Mike Tyson Tattoos

You are OK. This is taken from the 485 instructions.
File all employment-based AOS applications at the following address:

USCIS Nebraska Service Center
P.O. Box 87485
Lincoln, NE 68501-7485

This includes an employment-based Form I-485 filed concurrently with a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, and an employment-based Form I-485 filed based on a pending or an approved Form I-140. To facilitate acceptance and processing of Form I-485 when Form I-140 has already been approved, submit a copy of the I-140 approval notice.

what does this mean ? did I file to wrong Service Center?:(

Gurus, your inputs please: Can I take up a position in India with an American Firm while on H1B?

You can take any position anywhere with anyone...H1B is only if you want to work in the US

Yes. Thats true. If you are not eligible for any other H-1extensions(i.e. labor filed 365 days before etc), you can apply for premium processing for I-140 if your H-1 is about to exprire. However, the extension can only be filed with a copy of the approved I-140. You can also do your H-1 under premuim processing if you are running out of time.
I think its better if you just go ahead and apply and pray everything works according to plan.

FinalGC, Thanks for your reply. I am partially paying for this process. I heard that if the labor is approved and h1b is about to expire, I can apply I-140 under premium processing due to a recent rule change. Is that true? If so, will I be able apply concurrent I-140 and h1B extension?

what to you mean by 485 fingerprinting?
Is it just getting it done or any other issue relating to this...

Just getting it done...Some os us didnt get notice at all

Is there is any way can we see the data.

i think they are going to do it every quarter. i am thinking that the results in the aug 2009 file were third quarter FY 2009 data. so i am thinking that the data as of sept 2009 will be out in Nov. any other predictions?

SUIT OR NO SUIT, BUT

The question is, how will this rally look and feel different from illegal immigrant rally?

The info I got is I can not apply for 7th year based on the approved LC I have. But I can apply for 7th year based on the LC pending with PBEC. My problem is that LC applied in Marc 2005, is thr some other employer and I do not have any details of this application. I sent 3 emails to PBEC for screenshot which can be used as proof od pending LC and I can then apply for 7th year extension. But unfortunately I did not get any response from PBEC, I know some people get the response within 2-3 hrs from them????

Another possibility is if the pending I-140 is approved by Aug end I can apply for 3 year extension.

So I am totally uninformed what's the future. I talked with the lawyer who filed my earlier labor, she says we can demand for screenshot only in June, then we will get response from PBEC.

Hope this helps.
Hi Madhuri,

Do you have any more information regarding this.
I am in the same boat .
My LC got approved through perm in my 6th year
and I140 applied and pending .
6th year expires in Sept06.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

That means, after the forms signed, you got one year to apply for 485. Once applied, USCIS may request for another medical after 18 months.

This is my understanding....

My main question is:

Comparing two forms there are 4 additional tests recently added in the new I693 form. I needed to know if I can file my I-485 without any issues with the medical completed in May'08 or need to fill out the new form again with new set of medical exams?

I am trying to understand if USCIS will send an RFE because my I693 (may'08) form does not have these 4 additional tests.

Don't know much about how long medical tests are valid for but for sure the test has changed. I medical took a test last year for the employer sponsored green card and just took another medical test in August for another green card petition and my doctor told me that they're much stricter with the TB section.
I saw the form and it is totally different. They're asking for more detail.

I had to take another vaccine, which wasn't required last year.


Folks,

Due to the priority data transfer issue my I-485 application was rejected in June'08 (submitted based on June'08 visa bulletin).

As part of my application necessary medical exam tests were conducted in May'08. If I were to submit my application today based on the new visa bulletin do you think I need to take all medical exams again and re-submit? Won't the first set of medical exams have any validity?

Also, on the forums there is a talk about medical forms being changed? Can anyone confirm?

Thanks in advance for all your responses.

This is beginning to look more and more like a organized and deliberate attempt to block people from filing for AOS.....

Dude, the whole system is setup and organized wrongly deliberately..
In the guise of fairness and promoting racial diversity, the system is deliberately setup so that countries that supply most labor backlog all the time....

Phillippines for healthcare workers
Chindia for technology workers
Mexico for low skilled workers

This gives businesses that employ the imported labor the opportunity to exploit the employees at will.

There are always unused visa numbers and oversubscribed countries in the system all the time...this gives politicians the leeway to throttle immigration as they want...through the DOS bulletins...the July fiasco was just an extreme example of this practice....

Even if a point based system is brought in, the per country fixed quotas will not go away....and thus the retrogression will continue....yes, you qualify through the point based system, but since a lot more from your country qualify too...you go the end of the line...

^^^^

USCIS is thinking of setting the priority date to ......India's independence day Aug-15-1945. Mera Bharat Mahaan.

I was issued a license based on my EAD expiration date. Same for my wife. We went back to DMV to get license extended based on I 94 expiry date. My I94 expiry date was different than ED expiration date as the customs gave expiry date which is 1 year later than EAD expriation date. I asked the customs officer why the date was different than my EAD date. He told my stay was valid till my I94 expiry date.
Anyways, IOWA DMV extended our license based on I94 date and we came back happy to know that we shall not have to walk in -30F to fetch our grocery as we wait to get our renewed EAD..

regardss

Dr. Balkrishna Matapurkar, a surgeon at New Delhi's Maulana Azad Medical College, has pioneered a stem cell based technique for the regeneration of tissues and organs. He already holds a patent for this innovative technique. Incidentally, he is of view that embryonic stem cell research is one of the lost sciences of ancient India.

But please note that I am not trying to propagate that indian culture is best or better etc. I just wanted to share that stem cell related view of mine.

A couple of the fellow members might be cursing me to have posted this in. I know its nowhere related to immigration, but just a thought share.

That would be the view of Dr BalKrishna Matapurkar.

There is no accepted literary evidence to support his views. If so, please point me to that

yawn!

Ok sorry if I post this in the wrong place. So I married my wife in 2004 and we began the immigration fillings right away. so you know I was turned away at the border in 2000 because I was going to stay with my wife and her family for 3 months.
When they asked why they would put me up for that long, I told them they were like my adopted family. they still turned me away saying that the money I had at the time $300 was not enough to support my self for that time. this was summer break from school. So that is from my record and the officer who interviewed me wrote in his report that I intended to be adopted for immigration purposes. I think he just mis understood me. ok so that is in the noid. when we went to the first interview the woman was hostile towards my wife and I asking about our age and how we met we are 22 years apart in age. we provided her with documents some bills, photos and joint bank account statement. this is all we had in the first 4 months of out marriage. she asked repeatedly why we had not made any major joint purchases Why we didn't have joint health care. both because I had just started working and had not saved money yet.
We had a second interview to which we took the same documents and more. This interview was short. The interviewer was professional and asked alot of yes and yes questions and would stop us from going on more then that. he said that he had to talk with his supervisor and we would hear from him with in six months. So nothing from them from them for 4 years I called the help line once a year and kept up my EAD and worked full time. Then 2 guys showed up and asked to be showed around the house. we let them in and they interviewed us they took some photos and said have a good day.
Then 6 months later we received our first NOID. Stating that I had been turned away the one time and that I had said I was to be adopted. That I was in a relationship with a person that does not exists. They pointed out that there were photos of my wife with her ex-husband on the walls.
So we go see some lawyers talk to like 6 of them and picked the one who seemed best. talked to people in out community friends who had immigrated. ects. so his plan was to withdraw and file anew to get a fresh first interview. So we refiled with a stack of documents 4 inches thick. insurance, all of our bill, tax returns, car payments. anything we could think of.
So we get anther interview dude takes us back to his office. asked me the basic security questions. and sent me away. Then told my wife and lawyer that the first filing was denied and letters sent. and that they never received our letter withdrawing the first filing. we never received their denial letter. He said he would review out case and the new documents. he sent a NOID for the second filing like 4 months later. So we responded to the noid with a letter from my wife and I refuting the noid line by line. And with letters from friends PHD professors at the local collages. about 10 - 15 all in all and we have not had a reply from them. So the layer said that we had to wait on the USCIS to make the next move. is this so is there anything we can do to move this along? should we switch lawyers? we really like the man we have but I dont know its been over a year now.

sorry for the poor grammar its really late here. thanks for your health.

thanks so much guys
my labor is in bpc
I still have 18 months in H1B. but after I get my I140 I will switch
if I feel that I cant file 485 for a while

Isnt recording conversations without the consent illegal? :confused:

Found on the net:

The U.S. federal law allows recording of phone calls and other electronic communications with the consent of at least one party to the call. A majority of the states and territories have adopted wiretapping statutes based on the federal law, although most have also extended the law to cover in-person conversations. 38 states and the D.C. permit recording telephone conversations to which they are a party without informing the other parties that they are doing so.

12 states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Washington.

It is illegal under all jurisdictions to record calls in which one is not a party.

A complete state-by-state set of regulations regarding telephone call recording may be obtained in the following report published by The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press:

http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states.html

it is very risky. you cannot use AC 21 when you move from a full time practising physician to fellowship. how can you justify being paid about 1/3rd of the salary mentioned in your Labor application. the job has to be similar in description and pay. earning extra by moonlighting will not be sufficient to satisfy the criteria. personally I have known Physicians who did not even move from a University hospital to a community hospital as the job description will be different from a University hospital to a community hospital. if you have green card processing through your wife then you can file as her dependent and go for the fellowship. if you don't have that option, then I would suggest that you not go for the fellowship and stick with your current job.

Summary

(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)


Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.

In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.



Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252


Matters for Congressional Consideration


Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.

Status: In process

Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.

Status: In process

Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.

Status: In process

Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.

Status: In process

Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action


Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.

Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security

Status: In process

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.

Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security

Status: In process

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.

Agency Affected: Department of Labor

Status: In process

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.

Agency Affected: Department of Labor

Status: In process

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.








VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)



More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)

At the time i was 2 semesters away from my Masters plus the mess my previous attorney had caused, my new attorney felt comfortable filing under EB3 because he felt i would have problems at the I-140 stage if i did not compete my Masters by that time.
In 2001 my attorney expected to have my GC by 2003 the latest and he was not counting on this mess with DBEC.

Hope all of us are through with this nightmare by end of 2007.http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=2453

Unfortunately, you are now out of status, and you are no longer authorized to work. Your employer can file a new petition for you, but because you are not in legal H1 status, you are not entitled to an extension of H1 status. The same is true if a new employer files an H1 petition for you. In either case, you will have to leave the US, get a new H1 visa stamped in your passport and re-enter the US using that visa in order to regain legal H1 status with authorization to work.

Premium processing isn't required, but if you want to get back to work as soon as possible it would be a good idea.

Ann