illinois_alum
03-06 09:42 AM
Online application usually warrants a fingerprinting , it's best to apply in paper if that needs to be avoided.
You may avoid fingerprinting (not so sure on that) by paper filing...but applying is a lot faster and easier. Moreover, even if she has to go for fingerprinting..shouldn't be a big deal...they have ASCs all around...
You may avoid fingerprinting (not so sure on that) by paper filing...but applying is a lot faster and easier. Moreover, even if she has to go for fingerprinting..shouldn't be a big deal...they have ASCs all around...
kprgroup
02-01 11:30 AM
Replied RFE with copy of 485 receipt and copy MTR approval and got 3 years H1 extension until 2013.
Thanks Everyone
KPR
Thanks Everyone
KPR
HumJumboHathuJumbo
01-08 12:41 PM
While I-485 is pending, how to change spouse's last name?. For that matter, how to change spouse's last completely in every agency(like ssn, paychecks, credit cards, green card, passport, drivers license). Is this list complete?. which one should i start first?.thanks
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPXn9RXH06JcF96283KRk9LYuvcU4eM1F-3ZVh0xupf6Et_CxJuPko7kbQACCfPizRYOFrp1dLEBRXetxqlJs6k8xnqxzb9ifsDy-ZuHFsfopTQqENj1Lij0qyb1aBqBKZc56oo8mAmzVr/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPXn9RXH06JcF96283KRk9LYuvcU4eM1F-3ZVh0xupf6Et_CxJuPko7kbQACCfPizRYOFrp1dLEBRXetxqlJs6k8xnqxzb9ifsDy-ZuHFsfopTQqENj1Lij0qyb1aBqBKZc56oo8mAmzVr/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
more...
harish357
03-15 12:26 AM
I believe that you need the actual diploma (you send a photocopy of it to USCIS) for getting counted in the M.S. quota. Most schools give the diploma once you have finished all requirements.
How come they cannot consider my EAD, Official transcripts, Graduate status letter?
Regarding Status letter, I have seen students applying like this and getting query later. What do you say about the students graduating in May (who files like me with OPT card and status letter) and applying for H1 in April?
How come they cannot consider my EAD, Official transcripts, Graduate status letter?
Regarding Status letter, I have seen students applying like this and getting query later. What do you say about the students graduating in May (who files like me with OPT card and status letter) and applying for H1 in April?
MYGCBY2010
10-02 05:25 PM
Filed in Nebraska...Went to CSC... Got my Receipt Number Sept last week...
more...
Sakthisagar
05-10 12:37 PM
well discussion is always welcome but do you mean that by discussing in the forums, you will have an effect on what will happen to the bill in the senate?i am all for any steps that will have a direct or indirect impact on the future of the bill. but do you really think that by arguing and debating with each other about what should happen will have any impact on the future of the legal immigration??
I do not think anybody here is a great political personality who is having a voice in the senate or congress, YOu know which forum you are in IV is lobbying and trying to make changes in the bill by lobbying and helping the immigrant communities, so ideas comes from debating and discussing that is the democractic way. Even lot of threads immigrationvoice hosted for ideas alone. so open your eyes. Dont wait to make effect in senate alone, but a combined effort by all of us will do.
I do not think anybody here is a great political personality who is having a voice in the senate or congress, YOu know which forum you are in IV is lobbying and trying to make changes in the bill by lobbying and helping the immigrant communities, so ideas comes from debating and discussing that is the democractic way. Even lot of threads immigrationvoice hosted for ideas alone. so open your eyes. Dont wait to make effect in senate alone, but a combined effort by all of us will do.
darslee
07-11 01:36 AM
Anything I can do to help?
more...
bijualex29
06-24 08:38 AM
If the EAD does not come in time. I have a strong feeling that you can take leave without pay or with pay.
Paid leave is a benefit. You earn the leave ( 1.5 day every month you worked legally). The salary you get during paid leave is not the salary of the day you worked. It is a benefit you received when you worked during your legal stay. Hence I do not feel that one have to be leave without pay. For example if you get your tax refund when your EAD is expired. We should reject the refund?
Paid leave is a benefit. You earn the leave ( 1.5 day every month you worked legally). The salary you get during paid leave is not the salary of the day you worked. It is a benefit you received when you worked during your legal stay. Hence I do not feel that one have to be leave without pay. For example if you get your tax refund when your EAD is expired. We should reject the refund?
lecter
February 26th, 2004, 10:11 PM
If every member critiques 5 photos a week, in no time, all photos will have comments.
I don't know about you, but I love comments, good or bad about my photos...
many help me to focus efforts and make better images...
Thoughts??
I don't know about you, but I love comments, good or bad about my photos...
many help me to focus efforts and make better images...
Thoughts??
more...
coopheal
12-17 03:30 PM
Dates were current till 2005. USCIS and its previous incarnation didn't even finish cases from 2001. Even in 2007 all blow out sale they didnt complete older cases. Also all along they kept on wasting visa as well.
Ideally these would be considered as severe circumstances and USCIS/Congress/Administration would work on getting us some relief because we would make such huge noice for this.
Oh wait.... we are highly skilled GC aspirants.... we won't contribute and won't participate in various IV efforts. We would rather come over here blame core for our situation.
Ideally these would be considered as severe circumstances and USCIS/Congress/Administration would work on getting us some relief because we would make such huge noice for this.
Oh wait.... we are highly skilled GC aspirants.... we won't contribute and won't participate in various IV efforts. We would rather come over here blame core for our situation.
javaconsultant
04-30 02:35 AM
Guys,
I am not 100 % sure if one can change employer after approved I-140.
But this is what I checked with lawyer --
-- Can transfer H-1 to new employer and can file new labor with new PD. Also can pursue your GC from old employer as long as he doesn't revokes it since GC is for future job.
-- Can simultaneously pursue GC from both employers if previous employer does not revoke it.
Also one sticking point ....H-1 extension with new employer if you are on 7th or 8th or 9th year extension... not sure how does it work....this check with a lawyer.......
I am not 100 % sure if one can change employer after approved I-140.
But this is what I checked with lawyer --
-- Can transfer H-1 to new employer and can file new labor with new PD. Also can pursue your GC from old employer as long as he doesn't revokes it since GC is for future job.
-- Can simultaneously pursue GC from both employers if previous employer does not revoke it.
Also one sticking point ....H-1 extension with new employer if you are on 7th or 8th or 9th year extension... not sure how does it work....this check with a lawyer.......
more...
seebi
03-14 01:10 AM
http://www.murthy.com/mb_pdf/030609_P.html
See under Improper Denials of I-485 AOS on Priority Date Issue
I did check the USCIS website for the July 17, 2007 (reinstating the July Visa Bulletin) and July 23, 2007 (about I-485 fees) notices that are specified on murthy.com link you provided, but did not find them. So if any of you know how and where to get them from please let me know. Appreciate your help. Thank you.
See under Improper Denials of I-485 AOS on Priority Date Issue
I did check the USCIS website for the July 17, 2007 (reinstating the July Visa Bulletin) and July 23, 2007 (about I-485 fees) notices that are specified on murthy.com link you provided, but did not find them. So if any of you know how and where to get them from please let me know. Appreciate your help. Thank you.
virginia_desi
02-13 03:28 PM
PD: October 2, 2002
Country: India
First Labor: EB3 (approved in May 2006)
First I-140 approved: July 2006
Second Labor: EB2 (filed in June 2007 and approved in December 07)
Second I-140: Filed in January 2008 requesting retention of priority date
I-485: Filed in April 2008
Second I-140 approved in August 2008 with incorrect priority date
Contacted AILA in December 2008 because priority date was incorrect on second approved I-140.
USCIS email on February 9.
Country: India
First Labor: EB3 (approved in May 2006)
First I-140 approved: July 2006
Second Labor: EB2 (filed in June 2007 and approved in December 07)
Second I-140: Filed in January 2008 requesting retention of priority date
I-485: Filed in April 2008
Second I-140 approved in August 2008 with incorrect priority date
Contacted AILA in December 2008 because priority date was incorrect on second approved I-140.
USCIS email on February 9.
more...
bobsn
04-02 03:52 PM
So Let me get this clear in my head..
If the I-94 is valid for 6 months and then if you need to extend the stay of your parents
option 1: to apply for extension with the USCIS .. (can someone please provide the process to do this)
Do you know if USCIS would accept that the mother is here to help out the daughter thru pregnancy?
option 2: Go out of the US (Mexico, West Indies) and return in 1 month?
option 3: Can you go to Canada like say at the end of month 4, stay there for a few days and come back into US for another 3-6 months. Does this work at all?
option 4: Request the officer at POE for a longer stay (> 6months) showing supporting documents.
Thanks
If the I-94 is valid for 6 months and then if you need to extend the stay of your parents
option 1: to apply for extension with the USCIS .. (can someone please provide the process to do this)
Do you know if USCIS would accept that the mother is here to help out the daughter thru pregnancy?
option 2: Go out of the US (Mexico, West Indies) and return in 1 month?
option 3: Can you go to Canada like say at the end of month 4, stay there for a few days and come back into US for another 3-6 months. Does this work at all?
option 4: Request the officer at POE for a longer stay (> 6months) showing supporting documents.
Thanks
Macaca
04-20 06:45 AM
This (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=58962&postcount=630) is how CIR was reported yesterday!
You will know a lot if you follow the News Article Thread!
You will know a lot if you follow the News Article Thread!
more...
chnaveen
03-22 09:22 PM
My deepest condolenses and sympathies to thier families. May their souls rest in peace.
sac-r-ten
02-21 07:37 PM
I did this recently for my Parents in Laws. I checked the do not apply for native name. Also i don;t think there is an option to print the entire form, only the last confirmation page is to printed and taken for the interview.
The form once completed is saved in consulate's database, so they know what you have filled.
Hope this helps.
The form once completed is saved in consulate's database, so they know what you have filled.
Hope this helps.
cox
October 6th, 2005, 01:52 AM
Over a hundred people have looked at this and no one has anything helpful to say about extension tubes?!? Guess I'm on my own...
jest_1
08-12 06:05 PM
thanks for the answers guys. So does USCIS question about the out of status issue before the last re-entry/485 filing during I-485 adjudication ? Any idea about whether they approve/deny petitions based on this scenario ?
langagadu
11-11 12:16 PM
I will advice you but do you provide free catering for the next 5 years?
Just kidding man. Stay with the employer for atleast 6 months (that's what pundits say).
Hi, I have got my GC couple of months back, planning to start a restaurant business and want to leave my current employer who sponsored my Green Card. Is it fine to leave my employer and start a business? Does it creates any problem in future when I apply for citizenship as Im into different field.
Please do advice accordingly as I need to take decision based on that.
Thanks in advance
Just kidding man. Stay with the employer for atleast 6 months (that's what pundits say).
Hi, I have got my GC couple of months back, planning to start a restaurant business and want to leave my current employer who sponsored my Green Card. Is it fine to leave my employer and start a business? Does it creates any problem in future when I apply for citizenship as Im into different field.
Please do advice accordingly as I need to take decision based on that.
Thanks in advance
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento