MrWaitingGC
06-18 07:08 PM
I am not getting any appointment in June with any doctor within 60 miles from my place. So I took an appointment with a doc 70+ miles away for end of june. The only problem is I need to go twice 70 miles one way. The clinic suggested I do the blood work in nearby county clinic, but the county clinic wants 7-10 days to get results of blood work. I asked them for HIV and Sephallius test to be done. I already got TB Skin test(tested negative) done at county clinic.
Can someone please tell what all blood tests need to be done, so I can check if any other doctor can do the blood work and I can save one 70 mile trip . Thanks.
Common buddy this is nothing. I drive this daily to work one way. You are worried about 2 days.
Take a day off and visit near by places and have fun.
Can someone please tell what all blood tests need to be done, so I can check if any other doctor can do the blood work and I can save one 70 mile trip . Thanks.
Common buddy this is nothing. I drive this daily to work one way. You are worried about 2 days.
Take a day off and visit near by places and have fun.
american_dreams
08-01 01:51 PM
Below is the link where the new forms are posted on the USCIS website. Also note that beside each form under "Edition" colum it says: "Previous editions accepted." for I-485, I-765, I-131. So you can use either the new forms or the olf forms. But if you are applying based on Department of State’s July Visa Bulletin No. 107 you can file your application till August 17th 2007 and have to pay the old fee.
In fact USCIS posted on 7/30/2007 for I-765 previos versions will not be accepted. but they have updated the website on 7/31/2007 that previos versions will be accepted for I-765.
So do not worry about which version of the form you are using. Make sure you are including the correct fee.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
BTW, i have the old forms if anyone really needs them.
In fact USCIS posted on 7/30/2007 for I-765 previos versions will not be accepted. but they have updated the website on 7/31/2007 that previos versions will be accepted for I-765.
So do not worry about which version of the form you are using. Make sure you are including the correct fee.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
BTW, i have the old forms if anyone really needs them.
gc28262
07-16 07:30 AM
Murthy Bulletin
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
Karthikthiru
10-11 12:40 PM
You said Master's is the requirement. But When did you file your labor?
Karthik
Karthik
more...
HumHongeKamiyab
12-16 05:46 PM
Does anybody know a good employment lawyer around houston area? I need to discuss my non-compete agreement with a lawyer ?
Thanks,
Thanks,
swaroopmukka
07-24 06:04 PM
My Labor has been approved around May 20 2007 and my employer received a letter from DOL stating the same, but the Lawyer says he never got the original Labor certificate. Now I've to file my 140 and 485 together and my lawyer is saying that he'll contact DOL and see what's going on, but he says that we can file 140 and 485 concurrently with the piece of evidence we have (the letter from DOL to my employer saying that my labor has been approved).
Will it be any problem with USCIS if we proceed this way ??
Will it be any problem with USCIS if we proceed this way ??
more...
gcdreamer05
11-05 03:27 PM
After july fiasco, uscis and dol are very very cautious, in opening up the gates and calling everyone current. (They dont want another 1-2 million applications being sent).
It is defintely not going to happen in the near future.....
So even finding a pattern may not help as its not going to be current for all for EB3 atleast.
It is defintely not going to happen in the near future.....
So even finding a pattern may not help as its not going to be current for all for EB3 atleast.
.jpg "Logo")
MartinR
February 16th, 2005, 03:14 AM
I have found a site that calculates the focal length:
http://www.jvcpro.co.uk/solu/networks/calcfocal
I have just checked the focal length at the wide angle end of the scale using a tape measure and got surprisingly close (7.02mm) agreement with the manufacturer's figure (7mm). With that, I can now find where on the scale the standard (50mm) length would be - just for interest's sake.
Many thanks to everyone for their help.
Martin
http://www.jvcpro.co.uk/solu/networks/calcfocal
I have just checked the focal length at the wide angle end of the scale using a tape measure and got surprisingly close (7.02mm) agreement with the manufacturer's figure (7mm). With that, I can now find where on the scale the standard (50mm) length would be - just for interest's sake.
Many thanks to everyone for their help.
Martin
more...
anyway
01-25 06:36 PM
You can add a MouseLeftButtonDown event to pretty much any element! Just select and use the Events tab to set your event handler name: http://www.kirupa.com/net/creating_simple_wpf_gui_app_pg5.htm
Both Blend and VS will auto-generate the event handler where you can insert some code :)
Thanks. I actually figured it out, sort of.
So what I did was drag and drop the icon into my project then turned the icon into a control using the 'Make into control' option (right click option); selected Button from the list and left everthing else as is. From here, I selected button from the tab (says [Button]) under the project name. example: mainpage.xmal).
So basic what this does is overlay the icon image with an actual button control.
Moving on.
I then selected the button (icon image) in my project and in the properties panel (on the right) under 'Common Properties' removed the word "button" from the 'Content' label.
Switched to event view (it's the rectangle with the lighting bolt -- top right) and in the box next to 'Click' gave it a meaningful name, i.e. query_Click or query or something. I think after this the MainPage.xaml.cs should open.
Both Blend and VS will auto-generate the event handler where you can insert some code :)
Thanks. I actually figured it out, sort of.
So what I did was drag and drop the icon into my project then turned the icon into a control using the 'Make into control' option (right click option); selected Button from the list and left everthing else as is. From here, I selected button from the tab (says [Button]) under the project name. example: mainpage.xmal).
So basic what this does is overlay the icon image with an actual button control.
Moving on.
I then selected the button (icon image) in my project and in the properties panel (on the right) under 'Common Properties' removed the word "button" from the 'Content' label.
Switched to event view (it's the rectangle with the lighting bolt -- top right) and in the box next to 'Click' gave it a meaningful name, i.e. query_Click or query or something. I think after this the MainPage.xaml.cs should open.
lagsam
12-17 03:35 PM
There is no problem re-entering with a valid AP, even if the validity date is the day you re-enter.
You will have a problem if your AP is expired. My daughter came back with just one month on her AP and she was stamped with extra 6 months on I-94. But I don't know the reason for that.
You will have a problem if your AP is expired. My daughter came back with just one month on her AP and she was stamped with extra 6 months on I-94. But I don't know the reason for that.
more...
hk196712
07-16 12:31 PM
I called them this morning and IO told me that my file has been assigned to an officer. What does this mean? Can anyone tell me?
Thanks
Thanks
upuaut
09-10 04:18 AM
you know.. I meant to do this a while ago, but lost track of the thought. I have a write up in one of my books, done by Colin Moock, in which he takes his frame rate tester and tests a variety of things to see which effect frame rate and to what degree. I really do think it's worth posting. I'll try to do a small write up on the subject soon.
more...
sodh
07-13 12:41 AM
May be someone was right they are load testing
Ann Ruben
01-20 11:17 AM
Abhay,
The USCIS online case status system has never been 100% accurate. New data is "dumped" into the system on a nightly basis, and sometimes there is a technical glitch that randomly prevents some data from being transferred. USCIS claims that it is impossible to correct this problem and update case status info. in individual cases. So, it is unlikely that you will be able to get the online status changed.
However, what you can and should do is to get written confirmation from USCIS that your RFE response was timely filed. If your lawyer is a member of AILA, he can use the AILA/TSC liaison process to obtain this written confirmation from USCIS. If your lawyer cannot or will not do this, you should consider finding another immigration lawyer. Remember that the I-485 is your application, and not your employer's. You are entitled to legal representation of your choice.
Ann
The USCIS online case status system has never been 100% accurate. New data is "dumped" into the system on a nightly basis, and sometimes there is a technical glitch that randomly prevents some data from being transferred. USCIS claims that it is impossible to correct this problem and update case status info. in individual cases. So, it is unlikely that you will be able to get the online status changed.
However, what you can and should do is to get written confirmation from USCIS that your RFE response was timely filed. If your lawyer is a member of AILA, he can use the AILA/TSC liaison process to obtain this written confirmation from USCIS. If your lawyer cannot or will not do this, you should consider finding another immigration lawyer. Remember that the I-485 is your application, and not your employer's. You are entitled to legal representation of your choice.
Ann
more...
nozerd
11-11 11:03 AM
Priority Date Current: Curse or Boon ?
I am EB3 India applicant with PD of August 2001 (own not substitution). Have I 140 approved since November 2005 but was only able to file I 485 in June 2007. With same employer for 10 yrs and on 9th yr of H1.
Earlier this year my PD was correct for 2 months but didnt hear anything from USCIS. My PD is current again this Nov and Dec and havent heard anything yet. Called USCIS customer svc and they said cant do anything as processing date is not current (Yes and they are going by Notice date and not Received date for service request). Lawyer says just stay cool and wait. So USCIS has no logic and no order and all we can do is wait for our stars to be aligned and case getting picked up in a sweep. Other than that being current is a curse rather than a boon because
You can not get 3 yr H1 extension if PD is current (only 1 yr).
You can not get 2 yrs EAD if PD is current.
So those dying for PD to be current think again. Its no use having PD current if USCIS is going to be so random and haphazard. It may turn out to be a curse.
I am EB3 India applicant with PD of August 2001 (own not substitution). Have I 140 approved since November 2005 but was only able to file I 485 in June 2007. With same employer for 10 yrs and on 9th yr of H1.
Earlier this year my PD was correct for 2 months but didnt hear anything from USCIS. My PD is current again this Nov and Dec and havent heard anything yet. Called USCIS customer svc and they said cant do anything as processing date is not current (Yes and they are going by Notice date and not Received date for service request). Lawyer says just stay cool and wait. So USCIS has no logic and no order and all we can do is wait for our stars to be aligned and case getting picked up in a sweep. Other than that being current is a curse rather than a boon because
You can not get 3 yr H1 extension if PD is current (only 1 yr).
You can not get 2 yrs EAD if PD is current.
So those dying for PD to be current think again. Its no use having PD current if USCIS is going to be so random and haphazard. It may turn out to be a curse.
ardnahc
08-14 12:30 PM
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/processTimesDisplay.do
NSC - I485 - Sep 15 2007
TSC - I485 - Aug 30 2007
Cheers,
Ardnahc
NSC - I485 - Sep 15 2007
TSC - I485 - Aug 30 2007
Cheers,
Ardnahc
more...
map_boiler
04-28 11:22 AM
...that the new job is similar or related to the pending I-485 application.
Also, I was reading on the murthy forum that you would need to file your intent of invoking AC21 with USCIS. If you don't file your intent with USCIS, they may deny the I-485 application if your current employer revoked the approved I-140. As per rules, If you file your intent for invoking AC21 with USCIS, your current employer will NOT be able to revoke the I-140.
Even with letting USCIS know, they're known to have issued denials by mistake or in some cases, NOID's (Notice of Intent to Deny) after the employer filed to revoke the I-140. Proceed cautiously and consult your immigration attorney before you do anything.
Good luck!
Also, I was reading on the murthy forum that you would need to file your intent of invoking AC21 with USCIS. If you don't file your intent with USCIS, they may deny the I-485 application if your current employer revoked the approved I-140. As per rules, If you file your intent for invoking AC21 with USCIS, your current employer will NOT be able to revoke the I-140.
Even with letting USCIS know, they're known to have issued denials by mistake or in some cases, NOID's (Notice of Intent to Deny) after the employer filed to revoke the I-140. Proceed cautiously and consult your immigration attorney before you do anything.
Good luck!
blacktongue
10-05 10:30 AM
If you want the best
Go to Kashmir. I have seen the pictures and it is beautiful in India. Jammu & Kashmir Tourism (http://www.jktourism.org/)
Or come to China. Tourism in China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_China)
You will like it.
Go to Kashmir. I have seen the pictures and it is beautiful in India. Jammu & Kashmir Tourism (http://www.jktourism.org/)
Or come to China. Tourism in China - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism_in_China)
You will like it.
thomachan72
10-19 09:35 AM
Has anybody done that?
Questions;
1) Will the old 140 be valid (for using the PD) even if the old employer withdraws/revokes the old LC/140? Big corporation, so I thought that would be a standard procedure?
2) Has the new job title and responsibilities be very similar to the old one?
3) Has the new LC/140 to be filed before the old one is cancelled inorder to keep the PD?
4) is there any memo/law that allows us to keep the old PD once a 140 has been approved (even if it is revoken)?
It is clear that a new LC/140 has to be done once you change the job. So any other information is welcome.
Questions;
1) Will the old 140 be valid (for using the PD) even if the old employer withdraws/revokes the old LC/140? Big corporation, so I thought that would be a standard procedure?
2) Has the new job title and responsibilities be very similar to the old one?
3) Has the new LC/140 to be filed before the old one is cancelled inorder to keep the PD?
4) is there any memo/law that allows us to keep the old PD once a 140 has been approved (even if it is revoken)?
It is clear that a new LC/140 has to be done once you change the job. So any other information is welcome.
bekugc
06-20 05:57 PM
sure, pls verify with lawyer to be safe
common consensus seems to be -->
if u have a valid/unexpired h1 petition, then even after using AP, u can continue to use the H1 for 'work authorization' ( u dont need to use EAD at the same employer).
But after using AP, officially ur status is 'parolee' and not H1-B. (official status of entry as put on i94 doc)
After using AP, u can further extend ur H1 if u want to -> in this case your status officially changes to H1b from parolee.
After using AP, if u desperately need to get back on H1 (for whatever reason) -> u can either extend ur H1 or amend ur H1, both these will put u back on H1.
Some people also say if u have used AP , but still have a valid h1 petition and desperately want to get back to H1, then u cud go to a consulate abroad, get ur h1 visa stamped and reenter and once again ur officially back on H1 ( seems valid, but i dont know anyone who tried this)
hope this helps...
common consensus seems to be -->
if u have a valid/unexpired h1 petition, then even after using AP, u can continue to use the H1 for 'work authorization' ( u dont need to use EAD at the same employer).
But after using AP, officially ur status is 'parolee' and not H1-B. (official status of entry as put on i94 doc)
After using AP, u can further extend ur H1 if u want to -> in this case your status officially changes to H1b from parolee.
After using AP, if u desperately need to get back on H1 (for whatever reason) -> u can either extend ur H1 or amend ur H1, both these will put u back on H1.
Some people also say if u have used AP , but still have a valid h1 petition and desperately want to get back to H1, then u cud go to a consulate abroad, get ur h1 visa stamped and reenter and once again ur officially back on H1 ( seems valid, but i dont know anyone who tried this)
hope this helps...
simple1
09-09 03:48 PM
A while back, I saw a post saying PD substitution doesn’t work smoothly most of the time (sorry, I dont remember the site).
I also heard (from another person) that for association with I485; the substituted PERM/labor must have an approved I140 that is not revoked or (labor) reassigned (to some one else). Not sure when AC21 180 day clock starts( for immunity from revoked I140). from I485 or from substitution date ?
Not sure if it is true.
I am july second 485 filer, filed with later PD(2007). Then an earlier (2004, my own) PD was substituted by lawyer last year which is now current on that 485 application.
I opened a SR last week, response to SR from USCIS told me they still have old (later) PD on file.So they cant allocate a visa to me.
Lawyer said he has confirmation from USCIS that USCIS will obey earlier 2004 PD(confirmation received last year!).
two contrary pieces of information from a govt agency!!
Anyone with similar experience
I am sick of this USCIS !
I also heard (from another person) that for association with I485; the substituted PERM/labor must have an approved I140 that is not revoked or (labor) reassigned (to some one else). Not sure when AC21 180 day clock starts( for immunity from revoked I140). from I485 or from substitution date ?
Not sure if it is true.
I am july second 485 filer, filed with later PD(2007). Then an earlier (2004, my own) PD was substituted by lawyer last year which is now current on that 485 application.
I opened a SR last week, response to SR from USCIS told me they still have old (later) PD on file.So they cant allocate a visa to me.
Lawyer said he has confirmation from USCIS that USCIS will obey earlier 2004 PD(confirmation received last year!).
two contrary pieces of information from a govt agency!!
Anyone with similar experience
I am sick of this USCIS !
No comments:
Post a Comment