tselva
07-05 08:15 PM
I have just thought of something (don't know that anyone discussed this in our forum), what if USCIS do not reject the cases filed for July and keep the packages back for few months or years, just saying...
a) Need to record each application that they have received
b) Need to make sure that there are no concurrent I-140 filings
c) Need to differentiate the packages received in June and July
d) Etc
e) Etc
What will happen to AILA' Plaintiffs? Can they sue just having FedEx/UPS tracking number and the updated visa bulletin?
What will happen to the folks applied on 1st July? They are not going to have AP and EAD in the future. Few of their visas may need renewal soon. How can the travel outside USA? I know there are lots more problems than this.....
What will happen, if Oct Visa Bulletin is moved to up to 2005 for all the EB categories and the people who have filed in July not received the packages back in the meantime?
Moreover, who knows, USCIS may not send the packages back for several weeks to avoid lawsuit. What will happen to the people who applied on 07/02?
a) Need to record each application that they have received
b) Need to make sure that there are no concurrent I-140 filings
c) Need to differentiate the packages received in June and July
d) Etc
e) Etc
What will happen to AILA' Plaintiffs? Can they sue just having FedEx/UPS tracking number and the updated visa bulletin?
What will happen to the folks applied on 1st July? They are not going to have AP and EAD in the future. Few of their visas may need renewal soon. How can the travel outside USA? I know there are lots more problems than this.....
What will happen, if Oct Visa Bulletin is moved to up to 2005 for all the EB categories and the people who have filed in July not received the packages back in the meantime?
Moreover, who knows, USCIS may not send the packages back for several weeks to avoid lawsuit. What will happen to the people who applied on 07/02?
vine93
03-04 11:01 AM
These type of memorandum every officer will know immidiately. Remember earlier many people posted in this forum when they called for Infopass appointment officer wasn't aware of any such ruling that he needs to approve I-485 if FBI Namecheck pending more than 180 days.
waitingmygc
03-08 12:48 PM
Congrats.
Celebrate your day with Wife and Mom. Happy Women day.
Celebrate your day with Wife and Mom. Happy Women day.
yestogc
05-31 05:05 PM
Will Obama fool his foot steps ?
more...
PlainSpeak
02-23 09:16 AM
Wow i bought a new toyota in Oct last year and no one asked me my immigration status. Of course i already had a loan with toyota financials for my older car so i guess that worked out to my benefit.
So i guess if some one gets deniend in one place it is not a dead end. They have other banks and credit unions as options and the best option would be a dealer provided finance as they want to sell you the car
So i guess if some one gets deniend in one place it is not a dead end. They have other banks and credit unions as options and the best option would be a dealer provided finance as they want to sell you the car
thakkarbhav
11-17 09:17 AM
DMV stopped issuing DL based on EAD card in Virginia. I guess it will be same for TX and other states. You need original I485 receipt to get one year extensiton. EAD no more valid document for extension.
more...
sanjaymk
07-18 12:46 PM
Thanks to the CORE team and everyone here who chipped in and made us not feel alone in this fight.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
Thanks,
Sanjay.
Ramba
08-13 10:55 AM
Hi All,
I have a very starge situation. I have an approved I-140 based on PERM LC - EB3 -India with PD of Jan 2006.
Before July 07, my company substituted me for LC Sub with PD of Jan 2003 and did the I-485 filing based on this pending LC Sub.
(Guys...please dont jump on me for using LC SUB...I work for a one of the biggest tech companies with 60000 employees for 6 years and its their policy to do LC Sub for their employees..i didn't buy the LCs through consulting or some one...). I got EAD renewals, AP etc...Since my LC Sub I-140 is beyond its processing dates, my attorney filed a AILA request and got a reponse saying
"The AILA Liaison committee member working on your case reviewed the petition with an I-140 senior officer at USCIS. It appears that the employee that had the original labor certification application adjusted his status based on the labor certification. Unfortunately, this means that the labor cert and priority date cannot be used for your green card application."
But, they also mentioned that "Your AOS that is pending will continue to be active based on your own approved I-140. This was verified by CIS in their response to our inquiry"
Question 1: My attorney said its an unofficial USCIS/AILA determination. Howmuch to rely on this AILA/USCIS unofficial determination? Because, Still, USCIS case status shows my I-140 is pending. Should i wait until the decision comes on my case?
Question 2: My understanding is that, if the LC is already used, then my LC Sub I-140 will be denied... if the I-140 is denied then the I-485 will also be denied..is it correct?
Question 3: If my above understanding is correct, then how will my AOS will continue to be active based on my original I-140 if my AOS was files uding pending LC Sub-I140? Is it true or they lawyer is giving me a fake answer? I thought you can only change underlying I-140, only if the new I-140s dates are current..in my case Jan 2006 date is not current.....
Please give me your thoughts...I would really appreciate your help...
Whatever response you got from the AILa may be true. If the first employee got GC through that LC (by AC21), you cannot get second one and even you can not port the PD. In nutshell, one LC cannot produce two 140 or 2 GC. You may be lucky, instead of denying your 485, the uscis perhaps replaced underlying first I-140 (LC sub) by your second approved (original) I-140 with PD 2006. Dont rely on web case status check.
I have a very starge situation. I have an approved I-140 based on PERM LC - EB3 -India with PD of Jan 2006.
Before July 07, my company substituted me for LC Sub with PD of Jan 2003 and did the I-485 filing based on this pending LC Sub.
(Guys...please dont jump on me for using LC SUB...I work for a one of the biggest tech companies with 60000 employees for 6 years and its their policy to do LC Sub for their employees..i didn't buy the LCs through consulting or some one...). I got EAD renewals, AP etc...Since my LC Sub I-140 is beyond its processing dates, my attorney filed a AILA request and got a reponse saying
"The AILA Liaison committee member working on your case reviewed the petition with an I-140 senior officer at USCIS. It appears that the employee that had the original labor certification application adjusted his status based on the labor certification. Unfortunately, this means that the labor cert and priority date cannot be used for your green card application."
But, they also mentioned that "Your AOS that is pending will continue to be active based on your own approved I-140. This was verified by CIS in their response to our inquiry"
Question 1: My attorney said its an unofficial USCIS/AILA determination. Howmuch to rely on this AILA/USCIS unofficial determination? Because, Still, USCIS case status shows my I-140 is pending. Should i wait until the decision comes on my case?
Question 2: My understanding is that, if the LC is already used, then my LC Sub I-140 will be denied... if the I-140 is denied then the I-485 will also be denied..is it correct?
Question 3: If my above understanding is correct, then how will my AOS will continue to be active based on my original I-140 if my AOS was files uding pending LC Sub-I140? Is it true or they lawyer is giving me a fake answer? I thought you can only change underlying I-140, only if the new I-140s dates are current..in my case Jan 2006 date is not current.....
Please give me your thoughts...I would really appreciate your help...
Whatever response you got from the AILa may be true. If the first employee got GC through that LC (by AC21), you cannot get second one and even you can not port the PD. In nutshell, one LC cannot produce two 140 or 2 GC. You may be lucky, instead of denying your 485, the uscis perhaps replaced underlying first I-140 (LC sub) by your second approved (original) I-140 with PD 2006. Dont rely on web case status check.
more...
sam2006
10-01 09:55 PM
I think his friend is a full time employee of Lehman.
Yes he is( was ) a FT at Lehman
Yes he is( was ) a FT at Lehman
chanduv23
10-29 07:24 PM
The meeting was very well organized. Q&A session with Attorney Prashanti Reddy was very useful. Here are my suggestions:
a) We can have these conferences every two months or whenever core thinks so.
b) I think we should stick to immigration.
c) Earlier 'Invite a friend/Add a member' campaigns were very successful as compared to flyer/poster campaign.
Thanks for coming with your wife - this is the third meet and you both came for all the meets.
Excellent input - we must do more of these. We are expanding now and getting support so I think we are in a position to do more stuff.
Flyers and posters also play a crucial role as a first step to a lot of people.
a) We can have these conferences every two months or whenever core thinks so.
b) I think we should stick to immigration.
c) Earlier 'Invite a friend/Add a member' campaigns were very successful as compared to flyer/poster campaign.
Thanks for coming with your wife - this is the third meet and you both came for all the meets.
Excellent input - we must do more of these. We are expanding now and getting support so I think we are in a position to do more stuff.
Flyers and posters also play a crucial role as a first step to a lot of people.
more...
vinki
10-27 12:54 PM
Hi !
I recently got my EAD. ..but I have not yet got a job..... when should I apply for SSN ? :confused:
Thank you in advance....
Vinki.
I recently got my EAD. ..but I have not yet got a job..... when should I apply for SSN ? :confused:
Thank you in advance....
Vinki.
sparky_jones
05-07 12:23 PM
Some are of the opinion that filing AC21 draws unnecessary attention & scrutiny of your application (apparently which would not happen if you do not file AC21).
But I found this article from Murthy.com to be conclusive on this matter.
MurthyDotCom : Risk of GC Rescission for Failure to Notify Change of Job / Employer! (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_risres.html)
Filing AC21 is the safest approach -- I guess there is no need worry if the papers are in line.
I continue to be amazed at how much opinion differs on this matter among the immigration lawyers community. If you ask Ron Gotcher, he would come out guns blazing telling you that you are nothing short of a fool inviting trouble if you pro-actively inform USCIS of job change under AC21. He claims to have seen "monster" RFEs result from such notifications, causing unnecessary and avoidable pain. On the other hand, Murthy is strongly in support of such notification, claiming that they haven't seen any additional RFEs from such notification, and that it's best to inform USCIS of job changes. They give the example of avoidance of future GC rescission as the motivation.
So, who's telling the truth? Maybe Ron has a point. Maybe Murthy encourages AC21 notification because it brings additional business to them. Or maybe Ron is blowing hot air..and Murthy is right. Who knows...
At the end of the day, it boils down to you. Who do you want to trust?
But I found this article from Murthy.com to be conclusive on this matter.
MurthyDotCom : Risk of GC Rescission for Failure to Notify Change of Job / Employer! (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_risres.html)
Filing AC21 is the safest approach -- I guess there is no need worry if the papers are in line.
I continue to be amazed at how much opinion differs on this matter among the immigration lawyers community. If you ask Ron Gotcher, he would come out guns blazing telling you that you are nothing short of a fool inviting trouble if you pro-actively inform USCIS of job change under AC21. He claims to have seen "monster" RFEs result from such notifications, causing unnecessary and avoidable pain. On the other hand, Murthy is strongly in support of such notification, claiming that they haven't seen any additional RFEs from such notification, and that it's best to inform USCIS of job changes. They give the example of avoidance of future GC rescission as the motivation.
So, who's telling the truth? Maybe Ron has a point. Maybe Murthy encourages AC21 notification because it brings additional business to them. Or maybe Ron is blowing hot air..and Murthy is right. Who knows...
At the end of the day, it boils down to you. Who do you want to trust?
more...
wandmaker
08-17 09:09 AM
Hi,
I am currently holding L1 and B1 visa from a company A. Now some company B has applied for my H1 Visa. If I get H1b visa, does both L1 and B1 get cancelled.
Thanks.
Your L1 will be CWPed for sure. I went for H1B stamping multiple times, my B1 was not CWPed
I am currently holding L1 and B1 visa from a company A. Now some company B has applied for my H1 Visa. If I get H1b visa, does both L1 and B1 get cancelled.
Thanks.
Your L1 will be CWPed for sure. I went for H1B stamping multiple times, my B1 was not CWPed
jonty_11
02-05 11:59 AM
I have a old EB3 PD Sept 2003 with Company A , and a new EB2 and I140 approved from Company B.
Can I ask my old company to file for I140 so that I may use the Old PD.
How can I bear the expenses of the USCIS and attorney's fees, given I am not working at company A.
Any clues would help.
Can I ask my old company to file for I140 so that I may use the Old PD.
How can I bear the expenses of the USCIS and attorney's fees, given I am not working at company A.
Any clues would help.
more...
dreeft
10-28 10:43 PM
Sounds complicated. I don't want to rain on your parade, but having more than one person in a freelance "business" (a business is anything that earns money) is very complicated. You have to work out tax and wages.
I'd suggest starting alone and then getting someone to help you, or share work with some else in a similar situation.
I'd suggest starting alone and then getting someone to help you, or share work with some else in a similar situation.
Singer
10-22 01:12 PM
I am a vocalist based in the US for the last 13 years. I have performed around the world at World music festivals, television shows, radios, various clubs, private events, for stars like P... S.... and D.... B.... and for organizations such as UN, UNESCO, UNDP, NDI, Schomburg Center, etc.I have always been legal and on several P1/O1 artist visas), I have applied on December 2006 for a EB1-EA green card
On June 10th 2007 I have received a RFE from the Nebraska Service Center, and I had to submit additional stuff proving I am really a singer with an international carreer. (I won an award by the way)before August 15th 2007. On August 3rd 2007 I went myself to the FedEx office and sent a priority 8.0lbs package to the Nebraska Service Center. It was delivered on August 6th signed by Mr. Brad B... at the Nebraska Center.
When I called they said my case was pending, same thing on the USCIS website where I create a portfolio. It is until April 2009 that thanks to congressional and senatorial help that we found out that my I-140 and I-485 had been denied, closed archived since end of August 2007! They said that my response to the RFE was received by them in October!
We argued that I never received the denial notice, neither my attorney received. My congressional liaison faxed them the ax receipt, then the congressional liaison there said: "O my God!" We were hoping that at this stage they would simply reopen the case and look at my 8 pounder RFE response! Nebraska Service Center decided that i will have to file an appeal.
In April 2008 I filled and appeal with Administrative Appeals Office in DC in 2008 (more money into thei pockets) to demonstrate that both my I-140 and I-485 were denied in error, (they had lost my application) the case was returned to Nebraska for them to reconsider.
The AAO decision granted me all that was in their power to give.
1. The appeal was rejected because it was untimely filed -- By statute (law) they cannot consider an untimely appeal regardless of circumstances however.
2. They state that if "an utimely appeal meets the requirements of a motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider, the appeal "MUST" be treated as a motion and a decision "MUST" be made on the merits of the case. -- This is exactly what I asked for.
3. They state that a motion to reconsider must establish that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence of record at the time of the initial decision. Again this is exactly what I claimed.
4. They catagoricaly state in paragraph 2 on page 3 -- Here, the untimely appeal "MEETS" the requirements of a motion to reopen and reconsider. They also positively state that you "SUCCESSFULLY" argue that the October 10, 2007 decision was "FLAWED" and they point to 2 specific reasons -- that yur attorney of record was not properly notified and that your response to the RFE was not considered.
5. In paragraph 5 on page 3 they conclude that the October 10, 2007 decision was "CLEARLY IN ERROR" and that the decision "DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS".
6. Finally, in the last pragraph on page 3 and the 1st paragraph of page 4 they state "therefore, the director "MUST" consider the untimely appeal as a motion to reopen and reconsider and render a "NEW" decision acccordingly"
7. They also state that the "NEW" decision "MUST" thoroughly address all of the evidence submitted in your response to the RFE.
So the AAO�s office sent back my file to the Nebraska Service Center.
Then the I-140 was reopened and I finally approved May 20th 2009. At that time the rest should be like �a letter in the mail�. That is when I demanded that my I-485 be reopened as well.
They responded to my congressional liaison telling him that they will reopen the I-485 and tat the green cards were being prepared and would be sent to us in less then 60 days. Stating: This has been going on for too long�
That is when the �saga� took another turn. On August 14th 09 I received another RFE on the I-485! I was told by one lawyer that it was not so bad (they just needed to update my records since 2006 is the date of my first GC filling), But this RFE did not make sense because once the I-140 is approved they should not ask me to supply any documents work related. They wanted me to prove that I will continue to work in my field, what I have been doing for the last 2 years since they have denied my case and what will be my upcoming work offers.
Remember that in May 2009 they have said that the green cards would be sent�
We responded again with a 5 pounder file! We mailed it September 1rst 2009. I provided them with the same documents I sent in the 8 pounder they have lost in 2006, plus everything I have done since. Including all the performances with P. S., D. B. and letters from future contractors such as The United Nations, Schomburg, my booking agents letters, etc...)
October 19th 2009 we received an email from USCIS saying that a decision has been taken and that my husband�s I-485 has been denied!
Another ridiculous thing.
1-I am the petitioner, not my husband.
2-They should adjudicate my case first, not my husband�s!
3-my case is still pending no decision made on it�
At this time, we are awaiting the full denial explanation letter, to see what is the reason for their decision. Hoping that they just made another mistake for example dissociated my husband I-485 from mine the petitioner.
I am currently (Thank God) on an 01-visa valid until 2011, my husband has a -O3-visa
Because of this terrible saga, we have endured a tremendous stress, and anxiety. We have lost a lot of money. Between the lawyers fees, the various application fees plus the appeal we have spent more than $20,000. I have decided not to file another appeal because this is more money into their pockets. I am ready to sue the USICS with a writ of mandamus and more if they do not fix the multiple mistakes they have made.
Please somebody in this forum answers me. What should I do? Please help!
Thank you.
Singer
On June 10th 2007 I have received a RFE from the Nebraska Service Center, and I had to submit additional stuff proving I am really a singer with an international carreer. (I won an award by the way)before August 15th 2007. On August 3rd 2007 I went myself to the FedEx office and sent a priority 8.0lbs package to the Nebraska Service Center. It was delivered on August 6th signed by Mr. Brad B... at the Nebraska Center.
When I called they said my case was pending, same thing on the USCIS website where I create a portfolio. It is until April 2009 that thanks to congressional and senatorial help that we found out that my I-140 and I-485 had been denied, closed archived since end of August 2007! They said that my response to the RFE was received by them in October!
We argued that I never received the denial notice, neither my attorney received. My congressional liaison faxed them the ax receipt, then the congressional liaison there said: "O my God!" We were hoping that at this stage they would simply reopen the case and look at my 8 pounder RFE response! Nebraska Service Center decided that i will have to file an appeal.
In April 2008 I filled and appeal with Administrative Appeals Office in DC in 2008 (more money into thei pockets) to demonstrate that both my I-140 and I-485 were denied in error, (they had lost my application) the case was returned to Nebraska for them to reconsider.
The AAO decision granted me all that was in their power to give.
1. The appeal was rejected because it was untimely filed -- By statute (law) they cannot consider an untimely appeal regardless of circumstances however.
2. They state that if "an utimely appeal meets the requirements of a motion to reopen or a motion to reconsider, the appeal "MUST" be treated as a motion and a decision "MUST" be made on the merits of the case. -- This is exactly what I asked for.
3. They state that a motion to reconsider must establish that the decision was incorrect based on the evidence of record at the time of the initial decision. Again this is exactly what I claimed.
4. They catagoricaly state in paragraph 2 on page 3 -- Here, the untimely appeal "MEETS" the requirements of a motion to reopen and reconsider. They also positively state that you "SUCCESSFULLY" argue that the October 10, 2007 decision was "FLAWED" and they point to 2 specific reasons -- that yur attorney of record was not properly notified and that your response to the RFE was not considered.
5. In paragraph 5 on page 3 they conclude that the October 10, 2007 decision was "CLEARLY IN ERROR" and that the decision "DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS".
6. Finally, in the last pragraph on page 3 and the 1st paragraph of page 4 they state "therefore, the director "MUST" consider the untimely appeal as a motion to reopen and reconsider and render a "NEW" decision acccordingly"
7. They also state that the "NEW" decision "MUST" thoroughly address all of the evidence submitted in your response to the RFE.
So the AAO�s office sent back my file to the Nebraska Service Center.
Then the I-140 was reopened and I finally approved May 20th 2009. At that time the rest should be like �a letter in the mail�. That is when I demanded that my I-485 be reopened as well.
They responded to my congressional liaison telling him that they will reopen the I-485 and tat the green cards were being prepared and would be sent to us in less then 60 days. Stating: This has been going on for too long�
That is when the �saga� took another turn. On August 14th 09 I received another RFE on the I-485! I was told by one lawyer that it was not so bad (they just needed to update my records since 2006 is the date of my first GC filling), But this RFE did not make sense because once the I-140 is approved they should not ask me to supply any documents work related. They wanted me to prove that I will continue to work in my field, what I have been doing for the last 2 years since they have denied my case and what will be my upcoming work offers.
Remember that in May 2009 they have said that the green cards would be sent�
We responded again with a 5 pounder file! We mailed it September 1rst 2009. I provided them with the same documents I sent in the 8 pounder they have lost in 2006, plus everything I have done since. Including all the performances with P. S., D. B. and letters from future contractors such as The United Nations, Schomburg, my booking agents letters, etc...)
October 19th 2009 we received an email from USCIS saying that a decision has been taken and that my husband�s I-485 has been denied!
Another ridiculous thing.
1-I am the petitioner, not my husband.
2-They should adjudicate my case first, not my husband�s!
3-my case is still pending no decision made on it�
At this time, we are awaiting the full denial explanation letter, to see what is the reason for their decision. Hoping that they just made another mistake for example dissociated my husband I-485 from mine the petitioner.
I am currently (Thank God) on an 01-visa valid until 2011, my husband has a -O3-visa
Because of this terrible saga, we have endured a tremendous stress, and anxiety. We have lost a lot of money. Between the lawyers fees, the various application fees plus the appeal we have spent more than $20,000. I have decided not to file another appeal because this is more money into their pockets. I am ready to sue the USICS with a writ of mandamus and more if they do not fix the multiple mistakes they have made.
Please somebody in this forum answers me. What should I do? Please help!
Thank you.
Singer
more...
bharani
08-11 09:51 AM
Eb2 -I
Pd 04/19/2006
Rd 08/13/2007
Nd 10/10/2007
Pd 04/19/2006
Rd 08/13/2007
Nd 10/10/2007
drirshad
05-05 02:23 AM
USCIS TEXAS SERVICE CENTER EMAIL PILOT INITIATIVE:
EMPLOYMENT-BASED 1-485 SPECIAL NOTIFICATION PROTOCOL
April 22, 2010
PURPOSE: The purpose of the Texas Service Cemer (TSC) employment-based (EB) 1-485 Email Pilot Special Notification Initiative is to prOVide a mechanism by which applicants can facilitate TSC processes relating to speCific EB 1-485 application scenarios through an email address. The email address for this purpose is: EBUPDATE.Tsc@dhs.gov.
Applicants will receive an automatic reply from TSC stating that the email was received. After submitting infonnation through this pilot email initiative, one follow-up inquiry may be sent if no communication has been received from TSC, such as a decision notice, a request for evidence, or other notice, within 90 days.
The automatic email reply will proVide further information on how to submit the follow-up inquiry. This email account does not replace general inquiry processes that are in place for users; general inquiries
received at this email account will not be addressed.
EB 1-485 CASE IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES
1. What is the procedure to notify TSC when an applicant is eligible for porting under AC21?
I. You should identify only one applicant in a single e-mail. E-mails must pertain to applicants whose 1-485s have been pending for 180 or more days and who are eligible for AC21 porting.
2. You should send an email to: EBUPDATE.Tsc@dhs.gov
3. On the subject line, you should write "EB 1-485/AC21." (Example: EB 1-485/AC21).
4. In the text of the email, you should prOVide: A-number, old employer's name and new employer's name. You should attach a copy of the new employer's letter of employment. The letter must
identify the follOWing information: the new employer, the letter's author and his/her job title, applicants new job title, start date of new employment, hours per week, salary, and specific description of the duties to be performed.
5. If the applicant has more than one A-number, you should type them both on the same line separated by a "/". (Example: All 1222333 I A444555666). If there are multiple family members, you should type them all on the same line separated by commas. (Example: AIII222333, A222333444, A444555666). You should also indicate which of the A-numbers is that of the principal 1-485 applicam I 1-140 beneficiary.
EMPLOYMENT-BASED 1-485 SPECIAL NOTIFICATION PROTOCOL
April 22, 2010
PURPOSE: The purpose of the Texas Service Cemer (TSC) employment-based (EB) 1-485 Email Pilot Special Notification Initiative is to prOVide a mechanism by which applicants can facilitate TSC processes relating to speCific EB 1-485 application scenarios through an email address. The email address for this purpose is: EBUPDATE.Tsc@dhs.gov.
Applicants will receive an automatic reply from TSC stating that the email was received. After submitting infonnation through this pilot email initiative, one follow-up inquiry may be sent if no communication has been received from TSC, such as a decision notice, a request for evidence, or other notice, within 90 days.
The automatic email reply will proVide further information on how to submit the follow-up inquiry. This email account does not replace general inquiry processes that are in place for users; general inquiries
received at this email account will not be addressed.
EB 1-485 CASE IDENTIFICATION PROCEDURES
1. What is the procedure to notify TSC when an applicant is eligible for porting under AC21?
I. You should identify only one applicant in a single e-mail. E-mails must pertain to applicants whose 1-485s have been pending for 180 or more days and who are eligible for AC21 porting.
2. You should send an email to: EBUPDATE.Tsc@dhs.gov
3. On the subject line, you should write "EB 1-485/AC21." (Example: EB 1-485/AC21).
4. In the text of the email, you should prOVide: A-number, old employer's name and new employer's name. You should attach a copy of the new employer's letter of employment. The letter must
identify the follOWing information: the new employer, the letter's author and his/her job title, applicants new job title, start date of new employment, hours per week, salary, and specific description of the duties to be performed.
5. If the applicant has more than one A-number, you should type them both on the same line separated by a "/". (Example: All 1222333 I A444555666). If there are multiple family members, you should type them all on the same line separated by commas. (Example: AIII222333, A222333444, A444555666). You should also indicate which of the A-numbers is that of the principal 1-485 applicam I 1-140 beneficiary.
jthomas
05-01 09:40 PM
Hi Guys,
Here is my situation:
- Labor & I 140 cleared: PD Jan 07 EB2
- Currently working on 6th year H1B, lawyer is asking me to extend the H1B visa for another 3 years since the I-140 has cleared.
- Changed my job title from a project engineer to a lead engineer 180 days after filing I485 ( with lawyer consent).
- Now offered a manager role with in the same organization hence accepted the offer without notifying the lawyer.
- Lawyer will ask me to file for a H1b extension in July/Aug time frame do you believe this might create a huge issue due to change in the role from an engineer to a manager (still within the engineering organization though)?
Would really appreciate your inputs and comments to this, is there anything on the USICS website that clarifies this.
Thanks
Amit
Engineer and manager have different Onet codes and responsibilities. I have been promoted to a managerial position in my formal firm but i turned it down.
Here is my situation:
- Labor & I 140 cleared: PD Jan 07 EB2
- Currently working on 6th year H1B, lawyer is asking me to extend the H1B visa for another 3 years since the I-140 has cleared.
- Changed my job title from a project engineer to a lead engineer 180 days after filing I485 ( with lawyer consent).
- Now offered a manager role with in the same organization hence accepted the offer without notifying the lawyer.
- Lawyer will ask me to file for a H1b extension in July/Aug time frame do you believe this might create a huge issue due to change in the role from an engineer to a manager (still within the engineering organization though)?
Would really appreciate your inputs and comments to this, is there anything on the USICS website that clarifies this.
Thanks
Amit
Engineer and manager have different Onet codes and responsibilities. I have been promoted to a managerial position in my formal firm but i turned it down.
seahawks
09-18 12:11 AM
yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaH...Welcome to D.C. Thanks for posting all the encouraging words to get everyone to come!
sathweb
02-13 09:10 AM
Our priority date is not yet current but that seem like a good idea. How do I go about finding who to contact.
The tool you are looking for is Google. Just search for your local Senator and give him a call, they will tell you what they need. As you said, Senator is very effective if your date is current.
The tool you are looking for is Google. Just search for your local Senator and give him a call, they will tell you what they need. As you said, Senator is very effective if your date is current.
No comments:
Post a Comment