ricky
05-22 02:51 PM
Here is what you do if the bill passes without amendments:
Get some sun-tan. Wear a baseball cap. Put in jeans with oil stains and bad quality collarless t-shirt. Grow an untrimmed mustache. Lose the dress shoes and wear cheap jogging shoes.
Go to the nearest USCIS office (after this bill passes) and say that you have been working off-books illegally at a nearby restaurant since 5 years and now you would like to apply for Z visa.
They will give you a probationary that will work like an EAD card (maybe better quality than EAD with it being tamper proof and wear proof). In the meantime, once the borders are closed and certain benchmarks are met, you will get Z visa with Advanced parole to replace your probationary card. With that advanced parole you can travel outside and come back in guaranteed (Guaranteed return due to AP). When outside you can file for GC, visit your parents and relatives, spend a few days in vacation and come back with full freedom to work anywhere without LCA restrictions and enjoy the Z visa that you can renew on your own (no need for employer sponsor).
They will give GC to all Z visa applicants within 5 years thru supplemental increase in GC (based on survey done by DHS). The annual cap will be total Z visa holders divided by 20%. If there are 11 million illegals who end up getting Z visa, the annual cap will be 2.2 million.
That 2.2 million beats the hell out of the 140,000 we have today for legal skilled immigrants or the 90,000 we will have with this new bill.
Advantages:
1. No need to comply to speciality occupation. Work in any line of work.
2. No need to get labor cert for GC.
3. No need to depend on employer for temp visas like H1B and GC sponsorship.
4. More travel flexibility due to advanced parole that comes with Z visa.
.
My employer cancelled my H1 visa for the period of 7 months in the year 2005without my knowledge. At that period I was working in a Gas Station. After a hectic bargaining my employer once again renewed by H1 (till now I do not know how he did it) and right now I am legal doing my software job. My perm which was applied in Feb 2006 was approved and my I-140 is pending.
My question is whether I am eligible to apply for 'Z' Visa??
Get some sun-tan. Wear a baseball cap. Put in jeans with oil stains and bad quality collarless t-shirt. Grow an untrimmed mustache. Lose the dress shoes and wear cheap jogging shoes.
Go to the nearest USCIS office (after this bill passes) and say that you have been working off-books illegally at a nearby restaurant since 5 years and now you would like to apply for Z visa.
They will give you a probationary that will work like an EAD card (maybe better quality than EAD with it being tamper proof and wear proof). In the meantime, once the borders are closed and certain benchmarks are met, you will get Z visa with Advanced parole to replace your probationary card. With that advanced parole you can travel outside and come back in guaranteed (Guaranteed return due to AP). When outside you can file for GC, visit your parents and relatives, spend a few days in vacation and come back with full freedom to work anywhere without LCA restrictions and enjoy the Z visa that you can renew on your own (no need for employer sponsor).
They will give GC to all Z visa applicants within 5 years thru supplemental increase in GC (based on survey done by DHS). The annual cap will be total Z visa holders divided by 20%. If there are 11 million illegals who end up getting Z visa, the annual cap will be 2.2 million.
That 2.2 million beats the hell out of the 140,000 we have today for legal skilled immigrants or the 90,000 we will have with this new bill.
Advantages:
1. No need to comply to speciality occupation. Work in any line of work.
2. No need to get labor cert for GC.
3. No need to depend on employer for temp visas like H1B and GC sponsorship.
4. More travel flexibility due to advanced parole that comes with Z visa.
.
My employer cancelled my H1 visa for the period of 7 months in the year 2005without my knowledge. At that period I was working in a Gas Station. After a hectic bargaining my employer once again renewed by H1 (till now I do not know how he did it) and right now I am legal doing my software job. My perm which was applied in Feb 2006 was approved and my I-140 is pending.
My question is whether I am eligible to apply for 'Z' Visa??
wallpaper sad love quotes wallpapers.
bujjigadu123
03-03 03:32 PM
I hope he was not deported.
Hi All,
Sorry for the delayed response.
Result:
ICE officer did not visit me on the scheduled day. There is no communciation from him so far on reschedule also. I donno what happened. I also did not want to follow up with him.
Regards,
bujjigadu.
Hi All,
Sorry for the delayed response.
Result:
ICE officer did not visit me on the scheduled day. There is no communciation from him so far on reschedule also. I donno what happened. I also did not want to follow up with him.
Regards,
bujjigadu.
gmatch
12-13 03:56 PM
It is not that i have full basket of apples now... my previous 2-employers promised me to start labor...but they did not do it..even i sent my docs 2-times to the previous employer ..but they gave lie assurances & very dumb...so i have lost my 2.5 years just waiting on their promises...& nothing got.
Finally, I made up my mind ...either to get it on fast track OR leave this option... forever.
I don't see anything wrong in it...as the previous person already left that labor unused... & employer needs those skills..which he found in me.
Finally, I made up my mind ...either to get it on fast track OR leave this option... forever.
I don't see anything wrong in it...as the previous person already left that labor unused... & employer needs those skills..which he found in me.
2011 sad love quotes wallpapers.
eb3_nepa
02-21 09:15 AM
Go read the posts on the other website, and you will see how important it was to counter this guy's posts that were raising basic doubts about IV.
To have prompt responses is extremely important! If you brush aside negative comments from 'male buffalos' and not counter them - we will never be able to get them into action!
Anyway, however clumsy my efforts, I could not just sit and watch & not try to get doubts addressed.
Mercies there is a bit of a difference in getting ur doubts addressed and ur post. Once again i didnt mean any offence to you in particular, just was upset by the sheer length and attack in ur post.
To have prompt responses is extremely important! If you brush aside negative comments from 'male buffalos' and not counter them - we will never be able to get them into action!
Anyway, however clumsy my efforts, I could not just sit and watch & not try to get doubts addressed.
Mercies there is a bit of a difference in getting ur doubts addressed and ur post. Once again i didnt mean any offence to you in particular, just was upset by the sheer length and attack in ur post.
more...
sanju
12-18 10:24 AM
Sarcasm ? Or is he really our friend ? Bad at remembering names.
-M
That's ok, totally understand.
Sorry, I did not raise my arm to indicate that it was ALL sarcasm. Durbin is aginst H1B. Although his press release says that he is not against green cards, but thats just bull.
And if he is appointed Labor Secretary, that will be the last straw to break the camel's back.
.
-M
That's ok, totally understand.
Sorry, I did not raise my arm to indicate that it was ALL sarcasm. Durbin is aginst H1B. Although his press release says that he is not against green cards, but thats just bull.
And if he is appointed Labor Secretary, that will be the last straw to break the camel's back.
.
longq
12-20 03:41 PM
Hello IV and its core members,
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
I am one of the members of the forum and suffering due to the severe retrogression of EB visas. I highly appreciate IV�s effort to bring some legislative relief to address the severe backlogs in EB visas. I too participated in all IVs campaign in urging the law makers to bring some relief for this crisis. However, I have some concern here; about the method followed U.S DOS in allocating EB visas particularly in EB2 category for India and China. I am worried whether U.S DOS is violating the INA 202 (a), by suspending AC21 provision that eliminates country quota in EB categories. If they are violating by mistake, it is our responsibility to notify/clarify with them or we need to understand the law clearly. This is very important. Because, even if 110th congress passes SKIL bill, if DOS violates the AC21 law then it will not help applicants from oversubscribed countries (India and China). Here is my analysis based on following facts.
The cutoff date for EB2 India has moved just 7 days since last 9 months. However EB2 �Row has been current. EB2- ROW has never retrogressed before. EB3 ROW has seen considerable movement in last 9 months.
There may be four possible separate or combination of following reasons for the freeze of cutoff dates for India in EB2 at Jan 2003.
1. The backlog elimination effort of DOL pumped massive approved labor certificates from BEC. There may be tons of EB2 applicants from India and China with PD in the year 2001 and 2002 might have applied 485s based on recent approvals from BEC. However I doubt that. Because, in the year 2001, 2002 and 2003, EB3 India and China were �current�. No body cared about filing EB2 labor certification till the later part of 2004. Most lawyers preferred to file EB3 as it was easy, and there were no difference between EB3 and EB2 at that time. First ever indication for EB3 retrogression was issued by DOS only in later part of 2004. I doubt so many people have filed EB2-labor till 2003, keeping in mind that EB3 will retrogress in 2004 or future. Traditionally EB2 has been less demanding compare to EB1 and EB3.
2. Perhaps, there may be a huge demand by ROW (Due to PERM) to consume all the 86% of visa numbers in EB2 category in every month that prompts DOS to allocate only 7% to India and China. I doubt this too, because India and China itself consume about 60% of EB2 visas.
3. There may be lot of EB3 Indians and Chinese with PD 2001 and 2002 porting their PD from EB3 to EB2 by filing new LC and EB2-I-140. This may escalate the demand. However, how many will do this? How many employers will to do this �favor� for their employees? A real US employer/big corporations will not do double time work for an employee. Only consulting/staffing companies will do this. I think this may be a small group (or may not be?).
4. There may be another possible reason. There may be something wrong with U.S.DOS in allocating visa numbers in EB2 category, as per section 202 (a) of current INA. They may be issuing only 2800 (7% of 40,000) visas to India and China in EB2 and redirecting unused EB2 numbers to EB3 category. They may be imposing hard country cap in EB2 (Suspending AC21 law as per their VB Nov 2005). There is a large room for this speculation, due to the pattern of cutoff date movement in EB2 category. This is just a speculation. This argument/speculation is valid if DOS has issued less than 40,000 EB2 visas in FY 2006 as mandated by the law, and issued those numbers (40,000 minus actually issued) to EB3-ROW. In my view, it violates section 203 (b) (2) of the INA. One has to wait till they release statistics for FY 2006, to see how many EB2 visas are issued in that FY.
Here is some detailed analysis that says why it violates the law.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least 140,000. Section 203 a and b of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets numbers for each preference categories with in FB and EB.
Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320. This section also explains how to handle unused numbers with respect to country quota.
Even before AC21 rule enacted in 2000, there was no �hard� country cap as per INA then. Here is the section of INA before year 2000, describes how to allocate unused visas, if overall/total demand for FB an EB visas are less than supply*.
INA 202 (a) (3)
�Exception if additional visas available. - If because of the application of paragraph (2) with respect to one or more foreign states or dependent areas, the total number of visas available under both subsections (a-Family category) and (b-Employment category) of section 203 for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who otherwise may be issued such a visa, paragraph (2) shall not apply to visas made available to such states or areas during the remainder of such calendar quarter�.
Therefore, the 7% country cap had always been �soft� till year 2000.
After year 2000, AC21 has completely removed country cap in each employment category, if excess visas are available in each preference categories.
After 2000 (After AC21) the following law was added to INA in the section 202.
INA 202 (a) (5) (A)
EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS NOT SUBJECT TO PER COUNTRY LIMITATION IF ADDITIONAL VISAS AVAILABLE- If the total number of visas available under paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) of section 203(b) for a calendar quarter exceeds the number of qualified immigrants who may otherwise be issued such visas, the visas made available under that paragraph shall be issued without regard to the numerical limitation under paragraph (2) of this subsection during the remainder of the calendar quarter.
As per my simple interpretation of above AC21 rule, DOS should allocate unused visas by ROW �EB2 (ROW- countries other than India and China in EB2 category) for the first two months of any calendar quarter to over-subscribed countries (India & China) at the third month of that calendar quarter. They should not allocate to lower Preference category (EB3), if demand is more in higher preference category (EB2) to consume all the visa numbers in that preference category. They should allocate visas to all the documentarily qualified applicants in that (EB2) preference category, irrespective of country of birth. If they followed this rule/law, there may be a considerable movement in cut-off dates for India and China in Dec 2005, Mar, June and Sep of 2006 in EB2 (last month of each calendar quarter in a fiscal year). We have not witnessed such movement in last 1.5 years. No one knows how DOS is allocating numbers. They may be allocating only 7% visas to India and China in EB2 category very strictly, every month, and allocating unused numbers to EB3 category, by suspending AC21 law as indicated in their Nov 2005 Visa Bulletin. If they do so, it is against the law, at least in my interpretation of AC21 rule that eliminates country quota in EB categories.
DOS can not interpret above AC21 rule that eliminates per country limit applies �totally� to all EB categories put together, not by individual preference categories. I.e. If they say they will issue more than 2,800 visas to EB2- India per year (more than 7% of 40,000), provided overall demand for EB visas are less than 140,000. If they interpret the law like this, then there is no need for section 202(a) (5) (A) due to AC21 law. The law before AC21 {i.e. section 202 (a) (3)} itself address the elimination of country quota in both FB and EB category*. Then, section 202(a) (5) (A) is a duplicate wording of section 202(a) (3). So, this section of AC21 law becomes a redundant/duplicate law. Then, there is no meaning of employment �preference� category if they interpret �totally or overall worldwide demand�. In other words, a non-Indian/Chinese restaurant cook (EB3) is more preferred than a NIW PhDs (EB2) from India or China. Is it the intend of the congress when enacting AC21 law in removing per country limitation in EB category? Is it the American Competitiveness in 21st century? I highly doubt that.
Now it is the time to ask US DOS, how they are allocating visa number in EB2 category. If DOS interpreting the law differently, then we need to ask the law makers (Congress) what is their original intension behind the section 202(a)(5)(A) when they drafted the AC21 law in 2000 and how it is differ from 202 (a) (3).
Perhaps Core IV team can initiate to discuss/consult this issue with an immigration lawyer and place an enquiry with DOS or Law makers, if needed.
(*Note: DOS do not mix FB and EB categories for visa number allocation/calculation to meet the per country limit. They keep both in separate track to meet separately the 7% limit)
more...
eb3retro
04-12 11:48 AM
Werc:
Thanks for your post. However, as per my original post, could you indicate the section where in the INA does it mention when employment authorization can be given? In fact, the first line in the in the paper in the link included by Bee in his post, clearly mentions that "...nowhere in the statutes or regulations, is there a reference to a work permit" (i.e. an EAD as clarified later in the document).
As you mention later in your post, yes it is hard to get something from USCIS, but should we shy away from something just because it is hard? Also, as the same document (posted by BEE) mentions, the reasons for issuing an EAD are varied.
But let us take the specific case you mentioned, a student can work up to 12 months after his graduation. This time frame is provided for multiple reasons, the main one being to give the student to find employment in his related field of education and for the employer to evaluate him and process his adjustment of status. Without the EAD, the student would have to find employment and adjust his status within 2 months or be out of status. BUT the EAD also provides the student the choice of changing employers without losing his status.
Now, coming to the issue of EAD after I-140 or after I-485...By submitting the I-140 the employer is not only asking the USCIS to approve the need (as certified by the DOL) of a alien as a permanent worker, the employer is also providing the USCIS with particulars of the alien who will be hired. Therefore, by approving the I-140, the USCIS is not only approving the need of the employer, it is also approving the alien for the job. This is also supported by the fact that the USCIS allows concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485 if the priority date is current for that particular country/category. Hence, an EAD after I-140 not only allows the employer to hire an alien already in the company, it also allows the alien who might be working for an employer other than the one which applied for the I-140 to switch jobs, without worrying about being out-of-status, if he is very close to finishing his 6years on an H1B. For an alien who is outside the country when his I-140 is approved (very rare case, but possible), he can enter the US on an H1B sponsored by the petitioning employer and then apply for an EAD for himself and his dependents while waiting for the visa number to be available and file his I-485. BUT the EAD also gives the alien the chance to find another willing employer within 6 months for similar job descriptions and within the same geographic area without being out of status and preserve the priority date rather than worry about losing his status if something unfortunate happens to the petitioning employer (ENRON, MCI, etc.)
Whether, this will be successful or not is another question. But unless you try you can never be sure. Before 1969, a man on the moon was an impossibility but it happened :) Changing the law is the NEED of the day and we should be pursuing it to the full extent of our capabilities for LONG term relief. But, asking the agencies who interpret the existing laws and apply them to reconsider will not and should not in any way hamper our efforts in this. Rather this is something that is a SHORT term relief that in no way goes against the word of the law or against the intent of Congress when it passed the law.
Well, since this has been an long post, I will call it my 4 cents.:D Thoughts, comments and brickbats are, as usual, welcome.
very nice analysis.
Thanks for your post. However, as per my original post, could you indicate the section where in the INA does it mention when employment authorization can be given? In fact, the first line in the in the paper in the link included by Bee in his post, clearly mentions that "...nowhere in the statutes or regulations, is there a reference to a work permit" (i.e. an EAD as clarified later in the document).
As you mention later in your post, yes it is hard to get something from USCIS, but should we shy away from something just because it is hard? Also, as the same document (posted by BEE) mentions, the reasons for issuing an EAD are varied.
But let us take the specific case you mentioned, a student can work up to 12 months after his graduation. This time frame is provided for multiple reasons, the main one being to give the student to find employment in his related field of education and for the employer to evaluate him and process his adjustment of status. Without the EAD, the student would have to find employment and adjust his status within 2 months or be out of status. BUT the EAD also provides the student the choice of changing employers without losing his status.
Now, coming to the issue of EAD after I-140 or after I-485...By submitting the I-140 the employer is not only asking the USCIS to approve the need (as certified by the DOL) of a alien as a permanent worker, the employer is also providing the USCIS with particulars of the alien who will be hired. Therefore, by approving the I-140, the USCIS is not only approving the need of the employer, it is also approving the alien for the job. This is also supported by the fact that the USCIS allows concurrent filing of I-140 and I-485 if the priority date is current for that particular country/category. Hence, an EAD after I-140 not only allows the employer to hire an alien already in the company, it also allows the alien who might be working for an employer other than the one which applied for the I-140 to switch jobs, without worrying about being out-of-status, if he is very close to finishing his 6years on an H1B. For an alien who is outside the country when his I-140 is approved (very rare case, but possible), he can enter the US on an H1B sponsored by the petitioning employer and then apply for an EAD for himself and his dependents while waiting for the visa number to be available and file his I-485. BUT the EAD also gives the alien the chance to find another willing employer within 6 months for similar job descriptions and within the same geographic area without being out of status and preserve the priority date rather than worry about losing his status if something unfortunate happens to the petitioning employer (ENRON, MCI, etc.)
Whether, this will be successful or not is another question. But unless you try you can never be sure. Before 1969, a man on the moon was an impossibility but it happened :) Changing the law is the NEED of the day and we should be pursuing it to the full extent of our capabilities for LONG term relief. But, asking the agencies who interpret the existing laws and apply them to reconsider will not and should not in any way hamper our efforts in this. Rather this is something that is a SHORT term relief that in no way goes against the word of the law or against the intent of Congress when it passed the law.
Well, since this has been an long post, I will call it my 4 cents.:D Thoughts, comments and brickbats are, as usual, welcome.
very nice analysis.
2010 sad love quotes wallpapers.
dilbert_cal
04-03 05:06 PM
Didnt think this would be so easy - My apologies to everyone for being a lazy person before - from the time of my last post till now, I've been able to get another 12 more webfaxes done through my friends and now they are talking to their friends ( not the common ones ) to get more faxes.
Moderator - Can you please post how many faxes are done as of now ?
Moderator - Can you please post how many faxes are done as of now ?
more...
saturnring11
09-15 10:42 AM
Here are a few reasons why I want to get the gc:
1) freedom to change jobs to make a higher salary so that I don't have to work two H1 jobs simultaneously
2) freedom to change your career track into another area, which cannot be done even with AC21 (job has to be essentially the same position)
3) freedom to travel out of the country and back in without going to Canada/Mexico each year for revalidation, for not only personal but even urgent busines trips. I get to see my family and friends, and not spend hundreds of $ in govt and legal fees
4) freedom to quit a job because the company/boss sucks
5) freedom to make enough money so that I can take a break from any job for a while (yes, this is actually a possibility if you have a well-enough paying job)
6) freedom to have one's dependents take advantage of benefits like in-state tuition, and other benefits residency brings
7) and finally freedom from the immense stress that I will lose my job and consequently all the time I have spent waiting for my gc, perhaps uproot myself and have to return to a place where I may not necessarily feel is home anymore
So am I doing what I really want?
No
I guess black Americans could have said something similar 200 years ago: as long as I am fed by my master, he provides me with a roof over my head, and I work hard, I should be happy.
Today they would still be slaves.
To misquote Orwell: America is a free country, but some people are freer than others.
Moral of this story: Satisfaction and complacency are two different things
Interesting blog on the issue of high-tech slavery.
http://saturnring11.blogspot.com/2006/02/high-tech-slavery-in-land-of-free.html
1) freedom to change jobs to make a higher salary so that I don't have to work two H1 jobs simultaneously
2) freedom to change your career track into another area, which cannot be done even with AC21 (job has to be essentially the same position)
3) freedom to travel out of the country and back in without going to Canada/Mexico each year for revalidation, for not only personal but even urgent busines trips. I get to see my family and friends, and not spend hundreds of $ in govt and legal fees
4) freedom to quit a job because the company/boss sucks
5) freedom to make enough money so that I can take a break from any job for a while (yes, this is actually a possibility if you have a well-enough paying job)
6) freedom to have one's dependents take advantage of benefits like in-state tuition, and other benefits residency brings
7) and finally freedom from the immense stress that I will lose my job and consequently all the time I have spent waiting for my gc, perhaps uproot myself and have to return to a place where I may not necessarily feel is home anymore
So am I doing what I really want?
No
I guess black Americans could have said something similar 200 years ago: as long as I am fed by my master, he provides me with a roof over my head, and I work hard, I should be happy.
Today they would still be slaves.
To misquote Orwell: America is a free country, but some people are freer than others.
Moral of this story: Satisfaction and complacency are two different things
Interesting blog on the issue of high-tech slavery.
http://saturnring11.blogspot.com/2006/02/high-tech-slavery-in-land-of-free.html
hair sad love quotes and sayings
am4gc
12-30 09:05 AM
Longq,
Are these info are based on good guess? If not, can you provide us some link, or attach jpg with highlighting relevent facts.
Because, till 2005 there were extra 100,000 (total 242,000 were issued) recapturd numbers available. Therefore, no one cared (DOS/USCIS) about AC21 law that removes country quota. EB2 were curren for all then.
Are these info are based on good guess? If not, can you provide us some link, or attach jpg with highlighting relevent facts.
Because, till 2005 there were extra 100,000 (total 242,000 were issued) recapturd numbers available. Therefore, no one cared (DOS/USCIS) about AC21 law that removes country quota. EB2 were curren for all then.
more...
manand24
08-10 10:23 AM
I don't care about LS. Almost all cases I know are fraud. Sometimes 2 guys got GCs on same labor(since they were not asking Original LC). Thank god USCIS banned LS.
God Bless USCIS for banning LS.
If you had the opportunity of getting a Substitute labor and potentially get your GC sooner rather than later, wouldn't you grab it with both hands. It is the GC Freedom.
I am also thankful that DOL and USCIS have banned Labor Substitutions but please give those who have used them a break. They are also in the same boat as you and me (people with regular labor). Chasing the American Dream. No offense intended.:o
God Bless USCIS for banning LS.
If you had the opportunity of getting a Substitute labor and potentially get your GC sooner rather than later, wouldn't you grab it with both hands. It is the GC Freedom.
I am also thankful that DOL and USCIS have banned Labor Substitutions but please give those who have used them a break. They are also in the same boat as you and me (people with regular labor). Chasing the American Dream. No offense intended.:o
hot sad love quotes wallpapers.
.jpg "Sad Love Quotes Wallpapers")
eastindia
07-29 01:11 PM
The "diversity" is a celebrated argument in USA. However, it takes a backseat when doling out amnesty. And "justice" is also important, and you can't sacrifice something as important as Justice for "diversity", which is just a long-term-point-of-view concept
Why is there no country limits for asylum, lottery and Green cards for undocumented in CIR bill?
Why is there no country limits for asylum, lottery and Green cards for undocumented in CIR bill?
more...
house sad love quotes wallpapers
hindu_king
08-14 11:01 AM
I think re-filing is a waste of time and energy. whatever's going to happen will happen.
tattoo emo love quotes wallpapers.
LostInGCProcess
02-11 04:24 PM
I found the formual still working on the variables :-)
http://www.acm.org/crossroads/xrds9-4/gfx/equation008.gif
:D:D:D Wow!! that was so simple, Thanks.... :D:D:D:D
http://www.acm.org/crossroads/xrds9-4/gfx/equation008.gif
:D:D:D Wow!! that was so simple, Thanks.... :D:D:D:D
more...
pictures sad love quotes wallpapers.
logiclife
04-01 05:31 PM
Just sent fax # 10 and 11.
--Jay.
--Jay.
dresses Sad Love Quotes Wallpapers
amit_p27
06-20 07:37 AM
Congratulation...
I hate to see you leaving, you need to fight for others. Who knows somebody close to you might get stuck in this mess. IF everybody leave just because they got what they need than its not fair. If you think IV has helped you in any way then each of us put some effort to help IV and its members.
Again congrates and hope you become more active in coming days.
Thanks.
Today is the next day of my GC freedom, and I am still on this forum, I didnot mean to leave the Forum, I still support IV with all my heart.......:D
I hate to see you leaving, you need to fight for others. Who knows somebody close to you might get stuck in this mess. IF everybody leave just because they got what they need than its not fair. If you think IV has helped you in any way then each of us put some effort to help IV and its members.
Again congrates and hope you become more active in coming days.
Thanks.
Today is the next day of my GC freedom, and I am still on this forum, I didnot mean to leave the Forum, I still support IV with all my heart.......:D
more...
makeup love and sad quotes. love
lazycis
12-18 11:02 AM
This is not to oppose your message - I am just trying to figure out where these arguments comes from because I don't think I believe in this whole fraud thing. AC21 is meant for one to change jobs after working for the original sponsoring company for 180 days. Also, there are no clear guidelines stating that one must inform the USCIS - so what will this fraud be based on? How can one be committing fraud if there are no guidelines to tell you what is considered fraudulent? I think one is fraudulant when one actually violates some set rules etc. I don't think the USCIS can have a basis for suspecting someone of fraud when they don't even have a definition of what may constitute fraud in this case because of the lack of guidelines. Plus, I have never, ever heard of anyone be denied or suspected of anything like this during citizenship, I just don't believe this is a factor AT ALL. I see these comments a lot and they just don't make any sense to me. To me, it is like breaking a law that doesn't exist. And you say one may be "suspected", well, suspicion is just that, suspicion. The USCIS needs to show proof that you intended to be fraudulent and for as long as there are no AC21 guidelines that tell you that you must inform the USCIS upon invoking AC21, the USCIS will not and cannot have a case against you.
I agree with you. It's not required by law to file any AC21 papers so the USCIS cannot do much. Also, the green card cannot be revoked after 5 years so by the time you apply for citizenship, the USCIS cannot do anything bad to you. Worst case, they will ask about it during the citizenship interview so it's a good idea to keep your employment offer handy. But it's very unlikely and I really doubt they can deny your citizenship based on this. That's why I see no drawbacks in not filing AC21 and no benefits in filing it if you know that I-140 won't be withdrawn. My advice would be to take an employment letter from current employer and keep it in case the USCIS asks for it. There is no need to cause troubles for yourself by letting the USCIS know about it.
I agree with you. It's not required by law to file any AC21 papers so the USCIS cannot do much. Also, the green card cannot be revoked after 5 years so by the time you apply for citizenship, the USCIS cannot do anything bad to you. Worst case, they will ask about it during the citizenship interview so it's a good idea to keep your employment offer handy. But it's very unlikely and I really doubt they can deny your citizenship based on this. That's why I see no drawbacks in not filing AC21 and no benefits in filing it if you know that I-140 won't be withdrawn. My advice would be to take an employment letter from current employer and keep it in case the USCIS asks for it. There is no need to cause troubles for yourself by letting the USCIS know about it.
girlfriend wallpaper sad love poems and
.jpg "sad love quotes wallpapers.")
India_USA
07-13 09:40 AM
Guys, there is real substance to what oscarzumaran says as well......
It is not fair to shout at him unless u understand the issue bereft of any emotions.
I think the AZ is the right thing to force illegal immigrants out of AZ since its bringing the economy down to its knees.
Moreover the AZ law is excatly the same as the current Federal law, its just that AZ is implementing it thru a state law, so why shd the feds object to it.
If you folks think that AZ law is wrong then why should other sanctuary states who prevent illegals from been sent back be allowed to pre-empt the fed law , even these states should be challenged.
We legal citizens are required by fed law to carry legal docs at any time(even though u may not like it), AZ is just enforcing the law
IV is all about legal immigration and does not support illegal immigration as I know it, Its a folly to think that if we support the feds they will support legal immigration and give GC's faster......Can anyone be 100% sure that the politicians will not drop the legal provisions from CIR just to get some votes to get the illegal immigrations laws in CIR thru......havent u seen how the healthcare bill was passed
How could you all support illegals when u are here legally? would you let pakistanis enter India without Visas or let palestines into Isreal just like that?, would Mexico allow Asians into their country just like that, heck NO.
Stop criticizing folks for stating their point of view, each one has a right to his opinion, so does oscarzumaran.
I dont care if you give some reds, hope oscarzumaran will compensate with some greens :)
I think you are missing the point cbpds.........Oscarzumaran is entitled to his opinion and so are others. What many of us are trying to say is that don't express them here. IV team has repeatedly said that antagonizing any other immigration based group (illegal, family based, asylum, even anti immigrants!!) does not help us in our march to get what we want. By talking ill of the other group, we are actually hurting ourselves. Time and time again, it has been proved that being united works better compared to being divided. Why do we want to gain the wrath of any group unnecessarily? Its not like IV is working on undocumented issues........
Anybody can have any opinion he/she chooses to have. But don't share the opinion in a forum where the leaders are requesting/asking not to do so for the good of our advocacy.
And also, IV is for legal immigrants. Period. I don't believe it has a stand on illegal immigration. Period. There is a huge difference between the two.
It is not fair to shout at him unless u understand the issue bereft of any emotions.
I think the AZ is the right thing to force illegal immigrants out of AZ since its bringing the economy down to its knees.
Moreover the AZ law is excatly the same as the current Federal law, its just that AZ is implementing it thru a state law, so why shd the feds object to it.
If you folks think that AZ law is wrong then why should other sanctuary states who prevent illegals from been sent back be allowed to pre-empt the fed law , even these states should be challenged.
We legal citizens are required by fed law to carry legal docs at any time(even though u may not like it), AZ is just enforcing the law
IV is all about legal immigration and does not support illegal immigration as I know it, Its a folly to think that if we support the feds they will support legal immigration and give GC's faster......Can anyone be 100% sure that the politicians will not drop the legal provisions from CIR just to get some votes to get the illegal immigrations laws in CIR thru......havent u seen how the healthcare bill was passed
How could you all support illegals when u are here legally? would you let pakistanis enter India without Visas or let palestines into Isreal just like that?, would Mexico allow Asians into their country just like that, heck NO.
Stop criticizing folks for stating their point of view, each one has a right to his opinion, so does oscarzumaran.
I dont care if you give some reds, hope oscarzumaran will compensate with some greens :)
I think you are missing the point cbpds.........Oscarzumaran is entitled to his opinion and so are others. What many of us are trying to say is that don't express them here. IV team has repeatedly said that antagonizing any other immigration based group (illegal, family based, asylum, even anti immigrants!!) does not help us in our march to get what we want. By talking ill of the other group, we are actually hurting ourselves. Time and time again, it has been proved that being united works better compared to being divided. Why do we want to gain the wrath of any group unnecessarily? Its not like IV is working on undocumented issues........
Anybody can have any opinion he/she chooses to have. But don't share the opinion in a forum where the leaders are requesting/asking not to do so for the good of our advocacy.
And also, IV is for legal immigrants. Period. I don't believe it has a stand on illegal immigration. Period. There is a huge difference between the two.
hairstyles sad love quotes wallpapers.
CHRAMA
04-14 02:44 PM
My I-140 was denied incorrectly , as a result my I-485 was denied.
The USCIS is claiming that the I-140 Petition was filed without a certified PERM application. This is absolutely incorrect. The original certified PERM application was filed with the I-140 Petition. I have a photocopy of the original PERM application.
My lawyer filed MTR for both I140 and I485 6weeks ago.I received receipt notices for both I290B.
I was working on my H1B till last week, but was laid off last week and I am searching for job.No one is offering job on H1B.I send a letter to coressman explaining my situation.
Can I use my EAD?-----My Lawyer says my EAD is invalid.
The USCIS is claiming that the I-140 Petition was filed without a certified PERM application. This is absolutely incorrect. The original certified PERM application was filed with the I-140 Petition. I have a photocopy of the original PERM application.
My lawyer filed MTR for both I140 and I485 6weeks ago.I received receipt notices for both I290B.
I was working on my H1B till last week, but was laid off last week and I am searching for job.No one is offering job on H1B.I send a letter to coressman explaining my situation.
Can I use my EAD?-----My Lawyer says my EAD is invalid.
anilsal
07-27 06:08 PM
Man u guys are faaaaaaaaaaaast!!!!
BTW, talking abt F5...I have lost the white ink on the F5 key..its all blank now.....seriously not kidding, and also some dead skin on my index finger.......cheeeeeeeers!!!
I would love to see your contribution trail in your signature.
BTW, talking abt F5...I have lost the white ink on the F5 key..its all blank now.....seriously not kidding, and also some dead skin on my index finger.......cheeeeeeeers!!!
I would love to see your contribution trail in your signature.
hpandey
12-28 12:33 PM
Anyone invoking AC21 with unapproved I-140?
If you try to use AC21 without an approved I-140 your employer can withdraw the I-140 petition ( since it is not approved yet ) . So best wait a few months until it is approved and then merrily go the AC21 way
If you try to use AC21 without an approved I-140 your employer can withdraw the I-140 petition ( since it is not approved yet ) . So best wait a few months until it is approved and then merrily go the AC21 way
No comments:
Post a Comment