permfiling
09-08 11:42 PM
Permfiling,
Your response to this post is harsh/mean.
Can you give a single reason why not these guys shouldn't port or stick with their EB-2 priority date?
We should wish EB-3 dates also move and the guys get their GC before porting EB-3 to EB-2, otherwise EB-2 will retrogress (that�s the truth) and those are eligible to port will do it.
Frostrated,
It seems you missed the step of porting while filing I-140 (EB-2). Now, ask your attorney about the options.
My response is not supposed to be mean. I too wish that eb3 progresses. Well if by all means go ahead and do the process if the law permits but won't those cases get more complex?
The lawyers are hungry to get more $$$ as the case is complex and the processing as well.
member of North California Chapter
Donated $500 to IV
EB2 PD 2005
Your response to this post is harsh/mean.
Can you give a single reason why not these guys shouldn't port or stick with their EB-2 priority date?
We should wish EB-3 dates also move and the guys get their GC before porting EB-3 to EB-2, otherwise EB-2 will retrogress (that�s the truth) and those are eligible to port will do it.
Frostrated,
It seems you missed the step of porting while filing I-140 (EB-2). Now, ask your attorney about the options.
My response is not supposed to be mean. I too wish that eb3 progresses. Well if by all means go ahead and do the process if the law permits but won't those cases get more complex?
The lawyers are hungry to get more $$$ as the case is complex and the processing as well.
member of North California Chapter
Donated $500 to IV
EB2 PD 2005
GCeffect
02-09 05:22 AM
Last week i received a RFE against my I485 application. My PD is not current yet. I''m kind of confused about the RFE. I need some help from you guys...
Check out the RFE letter comment at the following:
"""""USCIS records indicate that you began your employment with compnay A in October 2005. However, the record indicates that the i-129, H1b, granting your authorization to work for company A was not filed until aug, 2006. Submit documentatary evidence that you were authorized to work for compnay A when you began your employment in Oct 2005.""""
Now let me explain my situation.
I had my first H1b from compnay B, for three years (oct 2002 to oct 2005). Then I started my renewed my H1b under another company C. (oct/2005 to oct 2008). Then i received my PERM labor from another company A (the company they USCIS mentioned in their RFE). Both the company C and compnay A was owned by one person. So even i was working with the company C, my payroll was under Company A. Right after I received my labor certificate from Compnay A, my lawyer suggested my transfer my H1b from Compnay C to company A. Then i received my h1b approval for compnay A in Jan 2007 to october 2008. In 0ctober 2008 i renewed my h1b from compnay A again for one year. But in november compnay A terminted me and withdraw my H1b. I got a new job and moved to a new compnay in december 2008. Everything is normal after that until i received the RFE. I have to get back to USCIS in by the end of this month with the evidence. I has the legal status all the time i worked for all those companies.
PLease let me know what you guys think about the whole situation.
Thanks ahead about your concern ......
EB3 (ROW)..PD May 2006
Check out the RFE letter comment at the following:
"""""USCIS records indicate that you began your employment with compnay A in October 2005. However, the record indicates that the i-129, H1b, granting your authorization to work for company A was not filed until aug, 2006. Submit documentatary evidence that you were authorized to work for compnay A when you began your employment in Oct 2005.""""
Now let me explain my situation.
I had my first H1b from compnay B, for three years (oct 2002 to oct 2005). Then I started my renewed my H1b under another company C. (oct/2005 to oct 2008). Then i received my PERM labor from another company A (the company they USCIS mentioned in their RFE). Both the company C and compnay A was owned by one person. So even i was working with the company C, my payroll was under Company A. Right after I received my labor certificate from Compnay A, my lawyer suggested my transfer my H1b from Compnay C to company A. Then i received my h1b approval for compnay A in Jan 2007 to october 2008. In 0ctober 2008 i renewed my h1b from compnay A again for one year. But in november compnay A terminted me and withdraw my H1b. I got a new job and moved to a new compnay in december 2008. Everything is normal after that until i received the RFE. I have to get back to USCIS in by the end of this month with the evidence. I has the legal status all the time i worked for all those companies.
PLease let me know what you guys think about the whole situation.
Thanks ahead about your concern ......
EB3 (ROW)..PD May 2006
smiledentist
06-21 11:16 AM
anyone
.jpg "Ne-Yo - One In a Million")
Siddharta
03-13 01:43 AM
Agree with you Infinite_Patience_GC.......for desis I would not recommend doing a full time MBA unless you get into top 10. Foreign students are having a hard time finding a job even at top 10 schools these days.
Although one good thing about part time is that it is less risky and usually lot of big companies help in reimbursing some of the tuition.
Although one good thing about part time is that it is less risky and usually lot of big companies help in reimbursing some of the tuition.
more...
EndlessWait
05-21 01:35 PM
cmon anyone?? should IV contact Indian govt. Its now or never guys
dan19
08-22 03:23 PM
Hello EB2ToEB3
Do you remember whether your job requirement specifically asked for BS in CS or just BS in Engineering?
Thanks for your earlier reply.
Dan
I doubt that you need BS in CS. I have a BS degree in Chem engg but recently my I-140 got approved without any issue.
Do you remember whether your job requirement specifically asked for BS in CS or just BS in Engineering?
Thanks for your earlier reply.
Dan
I doubt that you need BS in CS. I have a BS degree in Chem engg but recently my I-140 got approved without any issue.
more...
kondur_007
07-01 03:22 PM
It is a difficult scenario. Chances are that it would be very difficult for your mom to ever prectice in US (not to discourage, but tell you the fact).
first one has to pass USMLE step 1, Step 2 (CK and CS) and get ECFMG certification (info at ECFMG� | Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (http://www.ecfmg.org))
Then apply for residency and get into the residency (which is extremely competitive, requires high USMLE scores and reference letters and if you are old grade, many programs do not consider you).
Then Do the three/four year residency and pass USMLE step 3, get the license.
Absolutely no way to practice medicine unless she goes through above path (experience and training in india does not matter; only thing that will matter is her MBBS (if from regonized college there) which will allow her to sit for USMLE).
Many doctors in your mom's situation come here and do some paramedical job (phelbotomist, physical therapist etc).
Good Luck.
first one has to pass USMLE step 1, Step 2 (CK and CS) and get ECFMG certification (info at ECFMG� | Educational Commission for Foreign Medical Graduates (http://www.ecfmg.org))
Then apply for residency and get into the residency (which is extremely competitive, requires high USMLE scores and reference letters and if you are old grade, many programs do not consider you).
Then Do the three/four year residency and pass USMLE step 3, get the license.
Absolutely no way to practice medicine unless she goes through above path (experience and training in india does not matter; only thing that will matter is her MBBS (if from regonized college there) which will allow her to sit for USMLE).
Many doctors in your mom's situation come here and do some paramedical job (phelbotomist, physical therapist etc).
Good Luck.
martinvisalaw
08-17 07:22 PM
It seems as per the new DOL Requirements two notices has to be posted at two locations ( One at Employers office and one at the client location. U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) regulations requires that a Posting Notice be posted within your organization in two conspicuous locations for 10 consecutive business days)
As this H1-B posting info might contain the salary details etc. What happens if the client policies doesn't allow posting such notices ?? so what other options are available in such a case..
The DOL requirements are not new, it's just that the method for filing the LCA is new. The employer has always needed to post the LCA, including salary information. This is not optional, so if the employer refuses, there can be no H-1B.
As this H1-B posting info might contain the salary details etc. What happens if the client policies doesn't allow posting such notices ?? so what other options are available in such a case..
The DOL requirements are not new, it's just that the method for filing the LCA is new. The employer has always needed to post the LCA, including salary information. This is not optional, so if the employer refuses, there can be no H-1B.
more...
Asian
07-19 09:39 AM
Well, some people think it is of no use trying to predict anything. I have a slightly different opinion. If I had known this kind of thing could happen to me eight years ago (or at least five years ago), I definitely have chosen a different path. The same thing applies to now. If I could have a glimpse of five years from now, I might choose a different path.
Predictions work if it is based upon reasonable data and calculations. I think it would be actually humane of USIC if it could supply more statistical data about the number of applicants they are getting and the rate they are processing or even the projection of cut off dates for next two years. Of course we will not blame them if it deviates. They can simply say it is subject to change to avoid any legal complications. They are the organization that has most information after all. I think it is something we can suggest to law makers, too. Nobody likes surprises anymore in modern life. The more we can see the future, the better decision we can make and the less time we lose in vain.
I am not saying we can be negligent for necessary law changes but we have to think of various scenarios with probabilities.
I am also thinking IV core members may have a better statistical data from the members. These statistical data are actually very important if we use them well. ( I am not saying exposing private info.) The numbers talk louder than words. The same rule applies to law makers as well.
Predictions work if it is based upon reasonable data and calculations. I think it would be actually humane of USIC if it could supply more statistical data about the number of applicants they are getting and the rate they are processing or even the projection of cut off dates for next two years. Of course we will not blame them if it deviates. They can simply say it is subject to change to avoid any legal complications. They are the organization that has most information after all. I think it is something we can suggest to law makers, too. Nobody likes surprises anymore in modern life. The more we can see the future, the better decision we can make and the less time we lose in vain.
I am not saying we can be negligent for necessary law changes but we have to think of various scenarios with probabilities.
I am also thinking IV core members may have a better statistical data from the members. These statistical data are actually very important if we use them well. ( I am not saying exposing private info.) The numbers talk louder than words. The same rule applies to law makers as well.
sukhyani
01-27 11:43 PM
These are minor things, although annoying, but I wouldn't worry about them. I guess it's just your GC interview. The good thing is that they are processing your case. I would suggest taking your lawyer with you. When is your interview? Just curious what is the time frame. Good luck.
Thanks
Interview is scheduled during the first week of March.
Thanks
Interview is scheduled during the first week of March.
more...
PDOCT05
10-29 12:32 PM
Pls check the fees to be sent with new application, you might have to send the new fees. consult your lawyer
Thanks much for all your suggestions..i will inform lawyer about this.,
Thanks much for all your suggestions..i will inform lawyer about this.,
priderock
09-17 03:21 PM
Looks like no one is accepting my apologies :( maybe they will all come to DC and beat me up instead
That means no one was really offended by you. :)
You did well.
That means no one was really offended by you. :)
You did well.
more...
chanduv23
10-30 03:19 PM
Some pics and videos are available at
http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com
http://www2.snapfish.com/share/p=967...=SYE/otsi=SALB
more to follow.
http://immigrationvoice.blogspot.com
http://www2.snapfish.com/share/p=967...=SYE/otsi=SALB
more to follow.
ajay
12-23 08:34 PM
I joined another employer on H1b this May. I did not use my EAD since I wanted to maintain my H1 status. My employer is willing to support my I485 but I have not informed the USCIS about my change yet.
more...
maheshf
10-10 02:09 PM
Don�t worry. You will be in a good shape if you had your AP. I just came back from France and Switzerland. Both countries gave me Visa on AP, employment letter. The process was lot smoother than I expected. I will recommend that go ahead and apply..notthing to loose.
soarin3655
04-08 02:41 PM
US taxman gets after Indian-Americans - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/nri/news/US-taxman-gets-after-Indian-Americans/articleshow/7915510.cms)
US taxman gets after Indian-Americans
Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN | Apr 8, 2011, 09.40pm IST
On Thursday, the US govt filed a petition with the court to allow the IRS to serve what is known as a "John Doe" summons on HSBC Bank.
WASHINGTON: When you do a good deed, get a receipt, just in case heaven is like the IRS, goes the sagely tax advice in America. Some 9000 Indian-Americans are about to discover that tales of the dreaded Internal Revenue Service's omnipresence are not entirely exaggerated.
While millions of Americans are sweating it out to file their tax returns before the April 15 deadline, Uncle Sam's taxman has zeroed in wealthy Indian-Americans suspected of using their native land to stash away undeclared money and evade taxes. Yes; while India has long believed its wealthy has stashed away money abroad, the wheel has turned a full circle. The US now says its Indian-American citizens are using India as a tax haven.
In a surprising move that takes the American hunt for hidden money beyond the usual Swiss and Caribbean tax havens, the US Justice Department's civil tax division on Thursday asked a Federal Court's permission to force the London-based HSBC Bank to disclose names of thousands of wealthy Indian-American clients who it says maintain accounts with more than $ 100,000 in the bank's India branches -- ostensibly to hide it from the IRS taxman.
In a 47-page statement filed before a San Francisco court, the IRS said there were 9,000 US residents of Indian-origin who had $100,000-minimum-balance accounts at HSBC India but that fewer than 1,400 had disclosed existence of their accounts. US laws require citizens to disclose any foreign account containing $10,000 or more.
The US hunt for Indian-American tax evaders follows a case early this year when federal prosecutors nailed Vaibhav Dahake, a US citizen and an HSBC client for tax evasion by stashing money in India. According to documents filed with the government's petition, on Jan. 26, 2011, a grand jury in Newark, New Jersey, indicted Dahake, charging him with conspiracy to defraud the United States by using undeclared accounts in the British Virgin Islands and at HSBC India.
According to those documents, employees of HSBC Holdings plc and its affiliates operating in the United States assured Dahake that accounts maintained in India would not be reported to the IRS.
US authorities, attributing the information to HSBC's website, say that in 2002 HSBC India opened a "representative office" at an HSBC USA office in New York City to enable ''Non-Resident Indians'' (NRIs) living in the United States to open accounts in India. In 2007, HSBC India allegedly opened a second representative office at an HSBC USA office in Fremont, Calif., purportedly "to make banking transactions more convenient for the NRI community based in California." Although HSBC India closed those offices in June 2010, the government alleges that NRI clients may still access their accounts at HSBC India from the United States.
According to the petition documents, NRI clients have told IRS investigators that HSBC's NRI representatives in the United States assured them that they could invest in accounts at HSBC India without paying US income tax on interest earned on the accounts and that HSBC would not report the income earned on the HSBC India accounts to the IRS.
"The Department of Justice is committed to ensuring that all US taxpayers meet their obligations to declare and pay taxes on foreign bank accounts," John A. DiCicco, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Tax Division, said in a statement. "The ability to hide accounts in foreign countries is rapidly dwindling. We will continue working hand-in-hand with the IRS to enforce the tax laws against those who are using offshore accounts � wherever they are located � to evade taxes."
The IRS focus on India and Indian-Americans follows a campaign against undeclared offshore accounts held by US taxpayers, primarily in tax havens such as Switzerland and the Caribbean. In a landmark case in 2009, the IRS went after UBS AG for allowing U.S citizens hide their assets and evade taxes. UBS coughed up $780 million in fines, and more importantly, turned over some 4000 names in a precedent-setting case.
"The IRS continues to focus its attention on international tax evasion," IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman said on Thrusday about the HSBC India case. ''This summons request is focused on obtaining more information to help us determine if additional actions are needed. As I've said all along, our international efforts are not about just one country or one bank � it's about our wider effort to ensure compliance with the nation's tax laws."
Meanwhile, an HSBC spokesperson in New York told wire services that the bank has been engaged in a "constructive dialogue" with US authorities and hoped the issue can be resolved expeditiously. "HSBC does not condone tax evasion and fully supports the US efforts to promote appropriate payment of taxes by US taxpayers," spokeswoman Juanita Gutierrez said, adding that the bank complies with the law in all the jurisdictions and cooperates with requests from US authorities.
US taxman gets after Indian-Americans
Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN | Apr 8, 2011, 09.40pm IST
On Thursday, the US govt filed a petition with the court to allow the IRS to serve what is known as a "John Doe" summons on HSBC Bank.
WASHINGTON: When you do a good deed, get a receipt, just in case heaven is like the IRS, goes the sagely tax advice in America. Some 9000 Indian-Americans are about to discover that tales of the dreaded Internal Revenue Service's omnipresence are not entirely exaggerated.
While millions of Americans are sweating it out to file their tax returns before the April 15 deadline, Uncle Sam's taxman has zeroed in wealthy Indian-Americans suspected of using their native land to stash away undeclared money and evade taxes. Yes; while India has long believed its wealthy has stashed away money abroad, the wheel has turned a full circle. The US now says its Indian-American citizens are using India as a tax haven.
In a surprising move that takes the American hunt for hidden money beyond the usual Swiss and Caribbean tax havens, the US Justice Department's civil tax division on Thursday asked a Federal Court's permission to force the London-based HSBC Bank to disclose names of thousands of wealthy Indian-American clients who it says maintain accounts with more than $ 100,000 in the bank's India branches -- ostensibly to hide it from the IRS taxman.
In a 47-page statement filed before a San Francisco court, the IRS said there were 9,000 US residents of Indian-origin who had $100,000-minimum-balance accounts at HSBC India but that fewer than 1,400 had disclosed existence of their accounts. US laws require citizens to disclose any foreign account containing $10,000 or more.
The US hunt for Indian-American tax evaders follows a case early this year when federal prosecutors nailed Vaibhav Dahake, a US citizen and an HSBC client for tax evasion by stashing money in India. According to documents filed with the government's petition, on Jan. 26, 2011, a grand jury in Newark, New Jersey, indicted Dahake, charging him with conspiracy to defraud the United States by using undeclared accounts in the British Virgin Islands and at HSBC India.
According to those documents, employees of HSBC Holdings plc and its affiliates operating in the United States assured Dahake that accounts maintained in India would not be reported to the IRS.
US authorities, attributing the information to HSBC's website, say that in 2002 HSBC India opened a "representative office" at an HSBC USA office in New York City to enable ''Non-Resident Indians'' (NRIs) living in the United States to open accounts in India. In 2007, HSBC India allegedly opened a second representative office at an HSBC USA office in Fremont, Calif., purportedly "to make banking transactions more convenient for the NRI community based in California." Although HSBC India closed those offices in June 2010, the government alleges that NRI clients may still access their accounts at HSBC India from the United States.
According to the petition documents, NRI clients have told IRS investigators that HSBC's NRI representatives in the United States assured them that they could invest in accounts at HSBC India without paying US income tax on interest earned on the accounts and that HSBC would not report the income earned on the HSBC India accounts to the IRS.
"The Department of Justice is committed to ensuring that all US taxpayers meet their obligations to declare and pay taxes on foreign bank accounts," John A. DiCicco, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department's Tax Division, said in a statement. "The ability to hide accounts in foreign countries is rapidly dwindling. We will continue working hand-in-hand with the IRS to enforce the tax laws against those who are using offshore accounts � wherever they are located � to evade taxes."
The IRS focus on India and Indian-Americans follows a campaign against undeclared offshore accounts held by US taxpayers, primarily in tax havens such as Switzerland and the Caribbean. In a landmark case in 2009, the IRS went after UBS AG for allowing U.S citizens hide their assets and evade taxes. UBS coughed up $780 million in fines, and more importantly, turned over some 4000 names in a precedent-setting case.
"The IRS continues to focus its attention on international tax evasion," IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman said on Thrusday about the HSBC India case. ''This summons request is focused on obtaining more information to help us determine if additional actions are needed. As I've said all along, our international efforts are not about just one country or one bank � it's about our wider effort to ensure compliance with the nation's tax laws."
Meanwhile, an HSBC spokesperson in New York told wire services that the bank has been engaged in a "constructive dialogue" with US authorities and hoped the issue can be resolved expeditiously. "HSBC does not condone tax evasion and fully supports the US efforts to promote appropriate payment of taxes by US taxpayers," spokeswoman Juanita Gutierrez said, adding that the bank complies with the law in all the jurisdictions and cooperates with requests from US authorities.
more...
coopheal
11-06 06:57 PM
bump
glus
11-12 10:16 AM
Hi,
I think that DOS, the visa office has the answer. This is insane. According to the 485 report released by USCIS some time ago, there were approximately 4000 ROW EB3 pending cases up with PD of up to 6/2002. As such, the dates should have been moved in December and moved a lot. Yet, they did not move it. I think I am going to write up a letter to Mr. Opperheim, or whatever his name is and ask why he did not move the dates at all.
I think that DOS, the visa office has the answer. This is insane. According to the 485 report released by USCIS some time ago, there were approximately 4000 ROW EB3 pending cases up with PD of up to 6/2002. As such, the dates should have been moved in December and moved a lot. Yet, they did not move it. I think I am going to write up a letter to Mr. Opperheim, or whatever his name is and ask why he did not move the dates at all.
Nikith77
01-20 02:50 PM
LOOKs Goooood
prabasiodia
08-13 07:46 PM
This is the link to USCIS - FBI joint initiative where they plan to clear all the backlog by June 2009 to acceptable limits: http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/NameCheck_2Apr08.pdf
This is the link to Aytes' memo where he directs to approve I-485 if NC Pending > 180 days: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/DOC017.PDF. Unfortunately, the IO officers are oblivious to this memo.
This is the link to Aytes' memo where he directs to approve I-485 if NC Pending > 180 days: http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/DOC017.PDF. Unfortunately, the IO officers are oblivious to this memo.
chakdepatte
05-18 10:08 PM
what are we waiting for. for Chinese bhai to win the case and take EB3-I unused visas ? lets join and file another India EB3-I lawsuit. best way to be heard. ........squirrel.......
No comments:
Post a Comment