Mike Tyson Tattoos

thanks again

I paid my lawyer with a single check that had the USCIS fee + Attorney Fee...so I never got back the deposited check.....If I had know about this trick, I would have sent my lawyer two separate checks. Is there any way I can call USCIS and ask them the LIN# ?

All rite, SO I read this thread mistakenly- I guess it's your luck or my stupidity.
My lawyer was also Anal to give me my EAC, This is what I did, On the back of the Check that was submitted for 140 will be a stamp from Immigration authorities- You should also see an EAC # if you got that check back or if you can makeup a story saying you need it as part of the documentation.
Then you can go online and ensure that it's valid and the dates match.
Good Luck,

Good info vxg. Thanks. I am wondering though how come your job duties didn't change when you got promoted from an engineer to a manager, unless I guess you are an engineering manager and not a business development manager? Just curious. :)
My duties increased, in past i was doing more tech work now i mostly manage people who do the same tech work but as i said it's all subjected to the lawyer and employer.

Thanks to all who responded so far !!

I saw the denial letter and here is the gist of it from what I understood :

Got an RFE asking for client letter (since when my case was filed in Jan 2010, I was working for the client). From then onward I am off and on with the same client depending on their schedules / needs.

So when we got the RFE, I was not working for the client. My attorney replied to the RFE stating that I completed my project before time and now internally working on product development (which we do ) and produced the time sheets and everything for the internal project as well as for the client till the date of completion.

My case got denied reasons pertaining that USCIS asked for client letter, but you (petetioner) submitted papers that he is not working for the client anymore and now working for an internal project. OK. But where is the client letter that we asked for ? Since you didn't produce that, we are denying the case.

Hi Gurus,

I am on 9th year H1B extension.I filed I140/485 concurrently in June 2007 and on April 11th I got the denial email for I140.
No RFE/NOID received.

Here is my case.

PD May 2003, EB2, own labor. During Dec 06, the labor was converted from NON RIR to RIR and amended to accept BS+5 OR MS+3 to reflect the current state.

I-140/485/EAD/AP applied in June 2007, NSC and received EAD/AP and used AP recently. My H1B valid till Feb 2009.

After 5 stressful days finally today, we got the denial notice and it looks like USCIS assumed my Labor under EB3 classification and rejected my I140 where as the labor certificate is approved under EB2 classification. our attorney believes that its the result of an overlook by IO at the amedments made to the original labor.

Please let me know what options I have.


Thanks
GCWarrior

Oh yeah, we are demainding an RFE (request for evidence) to substantiate this gossip....
...not demanding an RFE, but making an RFE and demanding an answer. The initiator of this thread must have heard it as a wish, but wishfully being optimistic, reported it as a news.

I had received the same story in email about 7 years back.


This looks like a hoax to me. Could you quote a credible news story or a link on a enforcement site where there is any advisory?

[QUOTE=das0]Predierock,

Can you please adivse on the following:

My wife is currently on H4.

She has a H1b approved for 3 years to start working on October 1, 2007.

Now, she gets a EAD (though my I-485) to start working on September 1, 2007 valid for 1 year only.

She has a job and the company would like her join asap.

Questions are:

1. Will her EAD (I-485 pending) cancel her H1B approval for the company?

NO, I-485 doesn't cancel anything. H1b is approved for her sponsored by company. Basically it is status you need to maintain

2. Can she work only Sept 1 - Spet-30 on EAD and then fall-back on her H1B (Oct 1 - later) for next 3 years?

Yes. i believe she can work on EAD during that period, she is in 485 pending status. and she can switch back to H1b. I-9 form needs to be updated accordingly.

We know that H1b is approved and all set for 3 years but Green-Card-EAD is only valid for 1 yr only and sometimes renwal takes time and $$ and bit riskly. So we cant decide if we should stick to her alreay approved H1b or fall back on EAD.

Please advise folks

lawyer paper filed april 15th
receipt received april 27th
received date april 16th receipt date april 26th

last soft LUD April 30th

no fp notice or anything since

called them 2 days ago to put in a request for fp cus i am tired of waiting hoped that this would prompt them to look at it.... so far no change

seems like CSC is slow compared TSC. I dont think they issue FP notice for paper filing. There were lot of applications received by CSC in feb..i think thats what is causing the delay. please keep us updated with your status.

Hi
Is there any webpage that has details on an EAD and what jobs a person can do, cannot do, whether new job it needs to tie in 50% to current job etc ..
I'm looking for the official page that has some detail on this.

Looked online did not find anything. A little surprised.
Let me know if any of you have any relevant links to this info.
Not looking for hearsay ... something official.
Thanks
V

Thanks Tnite and Leoindiano for your responses.

Yes, I called Customer Service first thing this morning and I think I was lucky enough to talk to an IO. I think she was an IO because she had access to all the information and she confirmed that the older PD is in effect.

Once again thanks for the responses.

Pnini


When you filed I485 , you have to send a copy of the I140. If you had sent in the one with the old PD then thats what USCIS will go by.

Call USCIS custonmer service and see what they tell you.

Hi,

Why would notification be necessary? Isn't an I-9 form (w/ EAD as proof of work permit) being present at the employer's location sufficient?

I haven't heard of any employer "notifying" USCIS about an employee's EAD status!

Thanks!

It is an error on USCIS part, may be because you (or your spouse's employer) have not notified the USCIS about your spouse using the EAD for employment.

H4 status ends the moment you start using EAD for employment. You would need to use AP for travel and re-entry.
This is correct. Status changes from H4 to AOS the moment one starts working on EAD.

just remember to carefully preserve all payslips, email communications, and all other docs from this period. If and when you file for GC, you MAY need these docs.

But, otherwise, your case is straightforward. As long as you send the H1 transfer to CIS before you are terminated/resign from B, you status will continue uninterrupted... So you are ok.

Thanks. That helped a lot !

My wife is on H4 and is exploring the posibility of converting to a H1. She recently went for her first interview and the people over there told her that there is a new rule for H4 to H1B conversion. According to them, she needs to go to India and get her H1B stamped before she can start working. Is this true? As far as I know, all one needs is an approved I-797 (for I-129 petition) indicating that the approval is for change of status to H1B (meaning that the approval notice has a I-94).

Please let me know if there is any merit in the above statement?
Nope its not true.All she need is approved I-797.Visa Stamping is only required when she has to travel outside US and reenter.

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html

The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts

Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.

The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.

Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.

Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?


Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.

A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.

Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?

China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.

Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?

A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.

Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?

A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.

Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?

A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.

Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?

A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.

Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?

A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.

Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?

A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.

Q: What are the implications for the future?

A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.

About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.

I hope they are, too. Some birds seem to feed the young much longer than others, even after they've left the nest. I'd suggest taking a large *Do Not Disturb* sign with you tomorrow. Or perhaps "Approach at Your Own Risk*.
:)

Just a follow up question:

Now that i have my I-140 approved for over an year now and never filed for 485, does the similar/same job/field apply in case of a job change or can i have a new job responsibility with a new employer and then port my PD based upon the approved 1-140 from previous employer?

xxx

For once, I like what Grassley is doing.

Not all L1 is bad
Not all H1B is bad
Not all consulting companies are bad

So why are we behaving like crabs?
Think from a perspecive of a legit L1 visa holder too

To anti Immigrants even your greencard is bad.
He will be happy if your greencard is made painful
Will you rejoice then?

What Sen is doing is looking at everything in black and white. He is making all L1 as bad. He shoud be suggesting fixes in L1 like giving more power to L1s to complain and protecting them if they complain. he should be making punishment tougher for fraud. But he is targetting the whole via and you are feeling happy about it. Just because you are not an L1 visa holder some of us are happy. Tommow if he does it to all EAD holders will you be happy?

Tri State Folks,
You just saw priority dates in Dec visa bulletin. What do you plan to do now?
I have some answers for you but would like to hear from you first..

Hello IV members : I am mad about discrimination agst Indian and China born applicants for GC processing times. I have read many posts in here and it states to join tri-state chapters .. What does it mean? How can we be part of this.. Pls. elaborate.
Thanks