bank_king2003
06-04 02:03 PM
but in this case the H1b stamp on my passport is still valid and not expired.
i am entering on nov 11th. stamp expires on december 1. why i am worried is just because the stamp is still of old employer whereas 797 is of new employer.
port of entry may ask me why didnt i get the stamp again when it is just expiring after 20 days ?? U know....
i am entering on nov 11th. stamp expires on december 1. why i am worried is just because the stamp is still of old employer whereas 797 is of new employer.
port of entry may ask me why didnt i get the stamp again when it is just expiring after 20 days ?? U know....
wallpaper Medium Hairstyles for women
tabaching
10-22 12:43 AM
Gurus pls help,
Here's my situation.
I'm a derivative and recently got an interview notice.
1) My spouse came here with H1 status (without me). Because my spouse's company can only start processing my H4 visa, 3 months after my spouse start date. Since it will be difficult for us to be thousands of miles away, we decided to use my tourist visa and come here so that I can join my spouse. So, I came here initially in B1/B2 status (around February 2006). After 3 months (around May 2006), I got a job offer from one company and was willing to sponsor my H1 visa. During the H1 processing, I had to go back home for emergency. Again came back to US using B1/B2. After I came back, we got a RFE asking for the new I-94. Then, my H1 was approved around November 2006 but only started getting paid around May 2007 (after I got a client).
If asked during the interview, when I started working? Should I answer November 2006 (when my H1 visa was approved) or May 2007 (when I started getting paid bec I got a client)?
2) Late last year we went to Canada and our I-94 was not taken from us. We were told that it's because we will be in Canada for few days only. Hence, we dont have a new I-94 in our hands. Currently, we're still holding old I-94. When we filed our I-485, the last entry date we entered was based on the Canada trip so it wont match the date with the old I-94. Will this cause a problem during the interview?
Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks
Here's my situation.
I'm a derivative and recently got an interview notice.
1) My spouse came here with H1 status (without me). Because my spouse's company can only start processing my H4 visa, 3 months after my spouse start date. Since it will be difficult for us to be thousands of miles away, we decided to use my tourist visa and come here so that I can join my spouse. So, I came here initially in B1/B2 status (around February 2006). After 3 months (around May 2006), I got a job offer from one company and was willing to sponsor my H1 visa. During the H1 processing, I had to go back home for emergency. Again came back to US using B1/B2. After I came back, we got a RFE asking for the new I-94. Then, my H1 was approved around November 2006 but only started getting paid around May 2007 (after I got a client).
If asked during the interview, when I started working? Should I answer November 2006 (when my H1 visa was approved) or May 2007 (when I started getting paid bec I got a client)?
2) Late last year we went to Canada and our I-94 was not taken from us. We were told that it's because we will be in Canada for few days only. Hence, we dont have a new I-94 in our hands. Currently, we're still holding old I-94. When we filed our I-485, the last entry date we entered was based on the Canada trip so it wont match the date with the old I-94. Will this cause a problem during the interview?
Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks
summitpointe
02-20 11:53 AM
How can you use I-140 from Company A and 485 from Company B. I think you can't do it.
But I think you can use AC21 with Company B as 180 days has crossed after filing 485 and your I-140 is pending. This is very risky.
I would suggest you to consult an Attorney before taking any decision.
But I think you can use AC21 with Company B as 180 days has crossed after filing 485 and your I-140 is pending. This is very risky.
I would suggest you to consult an Attorney before taking any decision.
2011 short hair styles for women.
GreeNever
02-08 02:46 PM
I..sort of have turned philosophical abt the whole process. Having said that, I also see bright flashes off and on...(just kiddin'). I talk optimism, walk optimism, eat optimism, sleep optimism :) ..ends here!.
If all that it takes is - a copy of our presentation to be mailed/emailed to this 'super cop' of a minister or his office, I would still do it. That way, I have at least challenged him..
If all that it takes is - a copy of our presentation to be mailed/emailed to this 'super cop' of a minister or his office, I would still do it. That way, I have at least challenged him..
more...
cox
May 25th, 2005, 07:00 PM
You also might try a less busy background - the stripes are a little distracting. You could fuzz them with a wider aperture (a 50mm f/1.8 is cheap and good for portraits or when out shooting random subjects). Have you tried converting this one to B&W? Sometimes that's more pleasing with high contrast.
mallickarjunreddy
07-05 04:43 PM
labor Substitution ....Heloooo!!!!
Hey its give and take rite , if he bought the labor and or abused the system
it was there to be abused , i know gaziiilllion other people who bought labor and now have GC so dont go after this guy if u want go after the ones who provide such kinda services viz a viz desi employers who by the way are laughing all the way to the bank
Hey its give and take rite , if he bought the labor and or abused the system
it was there to be abused , i know gaziiilllion other people who bought labor and now have GC so dont go after this guy if u want go after the ones who provide such kinda services viz a viz desi employers who by the way are laughing all the way to the bank
more...
kmkk2006
04-09 12:07 AM
Hello,
This is my status.
I 140 � Approved in 2006 and have a copy.
I 485 � Filed in Jul 2007, Receipt date Jul 02, 2007. Have copy of I 485 receipt.
Perm Labor � Have perm labor approval copy.
Since it has been more than 180 days I 485 is pending and I 140 also approved, I joined my client. Now my old employer says he will withdraw my I 140.
I would like to send AC21 job change info to USCIS my self.
Please let me know if any one is in the same situation and filed (informed) AC21 by yourself.
And also advice if anyone used new attorney only for AC21.
Thanks.
This is my status.
I 140 � Approved in 2006 and have a copy.
I 485 � Filed in Jul 2007, Receipt date Jul 02, 2007. Have copy of I 485 receipt.
Perm Labor � Have perm labor approval copy.
Since it has been more than 180 days I 485 is pending and I 140 also approved, I joined my client. Now my old employer says he will withdraw my I 140.
I would like to send AC21 job change info to USCIS my self.
Please let me know if any one is in the same situation and filed (informed) AC21 by yourself.
And also advice if anyone used new attorney only for AC21.
Thanks.
2010 current hairstyles for women.
Blog Feeds
04-26 11:30 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
All eyes are on Governor Jan Brewer today.
On her desk is SB 1070, an anti-immigrant bill which would effectively make all Latinos the target of arrest or interrogation, whether or not they are U.S. citizens, lawful immigrants, or undocumented foreign nationals. Indeed, such a hate-motivated bill may well compel all Latinos to pack up and leave the state. Brewer's choice is clear to anyone who cherishes freedom and democracy�veto SB 1070, and toss it into the dust bin of history where it belongs, together with Jim Crow, the Nazi Nuremberg laws, and South African Apartheid.
But, believe it or not, the Governor is actually considering signing this venomous bill into law. Last night, in yet another surreal Arizona moment Governor Brewer addressed the 41st annual Chicanos Por La Causa anniversary dinner amid calls in the audience for her to veto SB 1070 and surrounded by protesters that chanted and marched outside the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown Hotel where the dinner was held. At the dinner, organization board chairwoman Erica Gonzalez-Melendez urged Brewer to veto "the most hateful piece of legislation directed at Latinos" aptly pointing out that SB 1070 will do nothing to fix our broken immigration system and only "panders to the racist fear mongers of our state." But, Governor Brewer refused to say what she would do, invoking political-speak instead, "I am not prepared to announce a decision on Senate Bill 1070," she said. "What I decide will be based on what's right for Arizona." http://bit.ly/96KJlT. (Note to reader: there have been several surreal moments in Arizona this week. On Monday Senator John McCain, who once described himself as a "maverick" and champion of comprehensive immigration reform, told Fox News host Bill O'Reilly that "the drivers of cars with illegals in it ... are intentionally causing accidents on the freeway." Then on Tuesday an Arizona state House committee approved a measure which would force President Obama to show his birth certificate if he runs for re-election. http://huff.to/9bfpzg)
What is right for Arizona is for Governor Brewer to jealously protect the rights of all its citizens and follow the U.S. Constitution, not turn Arizona into the Fourth Reich. Let's be frank, by passing SB 1070 lawmakers have sold out Arizona taxpayers in a cynical effort to garner votes and look tough. The bill does nothing to build a functional immigration system, secure the border nor rid the state of dangerous criminals. Nor does it protect the wages and working conditions of US workers. Instead, it targets day laborers and ordinary citizens whose appearance might raise "reasonable suspicion" of unlawful immigration status in the mind of a police officer. If Governor Brewer signs SB 1070, people in Arizona with foreign sounding accents or who don't "look American" had better not run into the wrong cop (or even the right cop) because the law mandates they prove they are here legally.
SB 1070 is not the product thoughtful policy making; it is hate speech masquerading as legislation. This sounds extreme until you read SB 1070 which is a hodgepodge of mean spirited provisions that will effectively transform Arizona into a police state for anyone whose skin is a shade other than white. The bill's effect may very well be to make Arizona "Latino Free" and force those who stay behind�U.S. citizens included�to feel like hunted criminals. Frankly, there is no other way to describe SB 1070 which would make not having immigration documents a state crime, allow law enforcement officers to arrest anyone who could not immediately prove they were in the U.S. legally, and subject a brown-skinned person who leaves home without a wallet to arrest. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles was hardly exaggerating when he compared SB 1070 to "German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques whereby people are required to turn one another in to the authorities on any suspicion of documentation." http://bit.ly/9ZIQ9K.
SB 1070's outright decimation of civil liberties and American values aside, Governor Brewer's signature on the bill will likely reek economic devastation on Arizona, costing its taxpayers billions in lost revenue. The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) reported this week that "if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them. The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002, the last year for which data is available. The Perryman Group estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well." And this loss of revenue to the hard working taxpayers of Arizona does not take into account the cost of defending the inevitable lawsuits that will be brought against the state for civil rights and other violations. According to the IPC, "Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted" leading to millions of dollars in expenditures. http://bit.ly/dbguDK.
As I wrote previously on this blog, SB 1070 is not the problem. It is an awful symptom of the failure of the Administration and Congress to enact immigration reform. In the void, local and state authorities have run roughshod over the civil liberties we cherish as a nation. What we see today is a perfect storm of crises�ICE's neglect and abuse of immigrant detainees which has culminated in 107 deaths in immigration detention since 2003, the serious civil rights abuses in the notorious 287(g) program which is administered by ICE and "deputizes" state and local law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration law, and an immigration bureaucracy that thumbs its nose at the needs of American business and families. As a nation we must demand that Congress and the Administration put politics aside and get to the hard work of building a safe, orderly, fair, and functional immigration policy designed to protect civil liberties and serve the needs of all Americans.
As for today, Governor Brewer has a choice. She can succumb to hatred and fear by signing SB 1070 or allowing it to become law without her signature (it is hard to say which would be more cowardly). Or she can show uncommon political courage and veto the bill, thereby drawing a line in the Arizona desert over which racism, intolerance, and injustice dare not cross.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3162775922361590244?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/04/arizona-governor-jan-brewers-choice.html)
All eyes are on Governor Jan Brewer today.
On her desk is SB 1070, an anti-immigrant bill which would effectively make all Latinos the target of arrest or interrogation, whether or not they are U.S. citizens, lawful immigrants, or undocumented foreign nationals. Indeed, such a hate-motivated bill may well compel all Latinos to pack up and leave the state. Brewer's choice is clear to anyone who cherishes freedom and democracy�veto SB 1070, and toss it into the dust bin of history where it belongs, together with Jim Crow, the Nazi Nuremberg laws, and South African Apartheid.
But, believe it or not, the Governor is actually considering signing this venomous bill into law. Last night, in yet another surreal Arizona moment Governor Brewer addressed the 41st annual Chicanos Por La Causa anniversary dinner amid calls in the audience for her to veto SB 1070 and surrounded by protesters that chanted and marched outside the Sheraton Phoenix Downtown Hotel where the dinner was held. At the dinner, organization board chairwoman Erica Gonzalez-Melendez urged Brewer to veto "the most hateful piece of legislation directed at Latinos" aptly pointing out that SB 1070 will do nothing to fix our broken immigration system and only "panders to the racist fear mongers of our state." But, Governor Brewer refused to say what she would do, invoking political-speak instead, "I am not prepared to announce a decision on Senate Bill 1070," she said. "What I decide will be based on what's right for Arizona." http://bit.ly/96KJlT. (Note to reader: there have been several surreal moments in Arizona this week. On Monday Senator John McCain, who once described himself as a "maverick" and champion of comprehensive immigration reform, told Fox News host Bill O'Reilly that "the drivers of cars with illegals in it ... are intentionally causing accidents on the freeway." Then on Tuesday an Arizona state House committee approved a measure which would force President Obama to show his birth certificate if he runs for re-election. http://huff.to/9bfpzg)
What is right for Arizona is for Governor Brewer to jealously protect the rights of all its citizens and follow the U.S. Constitution, not turn Arizona into the Fourth Reich. Let's be frank, by passing SB 1070 lawmakers have sold out Arizona taxpayers in a cynical effort to garner votes and look tough. The bill does nothing to build a functional immigration system, secure the border nor rid the state of dangerous criminals. Nor does it protect the wages and working conditions of US workers. Instead, it targets day laborers and ordinary citizens whose appearance might raise "reasonable suspicion" of unlawful immigration status in the mind of a police officer. If Governor Brewer signs SB 1070, people in Arizona with foreign sounding accents or who don't "look American" had better not run into the wrong cop (or even the right cop) because the law mandates they prove they are here legally.
SB 1070 is not the product thoughtful policy making; it is hate speech masquerading as legislation. This sounds extreme until you read SB 1070 which is a hodgepodge of mean spirited provisions that will effectively transform Arizona into a police state for anyone whose skin is a shade other than white. The bill's effect may very well be to make Arizona "Latino Free" and force those who stay behind�U.S. citizens included�to feel like hunted criminals. Frankly, there is no other way to describe SB 1070 which would make not having immigration documents a state crime, allow law enforcement officers to arrest anyone who could not immediately prove they were in the U.S. legally, and subject a brown-skinned person who leaves home without a wallet to arrest. Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles was hardly exaggerating when he compared SB 1070 to "German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques whereby people are required to turn one another in to the authorities on any suspicion of documentation." http://bit.ly/9ZIQ9K.
SB 1070's outright decimation of civil liberties and American values aside, Governor Brewer's signature on the bill will likely reek economic devastation on Arizona, costing its taxpayers billions in lost revenue. The Immigration Policy Center (IPC) reported this week that "if significant numbers of immigrants and Latinos are actually persuaded to leave the state because of this new law, they will take their tax dollars, businesses, and purchasing power with them. The University of Arizona's Udall Center for Studies in Public Policy estimates that the total economic output attributable to Arizona's immigrant workers was $44 billion in 2004, which sustained roughly 400,000 full-time jobs. Furthermore, over 35,000 businesses in Arizona are Latino-owned and had sales and receipts of $4.3 billion and employed 39,363 people in 2002, the last year for which data is available. The Perryman Group estimates that if all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Arizona, the state would lose $26.4 billion in economic activity, $11.7 billion in gross state product, and approximately 140,324 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time. Putting economic contributions of this magnitude at risk during a time of recession would not serve Arizona well." And this loss of revenue to the hard working taxpayers of Arizona does not take into account the cost of defending the inevitable lawsuits that will be brought against the state for civil rights and other violations. According to the IPC, "Arizona would probably face a costly slew of lawsuits on behalf of legal immigrants and native-born Latinos who feel they have been unjustly targeted" leading to millions of dollars in expenditures. http://bit.ly/dbguDK.
As I wrote previously on this blog, SB 1070 is not the problem. It is an awful symptom of the failure of the Administration and Congress to enact immigration reform. In the void, local and state authorities have run roughshod over the civil liberties we cherish as a nation. What we see today is a perfect storm of crises�ICE's neglect and abuse of immigrant detainees which has culminated in 107 deaths in immigration detention since 2003, the serious civil rights abuses in the notorious 287(g) program which is administered by ICE and "deputizes" state and local law enforcement agencies to enforce immigration law, and an immigration bureaucracy that thumbs its nose at the needs of American business and families. As a nation we must demand that Congress and the Administration put politics aside and get to the hard work of building a safe, orderly, fair, and functional immigration policy designed to protect civil liberties and serve the needs of all Americans.
As for today, Governor Brewer has a choice. She can succumb to hatred and fear by signing SB 1070 or allowing it to become law without her signature (it is hard to say which would be more cowardly). Or she can show uncommon political courage and veto the bill, thereby drawing a line in the Arizona desert over which racism, intolerance, and injustice dare not cross.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-3162775922361590244?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/04/arizona-governor-jan-brewers-choice.html)
more...
bigboy007
11-23 09:59 AM
do we need a UK visa even if we have a valid stamped US passport?
nope... but what do you mean by "Stamped US Passport"
nope... but what do you mean by "Stamped US Passport"
hair latest curly hairstyles
Britsabroad
December 2nd, 2008, 06:34 PM
Hey Ed - I chickened out on the Abes deal after reading the reviews - sounds like they make you work hard for your discount. If you went for it, let me know the outcome.
So what made you switch?
Well... A friend of mine has a photography business and uses Nikon kit. For a long time I have been impressed by her out of the camera images (color and skin tones), particularly flash shots. She was achieving good looking images with far less processing than me. Her nikon zooms were great wide open too - mine were just OK (on a 20d) I was hoping that Canon would take a hint, & come up with a feature set to compete with the d300. They didnt do it, so I jumped ship!
So what made you switch?
Well... A friend of mine has a photography business and uses Nikon kit. For a long time I have been impressed by her out of the camera images (color and skin tones), particularly flash shots. She was achieving good looking images with far less processing than me. Her nikon zooms were great wide open too - mine were just OK (on a 20d) I was hoping that Canon would take a hint, & come up with a feature set to compete with the d300. They didnt do it, so I jumped ship!
more...
CADude
07-31 10:27 PM
Mailroom indeed has to check all the documents(after cutting envelope from 3 sides, per operating manual). if clerk is not able to findout our checks then we are out of luck. wait for PD has to be current and refile.
Are you sure about this ? i heard that we can refile with proper quotes saying a filing fee was indeed issued etc ? any comments please?
Are you sure about this ? i heard that we can refile with proper quotes saying a filing fee was indeed issued etc ? any comments please?
hot short hairstyles celebrities
webm
04-10 11:42 AM
AFAIK it's not published yet. Also it's two years extension which is under review not three years.
Good luck
No, its 3 year proposed and still under review...:)
Good luck
No, its 3 year proposed and still under review...:)
more...
house long style haircuts for women.
sdrblr
02-04 08:52 AM
My experience says dont worry unless someone else comes back and say they had issues with different A#s on 140 and 485. I had applied for EAD and AP on the A# of 485 and was approved. Finally my GC has the A# on 485.
Eventually it is your call.
What does your attorney say?
Eventually it is your call.
What does your attorney say?
tattoo latest short hairstyles for
Googler
02-20 08:15 PM
Just food for thought. At this time there are 28600 EB1 visas. Most in the EB1 category are current or pretty close to it.
As a matter of fact, EB-1 annual limit = 28.6% of 140K = 40,040 and it has been current for a while.
As a matter of fact, EB-1 annual limit = 28.6% of 140K = 40,040 and it has been current for a while.
more...
pictures current hairstyles for women.
JunRN
12-17 06:59 PM
What was your status when you filed? H1 or L1 or F1? Have you filed before and got rejected? Were you in deportation proceedings before?
Is your PD current in June?
Is your PD current in June?
dresses hairstyles hair up. and hair
kondur_007
10-16 04:10 PM
My current employer gurantee that he will not withdraw I-140. I also talked to lawyer and she said it is individual choice but it is always good to let USCIS know since your case is pending..
However, I am little nervous since I heard that USCIS is rejecting I-485 for straight forward AC21 cases. Can't really think which way should go?
Thank you for your replies and interest.
If you do not plan to return to the original employer after GC approval; you have to use AC 21. (otherwise it will be problem in future).
However, "using AC21" does not require you to send anything to USCIS (although you CAN send); what would be needed at minimum is some documentation that justifies the "same or similar" occupation and wages. Now you can have this documentation with your lawyer and never send it to USCIS (unless asked for) or you can file it with USCIS (and in that case it gets lost in 90% cases as their mailroom does not know what to do with it). Having this documentation will help you in future if there is a question why you did not work for the sponsoring employer after GC approval.
See my comments in following thread as well:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22051
Hope this clarifies things.
Good Luck.
However, I am little nervous since I heard that USCIS is rejecting I-485 for straight forward AC21 cases. Can't really think which way should go?
Thank you for your replies and interest.
If you do not plan to return to the original employer after GC approval; you have to use AC 21. (otherwise it will be problem in future).
However, "using AC21" does not require you to send anything to USCIS (although you CAN send); what would be needed at minimum is some documentation that justifies the "same or similar" occupation and wages. Now you can have this documentation with your lawyer and never send it to USCIS (unless asked for) or you can file it with USCIS (and in that case it gets lost in 90% cases as their mailroom does not know what to do with it). Having this documentation will help you in future if there is a question why you did not work for the sponsoring employer after GC approval.
See my comments in following thread as well:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22051
Hope this clarifies things.
Good Luck.
more...
makeup hairstyles for long hair
Queen Josephine
May 25th, 2005, 09:45 PM
You also might try a less busy background - the stripes are a little distracting. You could fuzz them with a wider aperture (a 50mm f/1.8 is cheap and good for portraits or when out shooting random subjects). Have you tried converting this one to B&W? Sometimes that's more pleasing with high contrast.
Agree with Cox about the background.... I kept thinking that what thing in the upper right corner was a hat!
Agree with Cox about the background.... I kept thinking that what thing in the upper right corner was a hat!
girlfriend short hair styles 2011. short
.jpg "women. stylish hairstyles")
gcdreamer05
12-02 10:31 AM
Mine is pending in CSC since April 2008. My husband's extension was applied in July, and it came through in September. But mine is delayed like crazy. Processing date last month was June 16 or something. We have filed SR on Oct 28, but there hasnt been any updates until now.
Bottom line, USCIS=random!
Could you please share how you filed SR, my h1 extn is pending for 92 days.
Bottom line, USCIS=random!
Could you please share how you filed SR, my h1 extn is pending for 92 days.
hairstyles Latest Black Hairstyles Asian
anilkumar0902
08-26 11:59 PM
got similar RFE
for application original signature
identity documents
i efiled my 765 and on aug 3rd i got my rfe , i took print out of efiled copy signed it and wrote a cover letter and attached ead copy,ssn copy and passport copy
and sent it.
they received my response but havent updated my case yet...waiting for it..
please let me know anyone else has similar issues and what was the result..
These days...the status online remains in Reponse received for RFE...once the service center reviews your response..they usually respond back. If you are getting into a job loss risk due to the lack of EAD, then you should create an expedite SR.
Cheers
for application original signature
identity documents
i efiled my 765 and on aug 3rd i got my rfe , i took print out of efiled copy signed it and wrote a cover letter and attached ead copy,ssn copy and passport copy
and sent it.
they received my response but havent updated my case yet...waiting for it..
please let me know anyone else has similar issues and what was the result..
These days...the status online remains in Reponse received for RFE...once the service center reviews your response..they usually respond back. If you are getting into a job loss risk due to the lack of EAD, then you should create an expedite SR.
Cheers
kaisersose
06-16 12:57 PM
She can make all the recommendations she wants, but the decision lies with your employer.
Obviously, no employer can plan to retain his employees forever. It is a fact of life that people move on. So the basic question is, does your employer have problems with you quitting? What is his expectation? You will have to have a clear discussion with him and then see what he needs.
Now if his demands are unreasonable, then you can still move on anyway as you are protected due to 180 days passing since 485 filing. Technically, you do not need your 140 copy. Al you really need is evidence that you were with the sponsoring employer for 180 days after 485 filing. This evidence will be your 485 receipt and paystubs.
Obviously, no employer can plan to retain his employees forever. It is a fact of life that people move on. So the basic question is, does your employer have problems with you quitting? What is his expectation? You will have to have a clear discussion with him and then see what he needs.
Now if his demands are unreasonable, then you can still move on anyway as you are protected due to 180 days passing since 485 filing. Technically, you do not need your 140 copy. Al you really need is evidence that you were with the sponsoring employer for 180 days after 485 filing. This evidence will be your 485 receipt and paystubs.
krishmunn
09-17 12:08 PM
I had applied for an extension for my parents, just a month before their I-94 was about to end. According to the law (as per my attorney, forums, Internet), they could stay here legally until a decision is made, which may be past the I-94 expiration.
So, in your case, if the decision is Positive, then they can stay until the new I-94 date that USCIS gives them. However, if the decision is Negative, then they have 30 days from the date of the decision to leave the country without being deported.
Hope this helps...
If the extension is denied the person falls out of status immediately and the visa get voided.
Check this from Murthy Chat (answered by Attorney Murthy) --
MurthyDotCom : MurthyChat - Search Transcripts (http://www.murthy.com/chatdb.asp?sFor=extension&Category=visitusa&B1=Search)
Question: Our B-2 extension was denied and the denial letter was received after I-94 departure date. We have a 10-year multiple-entry visitors" visa. Should we apply for the visa again?
Answer: The B-2 visa stamp would remain valid if one departed prior to the receipt of the denial. If the person remained in the U.S., awaiting the decision, then s/he is out of status and unlawfully present as of the date of the extension denial. This would void the individual"s multiple-entry B-2 visitor"s visa in the passport, and require a new visa application at the U.S. consulate abroad in the person"s home country for the next trip to the U.S. This is under section 222(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. If there was a timely departure prior to the decision, the individual attempting to return to the U.S. later, and wishing to use that B-2 stamp, needs to show maintenance of valid B-2 status in the U.S. and proof of departure before the denial decision by the USCIS, by submitting a copy of the airline ticket, boarding card, and other details at the time of all future entries into the U.S. in such a situation.Mar-15-2010.
So, in your case, if the decision is Positive, then they can stay until the new I-94 date that USCIS gives them. However, if the decision is Negative, then they have 30 days from the date of the decision to leave the country without being deported.
Hope this helps...
If the extension is denied the person falls out of status immediately and the visa get voided.
Check this from Murthy Chat (answered by Attorney Murthy) --
MurthyDotCom : MurthyChat - Search Transcripts (http://www.murthy.com/chatdb.asp?sFor=extension&Category=visitusa&B1=Search)
Question: Our B-2 extension was denied and the denial letter was received after I-94 departure date. We have a 10-year multiple-entry visitors" visa. Should we apply for the visa again?
Answer: The B-2 visa stamp would remain valid if one departed prior to the receipt of the denial. If the person remained in the U.S., awaiting the decision, then s/he is out of status and unlawfully present as of the date of the extension denial. This would void the individual"s multiple-entry B-2 visitor"s visa in the passport, and require a new visa application at the U.S. consulate abroad in the person"s home country for the next trip to the U.S. This is under section 222(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. If there was a timely departure prior to the decision, the individual attempting to return to the U.S. later, and wishing to use that B-2 stamp, needs to show maintenance of valid B-2 status in the U.S. and proof of departure before the denial decision by the USCIS, by submitting a copy of the airline ticket, boarding card, and other details at the time of all future entries into the U.S. in such a situation.Mar-15-2010.
0 comments:
Post a Comment