EB3_SEP04
05-18 12:31 PM
Thanks for the reply, I had checked this before posting. However this is for extension of status(EOS) or change of status(COS) of non immigrant status.
I-485 being adjustment of status to permanent residence the AAO appeal cant be similar to a EOS/COS nonimmigrant visa situation.
In the entire 51 pages I dont think this situation is addressed for I-485 denial appeal, Please let me know if this is not correct.
Thanks
Even if the doc does not specifically mention AOS or 485, i think the central idea is that you do not accrue unlawful presence since the denial was wrongful in the first place(in my case 485 was (wrongfully) denied when prev emp revoked my approved 140). And i think applies to ANY case. it also makes sense that USCIS resets the counter ONLY IF the case has been reopened because they don't want people abusing the MTR/appeal process just to buy some time in the country when the original denial is right.
I-485 being adjustment of status to permanent residence the AAO appeal cant be similar to a EOS/COS nonimmigrant visa situation.
In the entire 51 pages I dont think this situation is addressed for I-485 denial appeal, Please let me know if this is not correct.
Thanks
Even if the doc does not specifically mention AOS or 485, i think the central idea is that you do not accrue unlawful presence since the denial was wrongful in the first place(in my case 485 was (wrongfully) denied when prev emp revoked my approved 140). And i think applies to ANY case. it also makes sense that USCIS resets the counter ONLY IF the case has been reopened because they don't want people abusing the MTR/appeal process just to buy some time in the country when the original denial is right.
wallpaper party quotes funny. Home of
maverick_joe
05-02 12:22 PM
thanks meridiani.planum, that saved me a lot of googling!
house needs to pass it, then give it to senate. It needs to pass there also (last year the Comprehensive Immigration Reform started in Senate and died right there). If whats passed in senate is not exactly same as what was passed in the house (ie. they add/delete stuff as its debated) then it goes to a committee where they reconcile everything. Once that is ok, it goes to the president for voting. the president can sign it or veto it and ask for changes. For something like this he will typically sign. So its upto the house and the senate... we are in the very first stage right now and there is a long way to go....
house needs to pass it, then give it to senate. It needs to pass there also (last year the Comprehensive Immigration Reform started in Senate and died right there). If whats passed in senate is not exactly same as what was passed in the house (ie. they add/delete stuff as its debated) then it goes to a committee where they reconcile everything. Once that is ok, it goes to the president for voting. the president can sign it or veto it and ask for changes. For something like this he will typically sign. So its upto the house and the senate... we are in the very first stage right now and there is a long way to go....
Dhundhun
10-19 04:44 PM
My friend initially came on H1 visa. Her Husband was the primary applicant for Green Card and she was working on H1 visa without break. Now she is on EAD and joined a job in EAD got 2 months pay stubs( ie 8 weekly pay stubs). After that got 3 months break. Her status now is on I-485 and no more on H1. Note: Her husband was the primary applicant and she applied I-485 through her husband's GC. Now will the break in her work on EAD be a problem for getting her GC?.
No.
Thanks for the replies... Now her Husbands Gc is approved and she is waiting on getting her's. But now she is on her EAD and I believe once she changed and worked on EAD she is no more on her H1 status. Her status should be I-485 status. So does that still means that she needs to be working without break, to maintain the status?
She does not need to work because she is not primary applicant.
Her EAD was obtain based on her Husbands being the primary applicant of the Gc. While her husband received the GC she was working on her EAD. Her husband has clean record in the employment history with no break and is still sticking to the GC sponser employer.
No.
Thanks for the replies... Now her Husbands Gc is approved and she is waiting on getting her's. But now she is on her EAD and I believe once she changed and worked on EAD she is no more on her H1 status. Her status should be I-485 status. So does that still means that she needs to be working without break, to maintain the status?
She does not need to work because she is not primary applicant.
Her EAD was obtain based on her Husbands being the primary applicant of the Gc. While her husband received the GC she was working on her EAD. Her husband has clean record in the employment history with no break and is still sticking to the GC sponser employer.
2011 Funny party quotes search
.jpg "pictures party quotes funny.")
shiankuraaf
03-22 01:28 PM
Check your LC approval and it should there in the Occupation: Computer Programmer, <code>. Or if you have filed LC application than it should the value you put in Job Name field.
more...
bcrawl
05-20 06:19 PM
Hi,
I received my permanent green card based on marriage to US citizen, valid for 10 years last month. Now, I am planning to travel to India after close to 9 years, but I am extremely concerned about returning point of entry issues and I wanted to see what would the community suggest.
I came to the US in Fall of 2002 on a student visa. Around aug - 06, I went out of status. Right around then I met my future wife who is an american citizen, we moved in dec of 06 and got married in Jun 07. Due to financial hardship, we couldnt apply for my AOS/GC up untill late Oct last year. [Oct - 2010]. We hired a lawyer and every thing went pretty smoothly and fast.
I had my EAD approved within 45 days and I got my GC interview after a month. We [me, wife, lawyer] went to the meeting and everything went great. Our interviewing officer just took 20 mins to question us and we received my Permanent GC [not conditional] in the mail shortly there after.
Now I am planning a visit back home for one week, because I couldn't get more days off.
I am just worried about my return step to US at the port of entry. I have been reading and I learnt that I just have to present my country passport and physical green card to the officer who will then scan and ask questions.
What kind of questions can I expect from the officer?
Will he be asking me questions about my past as in when was the last time I came to US?
Why I was illegal/out of status of close to 4 years and questions about our marraige etc?
When applying for GC we collected lot of documents to provide to the USCIS that our marriage was in good faith such as joint bank accounts, pictures, leases etc. Should I take all those documents with me when flying?
Will taking a certified copy of my marraige certificate beneficial along with the supporting documents?
It feels like another "meeting" with USCIS where I have to show proof but I am really concerned that I dont get denied at the port of entry.
Also, after I got my EAD, I moved to another state to work on a contract position for couple of months. I consider my actual address as the address I applied my GC which is in another state, since this is just temporary job. I already mentioned this to the officer at my interview and he noted my current location/job title etc during that time....should I do something about it?
Sorry about such a long list of questions. Its just that I havent travelled out of country in such as long time and I dont know what issues I could face and what I need to carry with me so that I can be allowed back into the country upon return?
Thanks.
I received my permanent green card based on marriage to US citizen, valid for 10 years last month. Now, I am planning to travel to India after close to 9 years, but I am extremely concerned about returning point of entry issues and I wanted to see what would the community suggest.
I came to the US in Fall of 2002 on a student visa. Around aug - 06, I went out of status. Right around then I met my future wife who is an american citizen, we moved in dec of 06 and got married in Jun 07. Due to financial hardship, we couldnt apply for my AOS/GC up untill late Oct last year. [Oct - 2010]. We hired a lawyer and every thing went pretty smoothly and fast.
I had my EAD approved within 45 days and I got my GC interview after a month. We [me, wife, lawyer] went to the meeting and everything went great. Our interviewing officer just took 20 mins to question us and we received my Permanent GC [not conditional] in the mail shortly there after.
Now I am planning a visit back home for one week, because I couldn't get more days off.
I am just worried about my return step to US at the port of entry. I have been reading and I learnt that I just have to present my country passport and physical green card to the officer who will then scan and ask questions.
What kind of questions can I expect from the officer?
Will he be asking me questions about my past as in when was the last time I came to US?
Why I was illegal/out of status of close to 4 years and questions about our marraige etc?
When applying for GC we collected lot of documents to provide to the USCIS that our marriage was in good faith such as joint bank accounts, pictures, leases etc. Should I take all those documents with me when flying?
Will taking a certified copy of my marraige certificate beneficial along with the supporting documents?
It feels like another "meeting" with USCIS where I have to show proof but I am really concerned that I dont get denied at the port of entry.
Also, after I got my EAD, I moved to another state to work on a contract position for couple of months. I consider my actual address as the address I applied my GC which is in another state, since this is just temporary job. I already mentioned this to the officer at my interview and he noted my current location/job title etc during that time....should I do something about it?
Sorry about such a long list of questions. Its just that I havent travelled out of country in such as long time and I dont know what issues I could face and what I need to carry with me so that I can be allowed back into the country upon return?
Thanks.
bijualex29
08-11 09:08 PM
It is necessary to investigate about refling is legal? What happend if they found the 2nd file, will they cancell the first one? It is stupid question I know, but we need to investigate this.
I searched under google with not much luck.
If any one is aware about the legal terms of refiling please post with reliable source, not forum.
I searched under google with not much luck.
If any one is aware about the legal terms of refiling please post with reliable source, not forum.
more...
amsgc
12-09 11:45 AM
gman,
Has your fiance considered getting a waiver for the 2 Yr. Home residency requirement?
http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/info/info_1288.html
Perhaps she could apply on the grounds of No Objection from Home Country. From what I understand, she needs a No objection certificate sent by her country's embassy in the US directly to the department of state.
Once she get's the waiver, she can be in the US on H, L, or LPR status.
Good luck!
Has your fiance considered getting a waiver for the 2 Yr. Home residency requirement?
http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/info/info_1288.html
Perhaps she could apply on the grounds of No Objection from Home Country. From what I understand, she needs a No objection certificate sent by her country's embassy in the US directly to the department of state.
Once she get's the waiver, she can be in the US on H, L, or LPR status.
Good luck!
2010 party quotes funny. Family Guy
smuggymba
07-19 09:05 AM
The best option for you is to go to India now, and get registered marriage done. As long as the marriage happened before the GC approval you will have the option of follow to join, otherwise a really long wait.
Get the parents to agree ( scare them into submission). You need 30 days of court notice before the actual marriage can be performed, (take care of that now, while the decision is being made) fly home and get married and then file for follow to join for her.
The OP mentioned he's getting married in december 2010 and we're all giving his reistered marriage suggestion, which is great but we need to check if he has found a bride or not yet or is december just a date planned by your parents? Just kidding:D
Get the parents to agree ( scare them into submission). You need 30 days of court notice before the actual marriage can be performed, (take care of that now, while the decision is being made) fly home and get married and then file for follow to join for her.
The OP mentioned he's getting married in december 2010 and we're all giving his reistered marriage suggestion, which is great but we need to check if he has found a bride or not yet or is december just a date planned by your parents? Just kidding:D
more...
howzatt
11-07 01:09 PM
I don't think so. We got our FP appointment on the 20th but we already have our EAD two weeks ago.
What's your receipt date?
08/13/07.
Was your FP appointment a "Code 3"? I managed to get a infopass appointment on Nov 14th(more than 90 days from receipt date) just to be on the safe side. Lets see what happens.
What's your receipt date?
08/13/07.
Was your FP appointment a "Code 3"? I managed to get a infopass appointment on Nov 14th(more than 90 days from receipt date) just to be on the safe side. Lets see what happens.
hair pictures party quotes funny.
IfYouSeekAmy
05-07 07:11 AM
I am sorry I should have mentioned...this question is from my sister.
Your sister has a wife???? :confused:
Your sister has a wife???? :confused:
more...
buehler
03-26 05:11 PM
Does USCIS issue multiple RFEs on I-485 simultaneously or consecutively? The reason I ask is because both myself and my wife recently got RFEs. Myself because the Doctor forgot to fill in the Tuberculosis details and for my wife about her birth certificate. We have responded to both and the responses are exactly what they requested in the RFE.
Should we now relax and just wait for the PD to be come current and get our GC or is there a possibility of getting more RFEs? When there are multiple issues in an application would USCIS raise all of them simultaneously or wait for the response for the first one before raising the second one? Any one have any experience in this regard?
Should we now relax and just wait for the PD to be come current and get our GC or is there a possibility of getting more RFEs? When there are multiple issues in an application would USCIS raise all of them simultaneously or wait for the response for the first one before raising the second one? Any one have any experience in this regard?
hot funny sayings and quotes for
dextro_a
07-13 05:37 PM
Do not send originals back. My company lawyer sent it to them last year (after keeping certified copies) and it has has not came back yet. They do not issue any new receipt numbers and there is no way to track it. Lawyer also did the inquiry thru AILA but nothing happened.
more...
house Cows Come Home Funny
gc_dream07
02-24 02:09 PM
I heard from somebody (may be my information is wrong) that even though you are in US, you can still have consulate processing. The only limitation is you can be in US only on H1B/H4 and you need to be present for Immigrant Visa (GC) in consulate in very short period of notice when GC is available.
Anybody has any idea about this??
Anybody has any idea about this??
tattoo party quotes funny. irthday
gemini23
07-18 02:45 PM
I am in the same boat as you, still waitiing for 140 approval. Now, we cant say when the 140 will be approved as the new 485 apps are going to flood uscis. I will give priority to having my H1 renewed in time, along with filing for EAD for me and my wife. My attorney from fragomen agreed with this view.
more...
pictures funny party quotes. irthday
akhilmahajan
02-07 02:11 PM
I agree with you. He opens thousands of threads for the same thing.
If you think it is a waste of resource, stay away from the thread.
but it seems to me like, u have enough time to read the thread and leave your comments here.
If you dont like it then dont leave messages.
People like you who have nothing to talk about except criticizing ppl and this have lead our community down and it shows all the negative energy around our community.
Chandu is a very very motivated person and if you are me, you wont even think about posting ur negative messages here in this thread.
So, think before u post. dont try to belittle anyone's effort.
We appreciate all your efforts and are really thankful to what you guys have done for the community.
GO IV GO. TOGTHER WE CAN.
If you think it is a waste of resource, stay away from the thread.
but it seems to me like, u have enough time to read the thread and leave your comments here.
If you dont like it then dont leave messages.
People like you who have nothing to talk about except criticizing ppl and this have lead our community down and it shows all the negative energy around our community.
Chandu is a very very motivated person and if you are me, you wont even think about posting ur negative messages here in this thread.
So, think before u post. dont try to belittle anyone's effort.
We appreciate all your efforts and are really thankful to what you guys have done for the community.
GO IV GO. TOGTHER WE CAN.
dresses funny single quotes. party
vikramWrites
02-04 01:11 PM
I am exactly in a similar situation, but my condition is much better. Got a job offer within 15 days of lay-off.
I have a US MBA and was working with a large corporation in finance dept. I was on h1b � which is already stamped on my passport and is valid for 2 more years (2010-2013). My job was pulled-back in Dec. After 15 days, I got a new job. The new employer, which is also a very large corporation took 30 days for background checks and documentation. Now has filed h1b petition through consular processing (premium processing), which has been approved. Now I need a new i-94. I plan to visit Canada and come back with new i-94.
Has anybody been through this kind of process. How was your experience. Is flying to Canada and back better than driving. It is advisable to go to India instead of going to Canada. I do not have an appointment at US consulate because I only need new i-94 (and not visa stamping). Will Canadian consulate have problem because I do not have an appointment at US consulate in Toronto. Can officers at canadian border decline me i-94 and re-entry.
Please share if your advice.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Complicated situation.
Came to the US on H1B Visa, 3 years, 2009-2012, with valid I-94.
Got laid off, but didn't leave the country and therefore became "Out of Status".
Stayed out of status for over 1 year.
Applied for new job, got offer, prepared paperwork and applied for NEW H1B (NOT a transfer since I was out of status). Did this through sponsoring company & their attorneys.
New H1B was approved.
Now I have to leave & reentry to get a new I-94, according to the lawyer.
I've heard I might not be able to go to Canada or Mexico and have to go to my homecountry? My attorney on the other hand says all I need to do is leave&reentry without even going through a consulate, just to get a new I-94.
Just want to double check that I'm not making any mistakes by going to Mexico instead of my home country (Italy).
Thanks!
I have a US MBA and was working with a large corporation in finance dept. I was on h1b � which is already stamped on my passport and is valid for 2 more years (2010-2013). My job was pulled-back in Dec. After 15 days, I got a new job. The new employer, which is also a very large corporation took 30 days for background checks and documentation. Now has filed h1b petition through consular processing (premium processing), which has been approved. Now I need a new i-94. I plan to visit Canada and come back with new i-94.
Has anybody been through this kind of process. How was your experience. Is flying to Canada and back better than driving. It is advisable to go to India instead of going to Canada. I do not have an appointment at US consulate because I only need new i-94 (and not visa stamping). Will Canadian consulate have problem because I do not have an appointment at US consulate in Toronto. Can officers at canadian border decline me i-94 and re-entry.
Please share if your advice.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Complicated situation.
Came to the US on H1B Visa, 3 years, 2009-2012, with valid I-94.
Got laid off, but didn't leave the country and therefore became "Out of Status".
Stayed out of status for over 1 year.
Applied for new job, got offer, prepared paperwork and applied for NEW H1B (NOT a transfer since I was out of status). Did this through sponsoring company & their attorneys.
New H1B was approved.
Now I have to leave & reentry to get a new I-94, according to the lawyer.
I've heard I might not be able to go to Canada or Mexico and have to go to my homecountry? My attorney on the other hand says all I need to do is leave&reentry without even going through a consulate, just to get a new I-94.
Just want to double check that I'm not making any mistakes by going to Mexico instead of my home country (Italy).
Thanks!
more...
makeup funny party quotes.
eastindia
09-14 10:07 AM
By Patrick Thibodeau
September 13, 2010 05:40 PM ET
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9185178/IT_staffing_firms_lose_H_1B_lawsuit
Computerworld - WASHINGTON - IT staffing firms that hire H-1B workers and make them available to customers are located in office parks and buildings around the U.S. But the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), under pressure by Congress to improve enforcement of the H-1B program, issued a memo last January that said that these IT staffing firms weren't the real employers of foreign workers and, thus, couldn't use this visa.
The so-called Neufeld Memo riled the IT staffing industry and in June three small firms that rely on H-1B visa holders for up to 90% of their employees sought a preliminary injunction to stop the USCIS from enforcing it. Those firms were joined in the suit by industry groups.
In August, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler dismissed their case.
Although the matter is unlikely to be appealed, it did clarify the limits of the controversial memo, according to the TechServe Alliance, an services industry group in Alexandria, Va. that took part in the legal fight.
H-1B battle
The memo, written by USCIS Associate Director Donald Neufeld, said that IT staffing firms that place H-1B workers at third-party sites didn't control the workers or have a true employer-employee relationship. That, he wrote, is why they weren't eligible for the visas. The staffing firms, in turn, argued that they maintained the authority to hire, pay, fire and supervise the woekrs and were very much in control of their employment.
Mark Roberts, CEO of TechServe Alliance, said the USCIS made some concessions during the case, namely that joint employment, or staffing, is permissible under the H-1B program, and that the memo was not binding on adjudicators.
"Our basic argument in the lawsuit was that this memo was tantamount of a regulation, and you are not allowed to basically change the rules and modify an existing regulation by memo," said Roberts.
But even if the memo is considered only as guidance and not an iron-clad rule, Roberts said staffing companies still have to ensure that the message out of the courtroom is heard in the field. As a result, they are putting together a "toolkit" for H-1B hiring firms to use. The toolkit will cite court transcripts and other materials from the case.
Kessler said there is no evidence that the memo is binding. She said USCIS adjudicators can consider a number of factors when weighing an H-1B application.
"The memorandum instructs USCIS adjudicators to look to the totality of the circumstances in each case to determine whether there is an employer-employee relationship," Kessler wrote.
The judge said that adjudicators have "considerable discretion" in interpreting the H-1B rules.
The lawsuit argued that the IT staffing industry could lose some $100 million in business a year because of the memo. The firms that joined TechServe in filing the lawsuit were: Broadgate Inc. in Troy, Michigan, which counts 21 H-1B visa holders among its 46 IT workers; Logic Planet Inc., in Edison, N.J., which employees 95 IT workers, including 89 on H-1B visas; and DVR Softek Inc., also in Edison, N.J., which says that 45 of its 50 tech workers hold H-1B visas.
The net impact of the memo has been to block the transfer of H-1B workers to new sites so they can take on new projects.
When an H-1B employee moves from job to job, they typically transfer their H-1B visa to a different company. Since the memo was issued, the USCIS has been blocking those transfers, said Mark Roberts, the CEO of the TechServe Alliance.
The immigration service has also been rejecting some initial applications for H-1B workers.
Roberts said the USCIS action is having "a chilling effect on the industry" because consultants with H-1B visas are now fearful of moving to a different company, which is causing some contracting deals to fall apart.
H-1B battle
"All this will lead, ultimately, to more offshoring -- companies always get done what they need to get done. [Now] they will get it done offshore," said Roberts.
The tech industry has argued that staffing firms fill technology gaps; critics say the IT staffing firms can bring in less costly H-1B workers who displace U.S. workers.
"If the mere requirement that people actually work for their employer will put many companies out of business, that demonstrates the extent of the rampant abuse in the H-1B program," said John Miano, founder of the Programmers Guild. "When Congress created the H-1B program it expected that such visas would only be used when U.S. workers cannot be found and as a last resort."
A USCIS spokesman said the agency won't comment on the lawsuit.
Eleanor Pelta, first vice president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the USCIS took direct aim at the IT staffing companies with the memo. She called it "an attempt to carve out staffing companies from being eligible for H-1Bs."
The Neufeld memo redefines the concept of worker control, requiring that an employer must be "directly over the shoulder of the employee" in order to have an employer-employee relationship.
The USCIS has been under pressure from some in Congress, particularly Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who have called on the agency to implement more controls and scrutiny of the use of H-1B workers.
The use of H-1B staffing agencies has long been a point of contention with in the H-1B debate, and the lawsuit may well bring the issue to a head.
Patrick Thibodeau covers SaaS and enterprise applications, outsourcing, government IT policies, data centers and IT workforce issues for Computerworld. Follow Patrick on Twitter at Twitter@DCgov, or subscribe to Patrick's RSS feed Thibodeau RSS. His e-mail address is pthibodeau@computerworld.com.
September 13, 2010 05:40 PM ET
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9185178/IT_staffing_firms_lose_H_1B_lawsuit
Computerworld - WASHINGTON - IT staffing firms that hire H-1B workers and make them available to customers are located in office parks and buildings around the U.S. But the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), under pressure by Congress to improve enforcement of the H-1B program, issued a memo last January that said that these IT staffing firms weren't the real employers of foreign workers and, thus, couldn't use this visa.
The so-called Neufeld Memo riled the IT staffing industry and in June three small firms that rely on H-1B visa holders for up to 90% of their employees sought a preliminary injunction to stop the USCIS from enforcing it. Those firms were joined in the suit by industry groups.
In August, U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler dismissed their case.
Although the matter is unlikely to be appealed, it did clarify the limits of the controversial memo, according to the TechServe Alliance, an services industry group in Alexandria, Va. that took part in the legal fight.
H-1B battle
The memo, written by USCIS Associate Director Donald Neufeld, said that IT staffing firms that place H-1B workers at third-party sites didn't control the workers or have a true employer-employee relationship. That, he wrote, is why they weren't eligible for the visas. The staffing firms, in turn, argued that they maintained the authority to hire, pay, fire and supervise the woekrs and were very much in control of their employment.
Mark Roberts, CEO of TechServe Alliance, said the USCIS made some concessions during the case, namely that joint employment, or staffing, is permissible under the H-1B program, and that the memo was not binding on adjudicators.
"Our basic argument in the lawsuit was that this memo was tantamount of a regulation, and you are not allowed to basically change the rules and modify an existing regulation by memo," said Roberts.
But even if the memo is considered only as guidance and not an iron-clad rule, Roberts said staffing companies still have to ensure that the message out of the courtroom is heard in the field. As a result, they are putting together a "toolkit" for H-1B hiring firms to use. The toolkit will cite court transcripts and other materials from the case.
Kessler said there is no evidence that the memo is binding. She said USCIS adjudicators can consider a number of factors when weighing an H-1B application.
"The memorandum instructs USCIS adjudicators to look to the totality of the circumstances in each case to determine whether there is an employer-employee relationship," Kessler wrote.
The judge said that adjudicators have "considerable discretion" in interpreting the H-1B rules.
The lawsuit argued that the IT staffing industry could lose some $100 million in business a year because of the memo. The firms that joined TechServe in filing the lawsuit were: Broadgate Inc. in Troy, Michigan, which counts 21 H-1B visa holders among its 46 IT workers; Logic Planet Inc., in Edison, N.J., which employees 95 IT workers, including 89 on H-1B visas; and DVR Softek Inc., also in Edison, N.J., which says that 45 of its 50 tech workers hold H-1B visas.
The net impact of the memo has been to block the transfer of H-1B workers to new sites so they can take on new projects.
When an H-1B employee moves from job to job, they typically transfer their H-1B visa to a different company. Since the memo was issued, the USCIS has been blocking those transfers, said Mark Roberts, the CEO of the TechServe Alliance.
The immigration service has also been rejecting some initial applications for H-1B workers.
Roberts said the USCIS action is having "a chilling effect on the industry" because consultants with H-1B visas are now fearful of moving to a different company, which is causing some contracting deals to fall apart.
H-1B battle
"All this will lead, ultimately, to more offshoring -- companies always get done what they need to get done. [Now] they will get it done offshore," said Roberts.
The tech industry has argued that staffing firms fill technology gaps; critics say the IT staffing firms can bring in less costly H-1B workers who displace U.S. workers.
"If the mere requirement that people actually work for their employer will put many companies out of business, that demonstrates the extent of the rampant abuse in the H-1B program," said John Miano, founder of the Programmers Guild. "When Congress created the H-1B program it expected that such visas would only be used when U.S. workers cannot be found and as a last resort."
A USCIS spokesman said the agency won't comment on the lawsuit.
Eleanor Pelta, first vice president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the USCIS took direct aim at the IT staffing companies with the memo. She called it "an attempt to carve out staffing companies from being eligible for H-1Bs."
The Neufeld memo redefines the concept of worker control, requiring that an employer must be "directly over the shoulder of the employee" in order to have an employer-employee relationship.
The USCIS has been under pressure from some in Congress, particularly Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who have called on the agency to implement more controls and scrutiny of the use of H-1B workers.
The use of H-1B staffing agencies has long been a point of contention with in the H-1B debate, and the lawsuit may well bring the issue to a head.
Patrick Thibodeau covers SaaS and enterprise applications, outsourcing, government IT policies, data centers and IT workforce issues for Computerworld. Follow Patrick on Twitter at Twitter@DCgov, or subscribe to Patrick's RSS feed Thibodeau RSS. His e-mail address is pthibodeau@computerworld.com.
girlfriend marathi funny quotes.
ns007
02-14 08:38 PM
Two problems:
1. You may not qualify for EB2. One scenario - three year degree like Indian BSc. Even if you have more than 5 years of experience, Service centers do not approve I-140 in EB2 with three year degree.
2. Money and time
However is you I-140 is cleared why can you not take up the promotion and refile under Eb2 again keeping the old priority date.
1. You may not qualify for EB2. One scenario - three year degree like Indian BSc. Even if you have more than 5 years of experience, Service centers do not approve I-140 in EB2 with three year degree.
2. Money and time
However is you I-140 is cleared why can you not take up the promotion and refile under Eb2 again keeping the old priority date.
hairstyles dresses mother. party quotes
Sakthisagar
06-17 10:25 AM
Below is the link This bill was introduced May 2009, and with the judiciary committee
S.1085: Reuniting Families Act - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s1085/show)
At present publicily this is not discussed but Harry Reid et al is discussing this to include with Agjobs. Will update you as soon as something opens up regarding this.
News
National Immigration Forum - Policy Center (http://www.immigrationforum.org/policy/update-display/whats-happening-with-immigration-reform/)
AILA - Web Resources (http://capwiz.com/aila2/issues/bills/?bill=13389281)
S.1085: Reuniting Families Act - U.S. Congress - OpenCongress (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-s1085/show)
At present publicily this is not discussed but Harry Reid et al is discussing this to include with Agjobs. Will update you as soon as something opens up regarding this.
News
National Immigration Forum - Policy Center (http://www.immigrationforum.org/policy/update-display/whats-happening-with-immigration-reform/)
AILA - Web Resources (http://capwiz.com/aila2/issues/bills/?bill=13389281)
BimmerFAn
10-11 09:53 PM
I hate to be the one to have to make this argument here as I deeply sympathize with everyone who is a potential DREAM Act beneficiary, but there is a logical paradox in this bill that I cannot simply overlook.
If this bill were to pass and be enacted into law, what would be the next step for some two million undocumented aliens who would benefit from it? Obviosuly documented and legal beneficiaries would be able to drop their visas and embrace a level an unprecedented level of workforce and social mobility previously denied to them. However, I can not with say with confidence that the newly-documented beneficiaries would be able to enjoy the same priviledges.
Primarily, the cost of obtaining a college education would deter most beneficiaries from being able to fulfill one of the key requirements for full legalization. Just because someone is allowed to go to college does not mean that they would be able to. If you think that college loans will enable your dreams, unfortunately you are sadly mistaken. Current loan underwriting standards are too restrictive to allow someone with zero equity and zero income to secure a loan. College takes years of financial planning for most middle-class american families with a steady annual income well above the national median average. As someone who works in Finance you would have to show me one hell of a model to get me to me to accept the risk of underwriting a loan for someone who has no tax history and no real source of income, only a "DREAM". In-state tuition programs or any federal assistance would put an enormous pressure on the taxpayers and would bankrupt the underlying program funds. As a taxpayer myself I would be furious to know that my taxes are going to fund the education of people who did not equally contribute to the pot to begin with, but are now lining up to reap the benefits of my hard work. Public discontent would quickly halt these lending practices and present newly-legalized beneficiaries with yet another dead end.
The two-year requirement as it is written into this Bill is a joke as well. If you want to stay and work in the US you need a minimum of a Bachelor's. A 4 year degree is the only way to go, and as I said before, plan to spend close to 200k on a decent diploma. I have been fortunate enough to attend college for free but have friends who have great jobs, paying more than 60-80k and are struggling to make their monthly loan payments which can be in excess of $1500 per month.
Lastly, this Bill does nothing to solve the problem of the other 10 million undocumented aliens residing in the United States. The beneficiaries of this act would be able to do very little to help their parents, siblings and relatives who would still be stuck without a status. To be honest, I am completely against general amnesty knowing my family's own legal struggles with immigration. It would simply be unfair to the thousands of highly skilled workers and researchers stuck in Visa limbo waiting for their Green Card applications to come current. Allowing illegals to cut infront of them in line would be the equivalent of a school bully cutting you in the lunch line to claim the last cookie. Unfortunately, the only reason there are 10 million undocumented residents living in the United States is labor economics. Due to their status they have to work for less, much less. If they were legalized many of the jobs they currently fill would evaporate as paying a "fair" wage would bankrupt most businesses (landscaping, construction, restaurant) that currently employ these workers. This would leave them in a jobless and furher exacerbate the problem of poverty already plaguing immigrant communities.
I am not an enemy of the DREAM Act. I support it and I hope that one of you can address my concerns and we can have a civil and fulfilling debate. Look forward to your comments.
If this bill were to pass and be enacted into law, what would be the next step for some two million undocumented aliens who would benefit from it? Obviosuly documented and legal beneficiaries would be able to drop their visas and embrace a level an unprecedented level of workforce and social mobility previously denied to them. However, I can not with say with confidence that the newly-documented beneficiaries would be able to enjoy the same priviledges.
Primarily, the cost of obtaining a college education would deter most beneficiaries from being able to fulfill one of the key requirements for full legalization. Just because someone is allowed to go to college does not mean that they would be able to. If you think that college loans will enable your dreams, unfortunately you are sadly mistaken. Current loan underwriting standards are too restrictive to allow someone with zero equity and zero income to secure a loan. College takes years of financial planning for most middle-class american families with a steady annual income well above the national median average. As someone who works in Finance you would have to show me one hell of a model to get me to me to accept the risk of underwriting a loan for someone who has no tax history and no real source of income, only a "DREAM". In-state tuition programs or any federal assistance would put an enormous pressure on the taxpayers and would bankrupt the underlying program funds. As a taxpayer myself I would be furious to know that my taxes are going to fund the education of people who did not equally contribute to the pot to begin with, but are now lining up to reap the benefits of my hard work. Public discontent would quickly halt these lending practices and present newly-legalized beneficiaries with yet another dead end.
The two-year requirement as it is written into this Bill is a joke as well. If you want to stay and work in the US you need a minimum of a Bachelor's. A 4 year degree is the only way to go, and as I said before, plan to spend close to 200k on a decent diploma. I have been fortunate enough to attend college for free but have friends who have great jobs, paying more than 60-80k and are struggling to make their monthly loan payments which can be in excess of $1500 per month.
Lastly, this Bill does nothing to solve the problem of the other 10 million undocumented aliens residing in the United States. The beneficiaries of this act would be able to do very little to help their parents, siblings and relatives who would still be stuck without a status. To be honest, I am completely against general amnesty knowing my family's own legal struggles with immigration. It would simply be unfair to the thousands of highly skilled workers and researchers stuck in Visa limbo waiting for their Green Card applications to come current. Allowing illegals to cut infront of them in line would be the equivalent of a school bully cutting you in the lunch line to claim the last cookie. Unfortunately, the only reason there are 10 million undocumented residents living in the United States is labor economics. Due to their status they have to work for less, much less. If they were legalized many of the jobs they currently fill would evaporate as paying a "fair" wage would bankrupt most businesses (landscaping, construction, restaurant) that currently employ these workers. This would leave them in a jobless and furher exacerbate the problem of poverty already plaguing immigrant communities.
I am not an enemy of the DREAM Act. I support it and I hope that one of you can address my concerns and we can have a civil and fulfilling debate. Look forward to your comments.
la6470
03-18 12:51 AM
thats all i see on these forum.. R rated souls like you...
i cant beleive you are so naive .. are you one of those antis?
i cant beleive you are so naive .. are you one of those antis?
No comments:
Post a Comment