Hi
Thanks for the reply. My new employer is fine. He is sure that my current employer cannot do anything as he has failed to meet his obligation as an employer. He cannot provide me with a job at the moment. But my end client is hesitating now. They are a very big company and do not want to get into any legal issues.
If my end client says No then my new employer will also probably back out because of lack of project.
Regards
H1InTrouble.
Thanks for the reply. My new employer is fine. He is sure that my current employer cannot do anything as he has failed to meet his obligation as an employer. He cannot provide me with a job at the moment. But my end client is hesitating now. They are a very big company and do not want to get into any legal issues.
If my end client says No then my new employer will also probably back out because of lack of project.
Regards
H1InTrouble.
Craap!!!! I have visited India 5 times in last 7 years. The officers have been very courteous and help. This mail is to discredit the system. Please stop discrediting your motherland. We are the people who have abondened our motherland, now don't abuse it. I wonder people like Kalloo dada on H1B are abusing India. What they'll do when they get their GC/Citizenship. I think US people are right to keep us in this shit. 'Jab apne desh ke nahee hue tou iss desh ke kya honge' You disown your mother land what will you do with your earned mother land ????
Sprint Nextel Corp. today said that it will lay off about 8,000 workers by April within “all levels” of the company.The carrier also said it will suspend the 401(k) matches for workers for 2009 and extend a freeze on annual salary increases started in 2008 through 2009. A tuition-reimbursement program was also suspended.Source: ComputerworldPosted in [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1237&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/sprint-to-lay-off-8000-by-apri/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/sprint-to-lay-off-8000-by-apri/)
You can't get an apointment for June, until you can prove you have an emergency. Also you should make your appointment at the post according to the permanent address on your passport.
Folks,
I have to visit India in June and I need to revalidate my visa that expired in April. I received my H1B extention last week, so that's no problem.
Do I have to go to one of the 4 visa application centers (mumbai, delhi, calcutta, chennai) Or can I just drop by any of the other centers (drop centers I believe, there is one in Bangalore). Website is not clear about this. There is an alluding reference in FAQ that says :
Qn: I am a returning H1-B/L-1 visa applicant, how do I apply for a revalidation?
You need to schedule an appointment for a visa interview through our website www.vfs-usa.co.in or at a visa application centre nearest to your area of residence.
Has anyone done this before? How long is it going to take? Is it similar to the drop-box that existed before?
I got an appointment in Delhi last year (7th year extention in New Delhi) But this time I can't get an appointment in any of the 4 centers.
Ganesh.
ps: I can't get appointments before June in Canada or Mexico either. :(
Folks,
I have to visit India in June and I need to revalidate my visa that expired in April. I received my H1B extention last week, so that's no problem.
Do I have to go to one of the 4 visa application centers (mumbai, delhi, calcutta, chennai) Or can I just drop by any of the other centers (drop centers I believe, there is one in Bangalore). Website is not clear about this. There is an alluding reference in FAQ that says :
Qn: I am a returning H1-B/L-1 visa applicant, how do I apply for a revalidation?
You need to schedule an appointment for a visa interview through our website www.vfs-usa.co.in or at a visa application centre nearest to your area of residence.
Has anyone done this before? How long is it going to take? Is it similar to the drop-box that existed before?
I got an appointment in Delhi last year (7th year extention in New Delhi) But this time I can't get an appointment in any of the 4 centers.
Ganesh.
ps: I can't get appointments before June in Canada or Mexico either. :(
regarding carrying older LCAs;
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
Yeah, why not? As long as Legals ALSO get green cards!
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
If you start using EAD invoking AC21(though there is about 1 year time left on H1) and later find a better job/company that will do H1 then will we have to do H1 transfer or will it be applying for new H1 altogether again?
Will it be possible to transfer or recapture H1 time considering the following two scenarios
Employer doesn't revoke H1
Employer revokes H1.
Appreciate advice on this.
Thank you.
Will it be possible to transfer or recapture H1 time considering the following two scenarios
Employer doesn't revoke H1
Employer revokes H1.
Appreciate advice on this.
Thank you.
I don't know about them. Any way free is free, till they ask for money.
BETTER CALL FROM WORK PHONE, IF YOU ARE NOT FEELING SAFE.
If they want our number for telemarketing, do the following.
If you think the number is used for telemarketing people,
dial *67 before you dial that number so it will block your caller id.
OR
you can go via Google Voice, as your Google Voice number will be displayed to the Telemarketers and not your own number!
One big question:
Who runs this free calling service?
There is no contact information or legal disclaimers. It is just a one page website.
BTW I tried and it worked. But these questions are important to know this is not a fishy site or what their true goal of providing this free call is.
BETTER CALL FROM WORK PHONE, IF YOU ARE NOT FEELING SAFE.
If they want our number for telemarketing, do the following.
If you think the number is used for telemarketing people,
dial *67 before you dial that number so it will block your caller id.
OR
you can go via Google Voice, as your Google Voice number will be displayed to the Telemarketers and not your own number!
One big question:
Who runs this free calling service?
There is no contact information or legal disclaimers. It is just a one page website.
BTW I tried and it worked. But these questions are important to know this is not a fishy site or what their true goal of providing this free call is.
If we have an AP, then do we still require a transit visa?
I am thinking of traveling by qatar airlines. I believe they dont have any transit visa requirement.
It's not your airline but your transit stop. If your flight is through London, you'll probably need a transit visa, but check with someone.
I am thinking of traveling by qatar airlines. I believe they dont have any transit visa requirement.
It's not your airline but your transit stop. If your flight is through London, you'll probably need a transit visa, but check with someone.
After EAD is approved, H4 can work anywhere in any job.
Thanks much Jasmin.
Thanks much Jasmin.
I agree. Sometimes I think I will be a little bit sad when I receive the green card because I would miss this daily excitments! As the saying goes "Its the Journey that matters, not the destination"
I have to disagree...in this case its the Destination!!!
I have to disagree...in this case its the Destination!!!
I am in scottsdale
Lets fight this together.
Lets fight this together.
See no GC? Hear no GC? Talk to IV
As I said it was work of a fellow member. But I dont see why you cant use the same letter. If you think this is a good format, please go ahead and use it.
thanks.....
thanks.....
Hello all,
Anyone knows if there is a certain length of time that I need to be employed with my GC sponsor after 485 approval?
I have heard 3-4 months, but I am wondering if there is legal time limit or if this is a "good faith" limit.
Appreciate responses.
The time limit is 6 months. But if 6 months have already elapsed after filing I485, then you are free to go anywhere.
Anyone knows if there is a certain length of time that I need to be employed with my GC sponsor after 485 approval?
I have heard 3-4 months, but I am wondering if there is legal time limit or if this is a "good faith" limit.
Appreciate responses.
The time limit is 6 months. But if 6 months have already elapsed after filing I485, then you are free to go anywhere.
Hi hydubadi,
I am aslo in same situation ... FNU and Pending 485.
My attorney says... just write a letter after chaning the name in passport. Mine is a name split issue.
My old passport has Last Name = Last Name + First NAme and First NAme = Blank and visa etc it is FNU
I got my H1B visa inside the US and when I went to the consulate, the lady refused to stamp my visa. I had to go to the passport office and get an "observation" that my name should be read as
First Name : "FirstName"
Last Name : "LastName"
I am aslo in same situation ... FNU and Pending 485.
My attorney says... just write a letter after chaning the name in passport. Mine is a name split issue.
My old passport has Last Name = Last Name + First NAme and First NAme = Blank and visa etc it is FNU
I got my H1B visa inside the US and when I went to the consulate, the lady refused to stamp my visa. I had to go to the passport office and get an "observation" that my name should be read as
First Name : "FirstName"
Last Name : "LastName"
The restrictionist Center for Immigration Studies has put out a DREAM Act proposal that could tell us what the Republicans might propose when they re-draft DREAM to their own liking. It's not horrible - some ideas, particularly those in the first of the two parts - would probably be areas where agreement could be reached. A few ideas - such as introducing a new extremely cumbersome process to get the green card after ten years - are really bad. But it is encouraging to at least be having a negotiation. One had the feeling in the last Congress that only...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/the-gop-dream-act-plan.html)
GOP can actually do something on imigration side. They already have the conservative votes (conservatives have nowhere else to go) and get some latino vote to top it in the swing states.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2011/01/the-gop-dream-act-plan.html)
GOP can actually do something on imigration side. They already have the conservative votes (conservatives have nowhere else to go) and get some latino vote to top it in the swing states.
what if for some reason you miss the flight or it gets canceled, give yourself some buffer time and save a lot of grief.
Decide a few dollars is more important than getting I-485 on time or not.
I have seen the same thing with B1 people, first they forget the rule is 180 days not six months then they book last day flight and are here beyond I-94 date.
Decide a few dollars is more important than getting I-485 on time or not.
I have seen the same thing with B1 people, first they forget the rule is 180 days not six months then they book last day flight and are here beyond I-94 date.
Called Sen Coryn's office. Kicked out of voice mail to immigration counsel. However, did leave the message with the staff. He was professional and nice. HE even thanked for calling.
We did the COS from H4 (stamped) to F1 for my wife ourselves. It was easy, no lawyer but we got an RFE on the dollar amount so we replied again ourselves (giving an excel sheet etc). You can do it yourself.
frostrated & smuggymba
Thanks for ur replies....
As I am EB3 - MAY 2009....No question of I 485 soon....
thats the reason for the F1....
U said to show the intent that we leave US back....but my I 140 is approved which makes the letter of intent very contradictory (unless they dont see my papers when processing my wife's F1).
And also, see the pattern She was on B1 - H4 - F1 (all COS), this is the main concern.
Whether is the letter of intent makes them believable!!!
Regarding funds availability, We have funds equivalent to 80% of 1st year fee (which shown on I 20), AND ALSO I AM SUBMITTING AN AFFIDAVIT THAT I AM SPONSORING MY WIFE.
Frostrated: College is only giving I 20 rest of the things we have to do ourselves.
frostrated & smuggymba
Thanks for ur replies....
As I am EB3 - MAY 2009....No question of I 485 soon....
thats the reason for the F1....
U said to show the intent that we leave US back....but my I 140 is approved which makes the letter of intent very contradictory (unless they dont see my papers when processing my wife's F1).
And also, see the pattern She was on B1 - H4 - F1 (all COS), this is the main concern.
Whether is the letter of intent makes them believable!!!
Regarding funds availability, We have funds equivalent to 80% of 1st year fee (which shown on I 20), AND ALSO I AM SUBMITTING AN AFFIDAVIT THAT I AM SPONSORING MY WIFE.
Frostrated: College is only giving I 20 rest of the things we have to do ourselves.
When I took a cruise last year (Carnival) one of my stops was Cozumel. We were there for around 12 hours. We did not have a mexican visa, did not have to go through Mexican immigration.
I spoke to Mexican consulate official, and he conforimed that I do not need a Mexican visa (as long as I have a valid American non-b1/b2 visa) if I am staying in Mexico for less than 72 hours. Carnival also did not require a visa.
They do that for some other stops.
I spoke to Mexican consulate official, and he conforimed that I do not need a Mexican visa (as long as I have a valid American non-b1/b2 visa) if I am staying in Mexico for less than 72 hours. Carnival also did not require a visa.
They do that for some other stops.
