIS have a lot of other things to look at. If you have been a good citizen until then you should be fine.
more...
Dhundhun
07-16 07:29 PM
seee SFO website...they issue PCC is upto 45 days, I think...
cgisf.org - even better call them
Won't SFO charge $20. Isn't it more than Rs 800. Tinku01 knows from where to buy for Rs100 to Rs200.
cgisf.org - even better call them
Won't SFO charge $20. Isn't it more than Rs 800. Tinku01 knows from where to buy for Rs100 to Rs200.
bang
01-09 06:43 AM
My wife had recently changed her status from H4 to H1 and had applied her SSN and got it.
So i dont think there's any new rule.
if you have a valid I94 then it should not cause any issue
Sreedhar where did you apply for SSN ? ie which city ?
So i dont think there's any new rule.
if you have a valid I94 then it should not cause any issue
Sreedhar where did you apply for SSN ? ie which city ?
nhfirefighter13
July 15th, 2004, 08:24 PM
Excellent work! You need to start sending copies of those out to publications to see what kind of response you get...or possibly some stock photo companies. :)
gc_kaavaali
12-24 10:17 PM
Okay...i will try my best to keep this thread on top...
This thread has to stay on top
This thread has to stay on top
GCBy3000
07-25 05:25 PM
I got promoted to managerial position and I got depromoted back during my H1 extn time when the company attorney noticed the change in my title. He politiely conferenced me and HR and said it is not acceptable as my GC is pending unless otherwise my company is willing to put me back in the LC position during my AOS filing. My duties change d as my title change, but I was still doing 50% of what was explained in the LC. Again there was no other pun intended reason for my demotion to make it clear. Each attorney is different, but it scews the candidates since the company HR listens to them as they are liable for it.
Yes that is right the job responsibilities can increase. For my case the labor was filed for engineer position but I am on a manager level now and title has changed. My responsibilities have increased means i have all resp advertised + more and lawyer said OK.
Yes that is right the job responsibilities can increase. For my case the labor was filed for engineer position but I am on a manager level now and title has changed. My responsibilities have increased means i have all resp advertised + more and lawyer said OK.
