dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
wallpaper front yard landscaping.
my2cents
08-05 11:36 AM
Time and again - there are confilicting opinion from attorneys.
My attorney ( and i trust her) said that if you are maintaining H1/H4 status (not necessairly VISA stamped) . your I-485/I-131 doesn't get considered cancelled and only requirements that you must be in US while filing. Being on purely non immigrant VISA like F1/F2/B1 you must be in US on day of approval.
People normally refer to friend's example but i have 2 collegues whose spouses has done same thing. Spouse's H4 visa stamping is long expired but they were gone to India after filing AP and they have comeback without any issue.
If you have not extended ur H1-B/H4 (dual immigrant) and have take advantage on AC-21 then I believe that you are not maintaining any non-immigrant status and you are just paroled in.
Thanks
My attorney ( and i trust her) said that if you are maintaining H1/H4 status (not necessairly VISA stamped) . your I-485/I-131 doesn't get considered cancelled and only requirements that you must be in US while filing. Being on purely non immigrant VISA like F1/F2/B1 you must be in US on day of approval.
People normally refer to friend's example but i have 2 collegues whose spouses has done same thing. Spouse's H4 visa stamping is long expired but they were gone to India after filing AP and they have comeback without any issue.
If you have not extended ur H1-B/H4 (dual immigrant) and have take advantage on AC-21 then I believe that you are not maintaining any non-immigrant status and you are just paroled in.
Thanks
crystal
02-04 02:42 PM
You are right only if they dont want to use EAD after they come back. If they use EAD once they come back to USA, then they are back to adjustee status.
Well..you can fall back to H-4 if something goes wrong with 485. But if you are on AP you will have to leave the country.
Well..you can fall back to H-4 if something goes wrong with 485. But if you are on AP you will have to leave the country.
2011 simple front yard landscaping
brb2
04-19 08:45 AM
Politians will act when they think it is time to act. It is already known that the CIR is planned for second half of May in the senate. Why would they want to lay it out in detail and have those against conduct minute analysis and attack it. So they will only reveal the content closer to the debate.
It is clear Nancy Pelosi has told Bush, if you want it, deliver me the Republican votes and then I will schedule it. She is not going to spend her political capital on CIR. She knows Democrats will vote for it, but republicans will play both sides and she does not want it to happen. The senator who are elected for 6 years (as opposed for 2 years in the house) are less affected by short term public opinion and do what is right for the country. Even there Presidential hopefuls change their tune, like McCain. He was too left of the republican party and now he is moving too much to the right and will please no one, just like Romney.
It is clear Nancy Pelosi has told Bush, if you want it, deliver me the Republican votes and then I will schedule it. She is not going to spend her political capital on CIR. She knows Democrats will vote for it, but republicans will play both sides and she does not want it to happen. The senator who are elected for 6 years (as opposed for 2 years in the house) are less affected by short term public opinion and do what is right for the country. Even there Presidential hopefuls change their tune, like McCain. He was too left of the republican party and now he is moving too much to the right and will please no one, just like Romney.
more...
Quest99
09-14 03:30 PM
Here is my story:
I work for Company A. Got an offer from Company B who is a consulting company. Got placed in a project which is like 1.5 hrs away from my home (I accepted this opportunity for my GC and everything was fine). Company B filed for my LCA for the H1-B transfer. They accepted to pay all the H1-B transfer fees.
Here is my problem:
1 week after my LCA was filed, I came to know that my wife was pregnant. As per the doctor she needs some close attention and care because of her health condition(atleast for 2 months). Also, I have to take her for tests minimum once per week at a hospital which is quite opposite in direction where company B placed me (2hrs ride).
I came to a conclusion not to take this opportunity because of my wife's health and also keeping in mind how the new job will treat me (in terms of flexibility. leaving early, WFH etc - for my wife's treatment). I felt this was a genuine reason from my side.
I informed Company B about this change of plan because I cannot commute such a long distance having these constraints in mind (not good for me as well as not good for the new project).
Company B is asking me pay $3000 for some damages and they say that it is as per the contract.
To my true knowledge I did not sign any kind of contract with them neither the recruiter told me anything. Now Company B is saying that minimum 3 months is required or I have to pay for H1-B transfer and all other fees.
The offer letter that I signed clearly stated that the employment is "At Will" in nature which when asked now, Company B is saying that is for GC and Citizens (which is not mentioned anywhere in the offer letter).
The thing is that they are threatening me and they were so rough and hard when I finally spoke to them. They said that they will be sending the vouchers for me to pay them back.
I thank God for not joining this company as I came to know about their true colors now, they are so money minded and the words they spoke were so harmful. I am pretty sure they would have created more problems for some other reasons if I had joined them.
Even though I did not sign any bond, I am really scared by the way they spoke to me. Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.
I work for Company A. Got an offer from Company B who is a consulting company. Got placed in a project which is like 1.5 hrs away from my home (I accepted this opportunity for my GC and everything was fine). Company B filed for my LCA for the H1-B transfer. They accepted to pay all the H1-B transfer fees.
Here is my problem:
1 week after my LCA was filed, I came to know that my wife was pregnant. As per the doctor she needs some close attention and care because of her health condition(atleast for 2 months). Also, I have to take her for tests minimum once per week at a hospital which is quite opposite in direction where company B placed me (2hrs ride).
I came to a conclusion not to take this opportunity because of my wife's health and also keeping in mind how the new job will treat me (in terms of flexibility. leaving early, WFH etc - for my wife's treatment). I felt this was a genuine reason from my side.
I informed Company B about this change of plan because I cannot commute such a long distance having these constraints in mind (not good for me as well as not good for the new project).
Company B is asking me pay $3000 for some damages and they say that it is as per the contract.
To my true knowledge I did not sign any kind of contract with them neither the recruiter told me anything. Now Company B is saying that minimum 3 months is required or I have to pay for H1-B transfer and all other fees.
The offer letter that I signed clearly stated that the employment is "At Will" in nature which when asked now, Company B is saying that is for GC and Citizens (which is not mentioned anywhere in the offer letter).
The thing is that they are threatening me and they were so rough and hard when I finally spoke to them. They said that they will be sending the vouchers for me to pay them back.
I thank God for not joining this company as I came to know about their true colors now, they are so money minded and the words they spoke were so harmful. I am pretty sure they would have created more problems for some other reasons if I had joined them.
Even though I did not sign any bond, I am really scared by the way they spoke to me. Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.
obelix
03-02 11:38 AM
Looks like your PD is current. You might get your GC anytime. That is another factor I would consider if your GC gets approved before you get married.
Filing six months in advance seems to be a better idea.
Thanks for your input. I had incorrect information attached under my signature. I've not even started GC filing yet.
Filing six months in advance seems to be a better idea.
Thanks for your input. I had incorrect information attached under my signature. I've not even started GC filing yet.
more...
ushkand
07-20 10:44 AM
I sent in form G-325 for both me and my wife along with my I-485 instead of the G-325A as required on I-485 instructions by oversight. What do you guys recommend I do? Should I send in a new application or just send in the G-325A form with a letter stating the issue? Please help.
2010 Shade garden. Shady front yard
gc_check
04-12 03:32 PM
Two Days Left for Submission of Comments to DOL on Substitution Elimination Proposed Rule....
IV Members, what do you folks think?
I suggest elimination of labour substitution is good for many of us and also help avoid people getting into the GC line in front of many people waiting for years, Many companies and attorney's suggest the labour substituion must be allowed, but I think the opposite... Any comments on this
IV Members, what do you folks think?
I suggest elimination of labour substitution is good for many of us and also help avoid people getting into the GC line in front of many people waiting for years, Many companies and attorney's suggest the labour substituion must be allowed, but I think the opposite... Any comments on this
more...
vidyakulkarni
07-13 11:24 AM
we are highly skilled people. so we should wear business suit , it will give impact.
hair Arizona Living Landscape
pani_6
02-09 09:48 AM
Yes this option is open...the sitiuation is getting ridicilous by the day..lets wait for couple of months so see if SKIL OR CIR take some direction..meanwhile nothin prevents us from preparing
grounds for a law suit!!
grounds for a law suit!!
more...
BimmerFAn
06-15 05:42 PM
Hey, I would like to help you but I know next to nothing about J-1 Physician waivers. It is a completely different system. My understanding that the best way to get a waiver is to go through the Conrad 30 program if your wife works in a hospital in an underserved area. I would encourage you look through this forum for individuals who would know more about the process. Likewise, I would also suggest that you consult with an attorney. I used one of the best attorney firms in the world and it was relatively inexpensive. Attorneys really do wonders in these cases bacause they understand this process inside and out and know exactly what the Department of State is looking for.
Best of luck!
Best of luck!
hot Front Yard Landscaping
kondur_007
09-22 09:48 AM
What if the employer showed XXX amount on the Labor Certification, and in the offer letter, but send an offer letter to the employee for YYY, where YYY < XXX? Does the employee is still obliged to for with the employer?
Your question is very short, but this is what I understand you are asking:
If GC is approved with XXX salary on the LC and offer letter during the GC process, but then employer only offers/pays YYY salary upon approval of GC.
As far as I can tell, this would be a problem on the part of employer and not the employee. For the most part, employee can leave that employer without any problems in future. what I do not know is, which one of the following option is better:
1. Never join the employer after getting GC as salary offerred after GC is lower than what was on LC.
2. Join the employer for a month or two and then leave giving the reason that "employer did not pay the salary offered in LC". This may be a safer option as you do prove your intention to join the employer and you get a few pay stubs proving that employer is not paying enough salary (not just othe offer letter showing YYY salary, but the hard proof of YYY salary by means of paystubs).
Also if the employer really does not have project, and can not really hire you at a salary offered on LC, and you have good terms with the employer, ask them to "fire" you rather than you leaving them. This way you will be very safe for future citizenship process.
Good Luck.
Your question is very short, but this is what I understand you are asking:
If GC is approved with XXX salary on the LC and offer letter during the GC process, but then employer only offers/pays YYY salary upon approval of GC.
As far as I can tell, this would be a problem on the part of employer and not the employee. For the most part, employee can leave that employer without any problems in future. what I do not know is, which one of the following option is better:
1. Never join the employer after getting GC as salary offerred after GC is lower than what was on LC.
2. Join the employer for a month or two and then leave giving the reason that "employer did not pay the salary offered in LC". This may be a safer option as you do prove your intention to join the employer and you get a few pay stubs proving that employer is not paying enough salary (not just othe offer letter showing YYY salary, but the hard proof of YYY salary by means of paystubs).
Also if the employer really does not have project, and can not really hire you at a salary offered on LC, and you have good terms with the employer, ask them to "fire" you rather than you leaving them. This way you will be very safe for future citizenship process.
Good Luck.
more...
house working Front+yard+garden
pom
05-27 09:05 AM
The links page in Soul's site almost made me throw up, great work man :P
tattoo small front yard landscaping
priti8888
02-18 06:19 PM
Maintaining legal visa status is not considered a deductible employee business expense. The IRS considers this as a personal expenditure
http://www.neidhartcpa.com/deduct.html
Medical expenses may be deductible but it won't exceed 7.5 % of your AGI so eventually it wont be deductible.
http://www.neidhartcpa.com/deduct.html
Medical expenses may be deductible but it won't exceed 7.5 % of your AGI so eventually it wont be deductible.
more...
pictures Walkway from front yard past
smuggymba
03-09 01:03 PM
Now I need to know what are the things that I can do.
1. Do I need to file PERM, I140 again on EB2?
2. Do I need to file for H1 again and complete the entire process?
3. What is and how to do EB3 to EB2 porting? is that all I need to do?
Please give me some advice. Thanks in advance.
I guess u need to have an approved labor in EB2 to even think about it. You can't port because you dont have an approved EB2 labor.
1. Do I need to file PERM, I140 again on EB2?
2. Do I need to file for H1 again and complete the entire process?
3. What is and how to do EB3 to EB2 porting? is that all I need to do?
Please give me some advice. Thanks in advance.
I guess u need to have an approved labor in EB2 to even think about it. You can't port because you dont have an approved EB2 labor.
dresses pavers in a front yard in
desih1b
05-01 10:17 AM
I think you can file a new LC with new employer and recapture the old LC priority date or if the previous 140 is still valid (not revoked) you can file for I485 using that 140 with that employer.
Better consult an attorney. before talk to the old lawyer and get all necessary info.
all the best.
Better consult an attorney. before talk to the old lawyer and get all necessary info.
all the best.
more...
makeup small front yard landscaping
pankajkakkar
03-01 06:46 PM
I'd like to join the conference call as well.
girlfriend front yard landscaping ideas
iwantmygreen
04-22 07:33 PM
Is there any way to know if employer has revoked your 140. I have an approved 140 & pending 485. After filing 485 I left my company before completing 180 days. Its more than 9 months since I left my employer. Will the status change on USCIS web if 140 was revoked.
hairstyles apple tree in a front yard
hopefulgc
08-07 09:18 AM
I have already filed on July 2nd.
i am sending my spouse's in the next few days.
I am doing:
i-485 - $ 325 + $70
i-131 - $170
i-765 - $180
using FEDEX delivery
to the following address:
Texas Service Center
4141 North St. Augustine Road
Dallas, TX 75227
If anyone think that I am wrong, please correct me.
i am sending my spouse's in the next few days.
I am doing:
i-485 - $ 325 + $70
i-131 - $170
i-765 - $180
using FEDEX delivery
to the following address:
Texas Service Center
4141 North St. Augustine Road
Dallas, TX 75227
If anyone think that I am wrong, please correct me.
ganguteli
06-12 11:26 AM
Why before October?
Because this year's greencards are expired. New quota starts in October. So he should apply labor by then so that he gets his greencard on Oct 1, 2009 by overnight FedEx at 9.00 AM.
Because this year's greencards are expired. New quota starts in October. So he should apply labor by then so that he gets his greencard on Oct 1, 2009 by overnight FedEx at 9.00 AM.
Aah_GC
09-21 11:14 PM
Thanks...your replies were compassionate and philosophical in a way.
Let me rephrase it. With current Globalization and other means to come to US such as B1,L1 etc....why are we stuck to this phase for years.
See tonnes of people going back----are we chasing something we are not supposed to do?
IMO I think that is a question only you can answer. Since we are all chasing some thing or the other -- it makes sense to enjoy the journey, see how we can be happy today and let nature take its course. For some going back to India makes most sense, for some probably not. Either way, the decisions that we take should be based out of our own individual purpose and desires than be guided by externals.
Let me rephrase it. With current Globalization and other means to come to US such as B1,L1 etc....why are we stuck to this phase for years.
See tonnes of people going back----are we chasing something we are not supposed to do?
IMO I think that is a question only you can answer. Since we are all chasing some thing or the other -- it makes sense to enjoy the journey, see how we can be happy today and let nature take its course. For some going back to India makes most sense, for some probably not. Either way, the decisions that we take should be based out of our own individual purpose and desires than be guided by externals.
No comments:
Post a Comment