anu_t
06-18 11:30 AM
I 'm no expert. But what Veni001 is telling is incorrect. Even though you didn't apply for 485 you still can use that 140 and use that date.
There might be a little problem if the 140 is revoked. But you can certainly try.
There might be a little problem if the 140 is revoked. But you can certainly try.
marlon2006
02-04 09:46 AM
I pray that the DOS advances the cut-off dates and get my I-485 approved by March - because I don't get excited at all by these immigration reform bills. There are 12-25 million illegal aliens in this country. 10,000+ crosses the border on daily basis.
I predict that the USCIS will be very, very busy processing guest-worker permits for all those people and my I-485 process would be put on hold again.
ALAN CHOATE AND TYLER PETERSON - Daily Herald
Congress should move forward on immigration reform now that the U.S. House of Representatives has new leadership, Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, said Friday.
The issue has been stalled, Cannon said, because of a decision by former House majority leader Tom DeLay, the congressman from Texas who has become embroiled in campaign finance scandals.
U.S. Rep. John Boehner of Ohio was picked to replace DeLay as majority leader on Thursday, and immigration legislation is high on his agenda, Cannon told Utah legislators.
He said legislation for a guest worker program should emerge soon that could include requirements for English instruction and health insurance.
"That should be done by, I hope, the end of April," Cannon said.
His comments came in response to a question from state Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, who criticized Congress' "absolute failure" to provide a process for regulating immigrant labor. Cannon also expressed sympathy for the struggles of state legislators who must balance budgets even when the federal government cuts revenue -- for programs like Medicaid, for example -- that had been provided previously.
"The pain of that is great," he said. "I would love to tell you we're never going to cut your budget again."
His proposed solution is to reduce the size and authority of the federal government: "The best way to govern in America is to let the states do it," he said.
Cannon made those comments on the Senate floor after answering three different questions from representatives on the House floor: How do we get the federal government out of our hair? When will federal government allow us to make more decisions on what we fund? and Why is federal government always overriding states' rights?
Cannon said the solution is to keep the money within state budgets, because as long as federal government has it, they share accountability.
He said the will in the U.S. House is to give states more discretion
I predict that the USCIS will be very, very busy processing guest-worker permits for all those people and my I-485 process would be put on hold again.
ALAN CHOATE AND TYLER PETERSON - Daily Herald
Congress should move forward on immigration reform now that the U.S. House of Representatives has new leadership, Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, said Friday.
The issue has been stalled, Cannon said, because of a decision by former House majority leader Tom DeLay, the congressman from Texas who has become embroiled in campaign finance scandals.
U.S. Rep. John Boehner of Ohio was picked to replace DeLay as majority leader on Thursday, and immigration legislation is high on his agenda, Cannon told Utah legislators.
He said legislation for a guest worker program should emerge soon that could include requirements for English instruction and health insurance.
"That should be done by, I hope, the end of April," Cannon said.
His comments came in response to a question from state Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, who criticized Congress' "absolute failure" to provide a process for regulating immigrant labor. Cannon also expressed sympathy for the struggles of state legislators who must balance budgets even when the federal government cuts revenue -- for programs like Medicaid, for example -- that had been provided previously.
"The pain of that is great," he said. "I would love to tell you we're never going to cut your budget again."
His proposed solution is to reduce the size and authority of the federal government: "The best way to govern in America is to let the states do it," he said.
Cannon made those comments on the Senate floor after answering three different questions from representatives on the House floor: How do we get the federal government out of our hair? When will federal government allow us to make more decisions on what we fund? and Why is federal government always overriding states' rights?
Cannon said the solution is to keep the money within state budgets, because as long as federal government has it, they share accountability.
He said the will in the U.S. House is to give states more discretion
gcpain
05-20 03:59 PM
1. If ur attorney is an AILA member, Check ur status through AILA
- My attorney sumited request today. Same time will there be any reference number for this request to ask my attorney? Do you guys know how much long time it takes to get status?
2. Call the USCIS customer service and submit an SR request
- What is USCIS customer service number? what SR request I have to submit? Please elerobate little more.
All you Immigration gurus, please advice. Thanks in advace fot you all.
- My attorney sumited request today. Same time will there be any reference number for this request to ask my attorney? Do you guys know how much long time it takes to get status?
2. Call the USCIS customer service and submit an SR request
- What is USCIS customer service number? what SR request I have to submit? Please elerobate little more.
All you Immigration gurus, please advice. Thanks in advace fot you all.
darslee
07-11 01:35 AM
and not lose focus ;)
more...
Fightwithfate
03-15 12:42 PM
Hi Thank you all,
Today (03/15/2010) my employer got Receipt No mail from VSC. It says that VSC Received date is 03/12/2010 and the count of 15 days will start from 03/12/2010.But FedEx Delivery date is 03/04/2010.
Does they process premium processing like this?
Hi attorneys/seniors,
Getting confused about the online status.
Today morning my employer got mail from VSC saying that their received date is 03/12/2010
Status check online by 10:30 AM(03/15/2010)
Status:Initial Review
Date received shown:03/12/2010
Status check online by 1:00 PM(03/15/2010)
Status:Acceptance
Date received shown:03/15/2010
Status went back from Inital review to Acceptance and date also changed from 03/12/2010 to 03/15/2010.
Got confused.
How it works normally?
Today (03/15/2010) my employer got Receipt No mail from VSC. It says that VSC Received date is 03/12/2010 and the count of 15 days will start from 03/12/2010.But FedEx Delivery date is 03/04/2010.
Does they process premium processing like this?
Hi attorneys/seniors,
Getting confused about the online status.
Today morning my employer got mail from VSC saying that their received date is 03/12/2010
Status check online by 10:30 AM(03/15/2010)
Status:Initial Review
Date received shown:03/12/2010
Status check online by 1:00 PM(03/15/2010)
Status:Acceptance
Date received shown:03/15/2010
Status went back from Inital review to Acceptance and date also changed from 03/12/2010 to 03/15/2010.
Got confused.
How it works normally?
yingli
08-23 10:59 PM
My greencard application has stuck in name checks for 3 years. I recently filed a Writ of Mandamus. Before going to court, U.S. Attorneys filed to dismiss my case, citing that the adjustment of status is discretionary and the FBI can take as long as they want to do background checks.
I am hesitating whether to go ahead with a court hearing. In addition, I am not happy with my current lawyer.
Can someone recommend a good lawyer to me? Many thanks!
YL
I am hesitating whether to go ahead with a court hearing. In addition, I am not happy with my current lawyer.
Can someone recommend a good lawyer to me? Many thanks!
YL
more...
fromnaija
07-26 03:38 AM
Once you get a receipt notice you could send the correct marriage certificate with a letter explaining the mistake. It will probably lead to a RFE and not a rejection.
Just noticed that my lawyer has attached marriage certificate of my co-worker in the dependendent's petition. I am waiting for the receipt.
What are the impacts of this mistake? To compound the issue, my wife is flying out next week for a month to India.
Gurus any answers on this is deeply appreciated.
Just noticed that my lawyer has attached marriage certificate of my co-worker in the dependendent's petition. I am waiting for the receipt.
What are the impacts of this mistake? To compound the issue, my wife is flying out next week for a month to India.
Gurus any answers on this is deeply appreciated.
kshitijnt
03-07 12:49 AM
Hi People,
I have been hearing a few things on the renewal and I cant seem to get a concrete picture here. Would appreciate a look here.
I am applying for an advance parole renewal for my wife, me and her, we did not apply for the GC at the same time, I applied during the hullabaloo July 2007 times under the old fee structure and she was applied later on in the following year 2008 under the new fee structure of $1010 as a derivative under my application. Her I-797 receipt notice indicates that a fee of $1010 was paid out. My I-797 indicates $300 odd as separate fees.
Given the above, is she exempt from paying the $305/$340 for the Advance Parole/EAD. A USCIS agent that I talked to says that anything after July 30th 2007 is exempt but she could well be reading from a piece of paper without actual knowledge of the intricacies. A paralegal at my lawyer's office said that she needs to pay, but somehow I am not convinced.
Would appreciate a little insight here.
Thx,
M
She is exempt. I renewed last year under new fees structure. I got my AP . For this year they did not even give me a receipt. So I am going to have to call USCIS.
I have been hearing a few things on the renewal and I cant seem to get a concrete picture here. Would appreciate a look here.
I am applying for an advance parole renewal for my wife, me and her, we did not apply for the GC at the same time, I applied during the hullabaloo July 2007 times under the old fee structure and she was applied later on in the following year 2008 under the new fee structure of $1010 as a derivative under my application. Her I-797 receipt notice indicates that a fee of $1010 was paid out. My I-797 indicates $300 odd as separate fees.
Given the above, is she exempt from paying the $305/$340 for the Advance Parole/EAD. A USCIS agent that I talked to says that anything after July 30th 2007 is exempt but she could well be reading from a piece of paper without actual knowledge of the intricacies. A paralegal at my lawyer's office said that she needs to pay, but somehow I am not convinced.
Would appreciate a little insight here.
Thx,
M
She is exempt. I renewed last year under new fees structure. I got my AP . For this year they did not even give me a receipt. So I am going to have to call USCIS.
more...
lskreddy
08-14 04:44 PM
Its really requires lot of planning and a tough decision to make. Some of our friends say you get good package if you find the job while you are in US and then go.
It does need planning. I am hoping I could find some opportunities here before I decide to take the 'search in India by being there' route, thus my post to ask folks if they know of any such positions.
It does need planning. I am hoping I could find some opportunities here before I decide to take the 'search in India by being there' route, thus my post to ask folks if they know of any such positions.
sertasheep
05-30 05:14 PM
Thats great news, berkeleybee. You should probably point out that several members may have contributed hundreds or even thousands of dollars,
(including the core team.)
This is a great achievement. I deeply respect the involvement and the efforts of the core team members.
:)
(including the core team.)
This is a great achievement. I deeply respect the involvement and the efforts of the core team members.
:)
more...
me_myself
03-05 01:03 PM
Yes, i will be working in Indian subsidiary for my current employer.
If i am away for 1 year is there a risk of my h1 getting revoked?
If i am away for 1 year is there a risk of my h1 getting revoked?
prout02
07-30 12:26 PM
I have read in this forum frequent questions about this - legality/enforceability of noncompete clause. Here's a recent court decision from Kansas. It talks about physician practices. No idea if it is applicable to other professions. But the four factors cited in the decision seem relevant.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Interestingly, it talks about 8 states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- that have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
Please take it for whatever it's worth.
======================
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2008/08/04/prsa0804.htm
amednews.com
Kansas court enforces noncompete clause
The court looked at a number of factors in weighing the contract's impact on the doctor, the employer and patient care.
By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews staff. Aug. 4, 2008.
A Kansas appeals court recently affirmed the enforceability of noncompete clauses in a ruling that puts the spotlight on issues that can arise in drafting or signing the employment contracts.
Kansas is among a majority of states that consider noncompete clauses legal, with varying case law or statutes as to when and how the provisions can be used. Eight states -- Alabama, California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, North Dakota, Tennessee and Texas -- have been known to outlaw or significantly restrict such clauses.
In June, the Kansas Court of Appeals upheld a contract that restricted a family physician from practicing for three years in the same county as the group she left unless she paid the clinic 25% of her earnings during those three years after her termination.
In its decision, the court analyzed four factors to determine the validity of the contract provision. The court looked at whether the restrictive covenant:
* Protected a legitimate business interest of the employer.
* Created an undue burden on the employee.
* Harmed the public welfare.
* Contained time and geographic limitations that were reasonable.
In upholding the noncompete clause, the court found that Wichita Clinic PA had a legitimate interest in protecting its patient base and the investment it made in establishing the practice of Michelle M. Louis, DO, when she joined the group in 1991. The court said the contract did not unfairly restrict competition or patient access because Dr. Louis had the option to continue practicing in the area, where other family physicians were available.
Gary M. Austerman, Dr. Louis' attorney, said the court essentially ruled that "a contract is a contract" while giving "short shrift" to other concerns, including patient care. Dr. Louis plans to petition the Kansas Supreme Court to take her case.
8 states outlaw or significantly restrict noncompete clauses.
"A doctor's right to practice and continue her relationship with her patients in this case is greater than the employer's right to restrain that right," Austerman said. "Patient choice is affected any time you say you can't take care of patients just because of a business relationship."
Austerman said Wichita Clinic -- a practice of nearly 200 multispecialty physicians -- was not harmed by Dr. Louis' departure, and the contract was aimed at protecting itself from competition rather than protecting patient care. He argued that the 25% damages clause imposed an arbitrary penalty on Dr. Louis and was not intended to apply to the income she would make when she left the clinic in 2004.
AMA policy states that covenants not to compete "restrict competition, disrupt continuity of care and potentially deprive the public of medical services." The AMA discourages any agreement that restricts the right of a physician to practice medicine and considers noncompete clauses unethical if they are excessive in scope.
Striking a balance
Gary L. Ayers, an attorney for Wichita Clinic, said the group's contract struck an appropriate balance.
He said the clinic hired Dr. Louis after she completed her residency and helped set up her practice with an existing source of patient contacts and referrals, and by covering administrative and overhead costs. But if doctors decide to leave and take a portion of their patients with them, the group would lose out financially without some reimbursement arrangement, Ayers said. As a result, patient care would suffer.
Restrictive covenants "allow groups to protect their patient base and in turn give them the ability to grow the practice to provide a vast array of patient services," Ayers said.
Doctors on either side of the negotiating table should consult legal counsel to know where their state stands on enforcing noncompete provisions, said Richard H. Sanders, a Chicago-based health care lawyer with Vedder Price.
Employers drafting contracts should make sure time and distance limitations are reasonable and reflect where the practice draws its patient base from, he said. On the flip side, individual doctors should not hesitate to negotiate and ask for a buyout clause or a carve-out leaving a particular geographic territory open.
Jerry Slaughter, executive director of the Kansas Medical Society, warned that doctors should take the contracts seriously. The medical society was not involved in the Wichita Clinic case.
"If properly constructed, [restrictive covenants] are legal and binding, so it's really about the parties going into it understanding it's a contract."
Discuss on Sermo Discuss on Sermo Back to top.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Case at a glance
Was a noncompete clause in a doctor's employment contract enforceable?
A Kansas appeals court said yes.
Impact: Some individual physicians say the provisions restrict their rights to practice in any given area and infringe on patients' rights to choose a doctor. Physicians on the medical group side say the contracts help protect the investment a practice makes in new doctors and its existing business, which, in turn, helps maintain access to care.
Wichita Clinic PA v. Michelle M. Louis, DO, Kansas Court of Appeals
Back to top.
Copyright 2008 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
more...
Hassan11
06-17 12:05 PM
is it PO box # 852401 or 851041 ?? please confirm correct PO box #.
For USPS deliveries:
USCIS
Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
For private courier (non-USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
Texas Service Center
4141 North St. Augustine Road
Dallas, TX 75227
For USPS deliveries:
USCIS
Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
For private courier (non-USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
Texas Service Center
4141 North St. Augustine Road
Dallas, TX 75227
gcboy442
08-26 09:35 AM
clockwork :
Mine is the same case....Did you have LUD on your I-485. Mine was received by J.Barrett on July 2nd and has an LUD on 8/5. Not received the RN yet.
Mine is the same case....Did you have LUD on your I-485. Mine was received by J.Barrett on July 2nd and has an LUD on 8/5. Not received the RN yet.
more...
optimist578
04-10 11:47 AM
My EAD is going to expire in 3 months and I am filing for my renewal now. What can be done if you don't get the EAD renewal response before the expiry of the current one ?
I heard somewhere, that if you don't receive the renewal notice within 60 days, then you can approach the local USCIS office and get a temporary EAD card for 90 days.
Anybody knows more ?
Also, generally do folks approach their lawyers for extension filing or they do it themselves?
Thanks,
------------------------
EB3 PD Mar 2003
I-485, AP, EAD filed in July 07
EAD expiring on July 31st 2008.
[I posted this on another thread under "EAD Filing Fees" but it did not show up on the first page- hence reposting it...]
I heard somewhere, that if you don't receive the renewal notice within 60 days, then you can approach the local USCIS office and get a temporary EAD card for 90 days.
Anybody knows more ?
Also, generally do folks approach their lawyers for extension filing or they do it themselves?
Thanks,
------------------------
EB3 PD Mar 2003
I-485, AP, EAD filed in July 07
EAD expiring on July 31st 2008.
[I posted this on another thread under "EAD Filing Fees" but it did not show up on the first page- hence reposting it...]
bbct
03-06 08:23 AM
In India, as of this day only Rs 1L is secured if a bank fails ............... isn't that way too low.
http://www.dicgc.org.in/GuideToDepositInsuranceInIndia.htm#q3
That is way too low compared to what FDIC insures us.
http://www.dicgc.org.in/GuideToDepositInsuranceInIndia.htm#q3
That is way too low compared to what FDIC insures us.
more...
hoolahoous
11-11 09:08 PM
there is no law/rule saying that you need to stay with employer after getting GC. However, GC is for future employment, so some people have been asked in past (just read on internet, so take with grain of salt) at citizenship as to why did they apply for GC for an employer they didn't want to work for. IF you get asked that question, you need to have a valid answer (layoff etc.). Also that question alone may not decide the fate of citizenship.
PS: I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion.
PS: I am not a lawyer, so this is not a legal opinion.
letstalklc
10-13 05:31 PM
What is the URL for checking the PERM case status?
You need login credintials in order to check the perm status. I am not sure if any option available in the New system...
You need login credintials in order to check the perm status. I am not sure if any option available in the New system...
edifier
07-23 07:40 PM
I am working for company A under H1-B visa and my PERM was approved early this year and my I-140 (EB2) is pending. I summitted I-485 last week since the PD is current again. Almost the same time, I moved to another department in the same company because of company reconstruction. The job seems to be having different requirements(>50% difference). I have a couple of questions:
1. Within how long I need to inform my company lawyer and then USCIS that my job changed within the same company?
2. What are the concequences if I do not inform my company laywer about my job change? Will USCIS know this in the future and deny my I-140 and I-485?
3. Will my pending I-140 get denied since my job requirement changed (if my company lawyer inform USICS)?
4. What are the possible outcomes for my I-485 under this job change situation?
5. Is that possible that I just stay there as nothing happened and wait for USCIS response to my I-140 and I-485?
6. What can be done in order to avoid a new PERM and new I-140? I really don't want to start all over again since who knows what the PD will be after Oct. this year...
1. Within how long I need to inform my company lawyer and then USCIS that my job changed within the same company?
2. What are the concequences if I do not inform my company laywer about my job change? Will USCIS know this in the future and deny my I-140 and I-485?
3. Will my pending I-140 get denied since my job requirement changed (if my company lawyer inform USICS)?
4. What are the possible outcomes for my I-485 under this job change situation?
5. Is that possible that I just stay there as nothing happened and wait for USCIS response to my I-140 and I-485?
6. What can be done in order to avoid a new PERM and new I-140? I really don't want to start all over again since who knows what the PD will be after Oct. this year...
desi485
01-08 12:55 PM
My employer has not provided copy of labor or I-140.
I am not planning to use AC-21 as my employer and work profile is good. But say if there is some thing unplanned happens, and if I need to change jobs, what can I do?
not having copy of labor or I-140 is an issue for AC21?
I am not planning to use AC-21 as my employer and work profile is good. But say if there is some thing unplanned happens, and if I need to change jobs, what can I do?
not having copy of labor or I-140 is an issue for AC21?
andreafejes26
03-31 08:42 PM
I have been working in the USA with an H1B Visa since Nov, 2007; this until August 2009 when I was laid off by my employer/sponsor (Company A). Last time I entered the US was August 13, 2009 (I was admitted until Sep 23, 2010 day the H1B visa expires). Last pay stub August 2009.
I dedicated myself to get a new job (I didn't know at the time that my staying represented a huge risk for me). I finally got a job offer on November 15, 2009. It is an international group who just opened an office in Miami.
Holidays, all the foreign management start up procedures, along with the fact that the lawyer was very slow, made that the actual application date for I-129 March 1st.2010. Imagine that. We required premium processing.
On January 15, I asked my lawyer if considering the delay of the new employer (it is a new business here in the US), and all other issues, it was better for me just to leave the country and simple apply again on April 2010. He said no.
On March 1, 2010 (effective date of the application) I started to formally work for company B -I just got my first pay stub. On March 22, 2009, USCIS sent a request for further evidence. The lawyer has the letter -I enclosed- in his desk since last Thursday. Response is due May 6, 2010.
As you can see USCIS requires, among other matters, pay stubs from January 1 2010 to present (from Company A). For 2009 we filed my W2 and 2009 income tax return. They didn't ask for 2009.
What should I do? Should I say that I don't have the pay stubs (implicit recognition I didn't maintain status), explaining that I indeed got an offer, and all the reasons for the delay?, or try to ask my ex employer if they give me a letter indicating I'm still her employee (I doubt they will do that, but I can try).
What are my options/risks; deportation for instance? Should I leave the country immediately?
I dedicated myself to get a new job (I didn't know at the time that my staying represented a huge risk for me). I finally got a job offer on November 15, 2009. It is an international group who just opened an office in Miami.
Holidays, all the foreign management start up procedures, along with the fact that the lawyer was very slow, made that the actual application date for I-129 March 1st.2010. Imagine that. We required premium processing.
On January 15, I asked my lawyer if considering the delay of the new employer (it is a new business here in the US), and all other issues, it was better for me just to leave the country and simple apply again on April 2010. He said no.
On March 1, 2010 (effective date of the application) I started to formally work for company B -I just got my first pay stub. On March 22, 2009, USCIS sent a request for further evidence. The lawyer has the letter -I enclosed- in his desk since last Thursday. Response is due May 6, 2010.
As you can see USCIS requires, among other matters, pay stubs from January 1 2010 to present (from Company A). For 2009 we filed my W2 and 2009 income tax return. They didn't ask for 2009.
What should I do? Should I say that I don't have the pay stubs (implicit recognition I didn't maintain status), explaining that I indeed got an offer, and all the reasons for the delay?, or try to ask my ex employer if they give me a letter indicating I'm still her employee (I doubt they will do that, but I can try).
What are my options/risks; deportation for instance? Should I leave the country immediately?
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento