bradley emmanuel

that gun is sweet, and I especially like the lettering you put on it

Well California is not same....they took 4 months to renew my lisence....and its purely based on the expiry of the H1B I-94 :mad:

I renewed my CA license last year. Gave them my expiring license, SS card, and proof of residence. Got new DL valid till 2011. I am on H-1 with a valid EAD.

EB2 India from NC.

Filed EAD renewal at TSC (my 485, however, is pending at NSC) on Aug 6. RD Aug 7. No LUDs since the notice was issued.

EAD CPO email on 9/23 :)

Wife's EAD (applied together) still pending. No LUDs either.

AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:


While the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act (�IRCA�) prohibits employers from knowingly hiring or continuing to employ unauthorized workers, the Obama Administration�s decision to vigorously enforce employer sanction laws against employers, before providing a path to U.S. employers to legalize critical essential workers, is plain bad policy. �Immigration officers are investigating workplaces in every state in the US to check whether they are hiring illegal workers.� ICE launches workplace immigration crackdown (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h_EhhmjIcqAzvJainjWnJTLRylXQD995P1T80)

We are in the midst of the �Great Recession� and U.S. industry is struggling to remain competitive. President Barack Obama�s strategy puts U.S. employers and industry between a rock and a hard place. While the law requires U.S. employers to verify, through a specific process, the identity and work authorization eligibility of all individuals, whether U.S. citizens or otherwise, it is practically impossible to obtain legal status for employers who discover undocumented workers in their workforce � even if they have been employed for decades. Immigrant Visa Numbers Hopelessly Encased In Amber (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigrant-visa-numbers-hopelessly.html).

The diligent employer questioning the veracity of employment eligibility documents can face discrimination charges and vigorous enforcement by the U.S. Department of Justice, if for example, they check only Latino workers, or subject certain classes or worker to extra scrutiny. The U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel enforces the antidiscrimination provisions that protect most work-authorized persons from intentional employment discrimination based upon citizenship or immigration status, national origin, and unfair documentary practices relating to the employment eligibility verification process. The law prohibits retaliation against individuals who file charges and who cooperate with an investigation. Office of Special Counsel for Immigration-Related Unfair ... (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/osc/)

No one knows how many of the 6,000,000 U.S. employers, as well as household employers, are familiar with, and in full compliance with the complex U.S. immigration law. Many employers are surprised when told the law requires ALL employers to complete an Employment Verification Form I-9 for any new employee hired after November 6, 1986, or face huge civil fines, and possible jail sentences. The I-9 Employee Verification form must be completed within three days of hire for all hires including U.S. citizens.

Vigorously enforcing this law without providing employers any way to keep essential workers puts employers struggling to make ends meet with the possibility of receiving huge fines, and even prison sentences if they "knowing continuing to hire five or more workers." Actual knowledge of the undocumented worker's status isn't always required, and "constructive knowledge" will suffice where the employer "should have known" of the worker's status. For example, if the employer tries to sponsor an undocumented worker for immigration benefits, the employer is presumed to know of the workers lack of immigration status. The Department of Homeland Security, through its enforcement division, Immigration and Customs Enforcements (ICE) has undertaken a massive new enforcement effort directed at employers large and small. More than 650 US businesses to have employee work files audited (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/more-than-650-businesses-nationwide-to-have-employee-work-files-inspected.html) Los Angeles Times - ?Jul 1, 2009.?

The focus on audit enforcement is clearly evidenced by the rising number of worksite audits, increased heavy civil penalties and likely continuing criminal prosecutions resulting from worksite violations. Immigration Focus Is on the Employers (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/us/02immig.html?ref=global-home) New York Times - ?Jul 1, 2009? �The Obama administration began investigations of hundreds of businesses on Wednesday as part of its strategy to focus immigration.�


While employers need to be extremely cautious and take steps to ensure that their employee verification papers are in order, the government needs to fix the immigration mess BEFORE pursuing this new aggressive policy of conducting ICE AUDIT "RAIDS�. Employers should be given an opportunity to pursue a legal path for essential workers before the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers come �knocking at the door.�
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-immigemploy2-2009jul02,0,7434438.story) Los Angeles Times: L.A. employers face immigration audits.

Many employers are caught in a Catch-22 when it comes to employee verification. �If you�re in the roofing business, if you�re in the concrete business, you don�t have American-born workers showing up at your door ... you have Hispanic workers showing up at your door, and they have what looks to be a legitimate Social Security card ... under our current law, if they have a card that looks legitimate and you don�t hire them because you suspect they are illegal, then you are guilty of discrimination and could be investigated by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that�s the current system and it�s broken." Said Norman Adams, co-founder of Texans for Sensible Immigration Policy to the Houston Chronicle: Immigration crackdown goes after employers. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/special/immigration/6506722.html)

Vigorously enforcing these laws without providing an option to employers is plain bad policy and it could make our economic situation worse. My experience with the employer verification law is most employers are simply not familiar with all aspects of the complex immigration laws. Most employers don't know that if they question a legal worker�s documents, the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S.D.O.J.) may charge them with discrimination. The adverse impact on the economy and on the housing market could be serious. The substantial economic contribution of hard working immigrants is clear. Economic contributions of immigrants come in many forms in California. (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) The California Immigrant Policy Center (http://topics.sacbee.com/California+Immigrant+Policy+Center/) estimates that the state's immigrants pay $30 billion in federal taxes, $5.2 billion in state income taxes, (http://topics.sacbee.com/state+income+taxes/) and $4.6 billion in sales taxes (http://topics.sacbee.com/sales+taxes/) each year. The Selig Center for Economic Growth (http://topics.sacbee.com/Selig+Center+for+Economic+Growth/) calculates that the purchasing power of Latino and Asian consumers in California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) totaled $412 billion in 2008 � nearly one-third of the state's total purchasing power. The U.S. Census Bureau (http://topics.sacbee.com/U.S.+Census+Bureau/) found that California (http://topics.sacbee.com/California/) businesses owned by Latinos and Asians constituted more than one-quarter of all businesses in the state as of 2002, employing 1.2 million people and generating sales and receipts of $183 billion. Where would our economy be without these immigrants? http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html (http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1981220.html) Sacramento Bee: Immigrants are not a fiscal drain.

Comprehensive immigration reform requires a path to legal status for the undocumented and an orderly system for future worker flows to allow U.S. industry to innovate and compete globally. It will require a complete overhaul of the government agencies that now mismanage a slew of immigration programs that could and should be the rejuvenating lifeblood of our nation. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/opinion/lweb30dream.html) New York Times: Opening a Door to Young Immigrants.

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) understands the issues from a deep perspective, not merely from an emotional view. We believe that a sensible comprehensive immigration reform package will have to include smart enforcement, a path to citizenship for the 12 million undocumented immigrants currently living and working in the U.S., elimination of family and employment-based visa backlogs, adequate visas to meet the needs of U.S. families and businesses, a new visa program for essential workers to enable employers to legalize critically needed workers in agriculture, construction, and to provide future flows in certain areas including scientific fields, where as many as two thirds of our advanced degreed graduates are international students. We must also provide due process protections and restore the rule of law in immigration adjudications, and in our immigration courts. AILA Welcomes Obama's Proactive Push for Comprehensive Immigration Reform This Year (http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=29372).https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-4886898674742904565?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com


More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/07/ice-cracks-audit-whip.html)

All,

Even though there are other threads on this topic, I wanted to start a separate thread, as I had some unique questions. I am at the zenith of frustration and at the age of 37, I feel like my career is slipping away while waiting for GC :(

My employment scenario:
- Been with the current employer since Jan 2001
- Less than 5 years experience before I joined the current employer
- Have an MBA that was not used to the GC application (applied in July 2003) since I was a programmer at the time of GC application

My GC scenario:
- Applied for GC in July 2003 under EB3
- Applied for I-485 in July 2007
- Approved I140 and EAD in hand
- Even though I have EAD, I continue to use my H1

My new role in the job:
- After being in the job for as long as I have been, I am now doing Business Development that makes use of my MBA

My questions:
1) Lawyer asked me to wait it out for the GC instead of trying to convert the application to GC2. Lawyer says new labor applications are getting under scrutiny a lot more than before and he think it is prudent to wait. Is this reasonable?

2) What are my other options - do you think I can ask my employer to apply fresh EB2 application for the business development role and show my MBA? Not sure if they will agree to my request, but wanted to make sure that it is even possible to do that.

3) Can I change my job based on H1? Or change the job based on EAD? If either way I change my job, can I then ask the new employer to apply for my GC under EB2? If I change the job, and if my current employer agrees (I don't why he would, but just for understanding sake), can I retain my current EB3 application?

Any advice is greatly appreciated. I am at a point of giving it up and going back to India, but then that is another big decision,

Regards,

You may be right on that.

But the real question in this case is will the person be subject to yearly cap (lotter system) or be considered as a H1-B transfer kind.

She doesn't need a transit visa. My mother-in-law came last week through Munich. She had a 10-yr multiple entry US visa stamped and didn't need any German transit visa.

Happy Birthday IV !!!!

Thank you very much for your prompt reply. Greatly appreciate.
I paid the money to my company who has applied for my H1B. I am not too sure whom they will address the check to. They only sent me the Fedex tracking no. which tells that the application is received by USCIS, Vermont on April 7th.
I am fine if it is taking time but my only concern is whether this company has really sent my H1B petition. Is there any way to find it out?

Regds,
Vani

No way, you will have to ask your employer

Hi
I clicked on the link provided but unfortunately I was not able to watch the video, can you please share what was concluded at the end of the session, any measures that they plan to take?

Thx

I am in the same boat too. Only difference is that I have formally accepted the offer and it's in the same corporation (but different legal entity).

My lawyer recommended that I have three options

1) Start over and recapture your PD. She mentioned that this is the cleanest option.

2) Apply for 485 from your old job and then move to the other job after six months

3) Move to the new job but apply for your 485 from your old job.However, you will need to move back to your old job once you get your Green Card.

I believe Option 3 is the best for all of you. Try contacting your old employers to see if they can file for your 485. That said, once your complete your six months after applying for 485, you can technically move. Now I am not sure if this will work, but can we not move into another company at more apparent time before the actual receipt of the Green Card. Also, given the severe retrogression expected, it may be a long wait and this move may potentially not have to happen for a while.

Please note the above is my opinion and you will need to consult your own lawyers.


How come option 1 will work if the law passes? First you have to apply for the labour and then only u can capture the old pd.
But we even can't apply for the labour so there is no point in capturing the old pd. Am I making the valid point here? Correct me if I am wrong.

I am glad they have started enforcing this. This will let them work on the cases rather than answer the calls.

ASK THE LAWYER FOR FREE int the NOV 11 FREE ATTORNEY CALL
Every week there is a free call
Hi All,

I had worked for a company from Feb 2006 to Feb 2007 on an H-1B visa. I had applied for an H-1B extension via that company as their software engineer. I was granted that extension. After Feb 2007, i started working at a different company.
I applied for an H1B transfer as a software engineer with my current employer on Nov 27th 2006 through a law firm in Michigan. And last year my current company applied for my GC process in October 2009 under EB2 CATEGORY but with the same designation software engineer [level 2 as suggested by our lawyer] .I obtained a Master�s of Science in Management Information Systems from (University of Illinois at Springfield) in 2008 .I received my I-140 delivery notice in July 2010 stating that they have received his I-140 and it is now in process. I also received an approval on I-131 and I-765 just 2 weeks ago, I got a notice asking me and my wife to go for the biometrics test. Moreover, yesterday i.e. Nov 9th ,I received the EAD card for both me and my wife but unfortunately the very same day I get this Notice of Intent to Deny for I-140 requesting for evidence .
The notice states:
"��..The record contains a form ETA 9089 received by the department of labor on October 2009, thereby establishing a priority date in this matter. The petitioner certified in part H of that form that the proffered position is that of a "Software Engineer" and that the minimum level of education required to enter into that position is a Master's in Computer Science, Management Information Systems, Information Technology.
However the beneficiary also filed a form I-129, Petition for a non-immigrant worker in November 2006 (when i was working for the previous company) as a "Software Engineer". It is noted that the beneficiary did not have a master's degree at that time.
If the beneficiary entered into that H1B employment as a software engineer without a master's degree, the labor certificate will be invalidated since the master's level of education was not a minimum requirement. Please submit the evidence that the beneficiary obtained a master's degree prior to starting work for the petitioner as a software engineer.
The petition may be denied based on the above information. However u r hereby granted 30 days from the date of this letter to submit to this office a written rebuttal to the adverse information."

Also please note that we recently applied for my H1B extension as a programmer analyst as our lawyer had applied with this designation last year.

Now here my questions:

1. I applied for my H1B transfer with my current employer as Software engineer in 2006; I got my masters degree in Dec 2008. After consulting with my lawyer I filed for my GC in EB2 category as Software Engineer level 2 in Oct 2009. Now based on this why do you think we got this RFE? Is this a matter of concern or can it be a mistake? How can we resolve this?

2. The USCIS has asked me to provide evidence of my masters degree in 2006, but that is not true, I received it in 2008, what I have to prove is that my new job requires me to have my masters degree. But how do I do that since my work title is still just a software engineer but level 2 and in my organization level 2 software engineer requires masters degree?!!!

3. What is the worst case scenario? Is there a possibility that my I-140 will be rejected? What should my next step be then?

4. What will happen to all my approved forms (I-131 and I-765). Will they automatically get rejected too if my I-140 is denied?

5. Has anybody else had a similar case like mine? If yes, Please post your case out-comings on this thread.

6. What will happen to my EAD card? Can I change my status to EAD now or should I just wait?

7. Also we applied for H-1B extension as a different designation [Programmer Analyst]. So will that affect my GC process?


We have 30 DAYS to respond to this RFE. If u have any suggestions or advice Relating to my case please post them here ASAP. Please help us out on this.

Thank you for your reply.

Even though we get a new I-94, it is still with my consulting company as the company does not give me my I797.
If I go to India and apply for H4 again, then wont the officer ask me on why I am trying to get the H4 stamping again since it already has a previous valid H4 stamping on it? since there is no H1 stamping on my passport.

Or can I go out of USA and get back on the same revious H4 stamping?

Thanks,

Arpu

I believe whenever you apply H1 or H4 in US, you will get new I-94 so you don't need to go outside US.

#3 : no, only show H1B approval from ur spouse.
#4 : I don't know about 60 days rule but this is like chicken and egg situation. to get paid (using H1), you will need to have SSN. if you don't get paid then you are violating ur H1 condition. so I believe the reasonable answer is you have to get SSN and a project so you can get paid and stay using H1B status (if not revert to H4 asap).
#5 : I believe you are not out of status but you are violating H1 condition.

But again, Please check with ur attorney since I am not an attorney.

Sorry if my answers will scare you a bit.

Regards,

I have an offer from a great company as a program manager that involves management and coordination of teams. There will be a little programming involved. This is in the software industry

The labor was filed as software engineer whose description says that this was java focussed intense programming position.

I am EB2, india, dec 2003 with more that 180 days and 140 approved, also have my ead and AP done.

I plan to move on EAD. Would this qualify as "same or similar". The industry is the same and the job is similar (it just shows normal career progression)

what do you think?

Hello fromnaija,
I don't think we need to start out GC process everytime we move to a different location. I believe that GC is for future employment so according to me we don't need to re-start GC process when we move from east to west and north to south.

Thanks

Hi friends,
My brother in NJ got his new passport at NY Indian consulate (since old one was expiring soon). They gave new passport which was valid for only one year - saying that they need valid unexpired visa-stamp to give 10 year validity passport.
They said that they will NOT accept
- valid unexpired EAD
- valid unexpired AP
- valid 485 receipt
- even valid unexpired H1 approval notice (my brother still has H1 in addition to AP)
...Now it is so absurd that, even if my bro went for visa stamping (which he isn't planning), he will not probably be issued 3 yr visa as passport is valid for very short duration. A chicken and egg problem.
In addition why do Indian consulate worry about our visa status for determining passport validity duration ? If they do care then at least they must accept the legal documents (ead/ap/485 receipt/h1 approval notice) to make a decision.

I will appreciate if anyone has a solution to this problem. All answers appreciated.

I am so sad (and mad) that lawmakers of our country are still haunting us while we are away from our country and trying to contribute to its progress.

Hi Sam,Munnabhai

Yes i am planning to start fresh GC and h1-extensio, The reason i am expecting to reject bcoz mine LC-sub and on top of 1,2,3 Mentioned RFE's. Case me Dham Nahi hai.

Do you hate lies like this? "Leprosy in this country. Incredible" - Lou Dobbs

Do you hate that your child is now called an anchor baby?

You are stuck in backlog limbo - What are you going to do about it macaca?

You can gain passive income.
You cannot materially participate in the operations of the firm (employee).
A member not necessarily be materially participating in the operations of the firm.
Income from profit on an investment is passive.

And this "attorney" was actually paid for filing this PERM application?

The educational requirements specified in the PERM may give you some room to wriggle out of this.
Yes. I have paid quite amount of money to fill the PERM application.
So, what you are saying that I actually can continue the process?