glus
02-16 08:56 AM
hello,
I had a very similar situation when i applied for a load a year ago. The loan officer was puzzled with my immigration status. He initially pre-approved the load and then he called and said that the bank can't approved due to my immigration status. However, the deny letter did not say that and said that the reason for denial was a completely different one. I spoke to a lawyer regarding this and he said that as long as I don't have immigration status / or origin of mine as the reason of denial in writing, I don't have a case. And, he said, immigration status can be taken into consideration when applying for a loan. As such, I re-aplied in a different bank and had no issues whatsoever.
I had a very similar situation when i applied for a load a year ago. The loan officer was puzzled with my immigration status. He initially pre-approved the load and then he called and said that the bank can't approved due to my immigration status. However, the deny letter did not say that and said that the reason for denial was a completely different one. I spoke to a lawyer regarding this and he said that as long as I don't have immigration status / or origin of mine as the reason of denial in writing, I don't have a case. And, he said, immigration status can be taken into consideration when applying for a loan. As such, I re-aplied in a different bank and had no issues whatsoever.
wallpaper peace and love quotes. beatles
PDOCT05
10-29 03:55 PM
Hi PDCOT05,
You should be OK, I am aware of same situation and they accepted the refiling.
Mine was reject due to "missing or incorrect fee" refiled on Oct 12, waiting. Strange part is we dont have any evidence of the original check. That makes it complicated..
Thanks for your info..and I wish you good luck. By any chance are you aware whether i need to send new fees or old fees? As a precaution I am going to sending the diff amount in a separate check.
You should be OK, I am aware of same situation and they accepted the refiling.
Mine was reject due to "missing or incorrect fee" refiled on Oct 12, waiting. Strange part is we dont have any evidence of the original check. That makes it complicated..
Thanks for your info..and I wish you good luck. By any chance are you aware whether i need to send new fees or old fees? As a precaution I am going to sending the diff amount in a separate check.
knnmbd
04-28 02:45 PM
DOL Proposed Legislation for Labor Certification
In an attempt to clamp down on fraud in the labor certification application process, the Department of Labor (�DOL�) has proposed regulations, which would impact both pre-PERM and PERM filings. The proposal includes requiring employers to pay for all costs and fees associated with a labor certification application. The penalties for violating this proposal include denial of the labor certification, revocation, debarment, or any combination. Debarment means an employer can not file a labor certification application for up to three years.
A labor certification application would also have a limited validity period. Currently a labor certification application is valid without limitation unless it is revoked or withdrawn. Under the proposed regulations, an employer must file an immigrant petition with the CIS within 45 days of the labor certification application approval. For applications which have already been certified, an employer must file within 45 days of the enactment of final rule implementing the regulations. If the labor certification application is not filed within this timeframe, it will expire and can not be used to support an immigrant petition.
The proposed regulations also prohibit substitution. Substitution occurs when an employer has an approved labor certification application, but the individual that was originally listed in the labor certification application is no longer being sponsored. An employer could �substitute� a new employee into the labor certification application if the new employee met the minimum requirements listed in the labor certification application at the time the application was initially filed. Concerned that substitution encouraged fraud, DOL proposes to eliminate substitution.
Finally, the proposed rule prohibits a labor certification application to be sold, bartered or purchased. If an individual or entity is found to have engaged in this kind of transaction, the labor certification application can be denied, revoked, debarment, or any combination.
I like the idea of the employer bearing ALL green card expenses and attesting to that with no impunity from prosecution if found guilty. Hey, that's the way it's supposed to be. The employer is SO INTERESTED in keeping you that they spend 15K on your paperwork, wait for 3-4 years till you get your GC. The reason we are being treated like the way we are by employers is because we are prepared to do any thing to get our GC's , even pay for it if it comes down to it and that this the case 90% of the time. Eliminating labor substitution, clamping down on fraudulent paperwork will clear the way up for everyone. I am glad that these steps are being taken; too bad it took so long.
In an attempt to clamp down on fraud in the labor certification application process, the Department of Labor (�DOL�) has proposed regulations, which would impact both pre-PERM and PERM filings. The proposal includes requiring employers to pay for all costs and fees associated with a labor certification application. The penalties for violating this proposal include denial of the labor certification, revocation, debarment, or any combination. Debarment means an employer can not file a labor certification application for up to three years.
A labor certification application would also have a limited validity period. Currently a labor certification application is valid without limitation unless it is revoked or withdrawn. Under the proposed regulations, an employer must file an immigrant petition with the CIS within 45 days of the labor certification application approval. For applications which have already been certified, an employer must file within 45 days of the enactment of final rule implementing the regulations. If the labor certification application is not filed within this timeframe, it will expire and can not be used to support an immigrant petition.
The proposed regulations also prohibit substitution. Substitution occurs when an employer has an approved labor certification application, but the individual that was originally listed in the labor certification application is no longer being sponsored. An employer could �substitute� a new employee into the labor certification application if the new employee met the minimum requirements listed in the labor certification application at the time the application was initially filed. Concerned that substitution encouraged fraud, DOL proposes to eliminate substitution.
Finally, the proposed rule prohibits a labor certification application to be sold, bartered or purchased. If an individual or entity is found to have engaged in this kind of transaction, the labor certification application can be denied, revoked, debarment, or any combination.
I like the idea of the employer bearing ALL green card expenses and attesting to that with no impunity from prosecution if found guilty. Hey, that's the way it's supposed to be. The employer is SO INTERESTED in keeping you that they spend 15K on your paperwork, wait for 3-4 years till you get your GC. The reason we are being treated like the way we are by employers is because we are prepared to do any thing to get our GC's , even pay for it if it comes down to it and that this the case 90% of the time. Eliminating labor substitution, clamping down on fraudulent paperwork will clear the way up for everyone. I am glad that these steps are being taken; too bad it took so long.
2011 Peace Love And Happiness,
rahul2699
05-19 08:31 AM
Please check the thread http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum16-iv-agenda-and-legislative-updates/184288-from-iv-access-to-donor-forum-issues.html
You would need to provide your information as directed by Starsun in the first post. Starsun has been keeping unwell these days and verifying information periodically. However within a few days, you would be added to the donor forum upon verification.
In the meantime, please join your state chapters and get active. ImmigrationVoice.org - Immigration Voice State Chapters (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52)
Pappu -- Is there anything i need to do besides sending the e-mail. I've sent the e-mail twice and its been a week since the contribution has made. I am by no means waiting desperately waiting to get access to donor forums but i am curious. Please let me know what i am missing. If the team is busy, may be IV should think about looking for more volunteers.
You would need to provide your information as directed by Starsun in the first post. Starsun has been keeping unwell these days and verifying information periodically. However within a few days, you would be added to the donor forum upon verification.
In the meantime, please join your state chapters and get active. ImmigrationVoice.org - Immigration Voice State Chapters (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=72&Itemid=52)
Pappu -- Is there anything i need to do besides sending the e-mail. I've sent the e-mail twice and its been a week since the contribution has made. I am by no means waiting desperately waiting to get access to donor forums but i am curious. Please let me know what i am missing. If the team is busy, may be IV should think about looking for more volunteers.
more...
casinoroyale
01-31 02:18 PM
Ok, this is a tough'ie.
You might be ok, but let me explain. There 2 rules that play-in in this scenario. One is " last action ", the other is " effectve date of your new I-797 ". If the start/effective date of your new I-797 is later than your last action i.e your entry in the USA, then technically your new I-94 which you got from your new I-797 will kick-in from its effective date making your stay in USA legal till its end. Now, if the start/effective date of your new I-797 started before you entered USA using your OLD I-797 (concequently got short I-94 validity) that will control your legal stay period ( as per last action rule ).
That being said, this is very tricky situation, though arguably valid as per different memo's of USCIS. So it is in your best interest, either to go with this interpretation and do nothing if the first case that i explained above is true or play safe and go out of country and enter back US using your new I-797.
Consult a lawyer before you take any step.
Thanks.
You might be ok, but let me explain. There 2 rules that play-in in this scenario. One is " last action ", the other is " effectve date of your new I-797 ". If the start/effective date of your new I-797 is later than your last action i.e your entry in the USA, then technically your new I-94 which you got from your new I-797 will kick-in from its effective date making your stay in USA legal till its end. Now, if the start/effective date of your new I-797 started before you entered USA using your OLD I-797 (concequently got short I-94 validity) that will control your legal stay period ( as per last action rule ).
That being said, this is very tricky situation, though arguably valid as per different memo's of USCIS. So it is in your best interest, either to go with this interpretation and do nothing if the first case that i explained above is true or play safe and go out of country and enter back US using your new I-797.
Consult a lawyer before you take any step.
Thanks.
gc_on_demand
12-03 01:43 PM
My friend got h4 without any issue last week at mumbai consulate. Her husband was on h1 full time for 6 years with same company. No document asked and few questions regarding trip. etc..
more...
guy03062
07-17 12:42 AM
kudos to ImmigrationVoice's core team and its members, especially flower campaign and San Jose rally. Apart from Congresswoman Lofgren, IV is the one who really added immense pressure on Govt by their root level activites.
2010 peace love and happiness
arnet
11-07 12:53 PM
difficult to classify which company are good or bad, based on each one experience or interest they may like or may not like the company. some struck in a company due to retrogression too. if you are planning to switch company, decide based on your interest/family situation and see whether your future job can give you those. get help from your friends/jobsites like dice.com/monster.com/careerbuilder.com/hotjobs.com to see the job oppurtunities.....good luck.
Disclaimer: Use at your own risk...I'm not an immigration attroney so please consult for your situation as laws/procedures are changing.
Friends,
Can you all post the names of good consulting companies to work for. Let's create a list here.
Thanks,
Disclaimer: Use at your own risk...I'm not an immigration attroney so please consult for your situation as laws/procedures are changing.
Friends,
Can you all post the names of good consulting companies to work for. Let's create a list here.
Thanks,
more...
yabadaba
08-07 09:26 AM
are you dumb or something????
this has been out for weeks...we are waiting for the september bulletin
what a moron!
this has been out for weeks...we are waiting for the september bulletin
what a moron!
hair Love is friendship set on fire
RNGC
02-05 04:47 PM
^^
more...
ssd213
02-25 04:53 PM
Bear in mind the following
You dont need to pay any tax in India for money that you withdraw from your 401k for only upto two years after you return back to india. (your are no longer a nri and the 2 years is the buffer)
For any money you withdraw after 2 years, you need to tay tax in US (which shouldnt be a lot if you withdraw little by little and you being non-resident of usa) and also pay tax in india (which could be quite a bit)
You dont need to pay any tax in India for money that you withdraw from your 401k for only upto two years after you return back to india. (your are no longer a nri and the 2 years is the buffer)
For any money you withdraw after 2 years, you need to tay tax in US (which shouldnt be a lot if you withdraw little by little and you being non-resident of usa) and also pay tax in india (which could be quite a bit)
hot quotes about peace and love. dalai lama quotes on peace.
ItIsNotFunny
04-06 12:47 PM
Yes it is correct link, many of us are headed this way....
I was saying this is not official link (please read previous post).
I was saying this is not official link (please read previous post).
more...
house Tagged: love, hate, inspired,
rocky17105
07-29 11:19 AM
of course used the sub labor to get 2005 EB2 priority date and moved to this employer. We filed the 140 on july 1st but some document was missing so it came back and then lawyer filed it again which reached uscis timely by 16th July 2007. I am still with the same employer since 2007 and yes unfortunately the employer is found in h1b fraud later but still havent proven guilty so not sure if company is blacklisted or not.
I understand why you are asking all these questions but my question is just can we reopen 485 based on wrong denial from USCIS side.
I understand why you are asking all these questions but my question is just can we reopen 485 based on wrong denial from USCIS side.
tattoo I had tea in my peace garden
maximus777
12-09 03:09 PM
in this environment where jobless rate is pushing 10%, i.e., one in ten Americans is without a job! Not trying to be negative here, just reconciling with the present reality and trying to re-adjust my expectations. Just have to hope that the economy picks up steam next year and optimism returns.
more...
pictures peace love and happiness
bchauhan
08-09 01:19 PM
It is your passport number
dresses quotes about peace and love. war and peace quotes about
andhrawala
09-22 10:01 AM
I applied my EAD in Nebraska as OH falls under it's jurisdiction and got my approval in 2 weeks. Thought of sharing so that some one may find this information useful.
Labor Priority Date: EB2 - 2007 April - India
I-140 Applied: 05/15/2007
I-140 Approved: 08/10/2009
I-485 Applied: 07/26/2007
I-485 Status: Pending
Labor Priority Date: EB2 - 2007 April - India
I-140 Applied: 05/15/2007
I-140 Approved: 08/10/2009
I-485 Applied: 07/26/2007
I-485 Status: Pending
more...
makeup peace love happiness Pictures,
summitpointe
02-29 08:07 AM
If your company is financially strong and can prove that they can pay your salary, then you will not have any problem. If your company is small and have only couple of consultants working and the earnings are less then you might have issues.
girlfriend peace love and happiness
anandrajesh
12-08 11:39 PM
Dear friends,
We are hoping to here from members in MN, there is much to be done yet...let us build on the energy from these last days.
Please visit the Chapters thread in the members only area and post your info and ideas in the MN chapter thread. Thanks!
OR use this thread if it is just more convenient....
Count me in dude... i am not a member in the state chapter...
We are hoping to here from members in MN, there is much to be done yet...let us build on the energy from these last days.
Please visit the Chapters thread in the members only area and post your info and ideas in the MN chapter thread. Thanks!
OR use this thread if it is just more convenient....
Count me in dude... i am not a member in the state chapter...
hairstyles quotes about peace and love. dalai lama quotes on peace.
gc28262
07-30 07:07 AM
Success Story: Showing a Valid Employer-Employee Relationship (http://shusterman.com/newsletterusimmigrationaugust2010.html#5)
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
peacocklover
12-01 08:33 AM
Ya, I think that could be a problem if they make it current again. Instead of messing up with influx of applications again like in July 2007, they can gradually move dates from July 2007 to Jan 2008 (six months) or July 2008 (a year) ahead in EB2 category, In that way it will not clog the system and will justify people who are sincerely waiting in the line until now and also for future movement.
i guess it doesn't count ppl who are waiting. The no of ppl who are not able to file 485 is huge.
i guess it doesn't count ppl who are waiting. The no of ppl who are not able to file 485 is huge.
shawnsteinbarth
February 14th, 2005, 05:41 PM
I have decided to go for the SB-600 rather than the 800 because I don't think I need the extra functions at this point. It will save on $$$ and weight too.
Thanks,
Shawn
Thanks,
Shawn
No comments:
Post a Comment