Aah_GC
06-19 07:51 PM
If I were you, I would look for opportunities that fall in line with your GC labor. System Analyst and Project Manager don't really go well together, leave alone the SOC codes. Your PD also seems to be quite close (relatively speaking).
If anything try to negotiate your external title with your prospective employer.
Good luck, can understand your frustration.
If anything try to negotiate your external title with your prospective employer.
Good luck, can understand your frustration.
wallpaper what may be an iPhone 5.
amitjoey
03-18 04:24 PM
Hello
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
My I140 has been pending for a long time too, without any reason. So finally after many service requests, I have talked to one of the senators of my state. I have explained the situation, ofcourse used the opportunity to highlight IV and EB immigrants problems and then talked about my specific case. There is a routine paperwork that my senators office has that they use to get authorisation from individuals like us to pursue the case with the USCIS. I have filled that paperwork and the request to look into my case. I have a strong notion that it is going to work. The senators office had looked into an earlier case for me with success where I needed to obtain a pending AP in a hurry. I have my own labor (NO Substitute)
I have no idea what the deal is with the H1- Why it was denied.
I suggest you talk to your senator's office.
I have substituted a Labor in 2004, My priority date is 4/4/2002. My I-140 is pending since May 2004 and i renew my EAD every year, EAD expires in July 2008. I got my 9th year H1 extensions till july 2007 from the same company/employer.
I tried to change the employer and file a new H1 which was denied this month. The reason for denial is USCIS is not satisfied with the place of work, I have re-applied H1 again on the same company. Now can i apply another NEW H1 from a different company.
I am tensed as my I-140 has been pending since so long....can someone please help me in this matter and suggest me what to do.
Thanks
Raghu
My I140 has been pending for a long time too, without any reason. So finally after many service requests, I have talked to one of the senators of my state. I have explained the situation, ofcourse used the opportunity to highlight IV and EB immigrants problems and then talked about my specific case. There is a routine paperwork that my senators office has that they use to get authorisation from individuals like us to pursue the case with the USCIS. I have filled that paperwork and the request to look into my case. I have a strong notion that it is going to work. The senators office had looked into an earlier case for me with success where I needed to obtain a pending AP in a hurry. I have my own labor (NO Substitute)
I have no idea what the deal is with the H1- Why it was denied.
I suggest you talk to your senator's office.
GCBy3000
09-20 08:52 AM
This exact issue is clearly discussed by Mathew Q&A section at www.immigration-law.com. He clearly says you are responsible for USCIS mistake if you did not bring that mistake to their notice. You have to get it corrected for one year ASAP and should contact the attorney at the earliest to do this.
YOU WILL BE OUT OF STATUS AFTER ONE YEAR EVEN IF YOU HAVE THREE YEAR EXTN IF USCIS DECIDES TO DO SO.
YOU WILL BE OUT OF STATUS AFTER ONE YEAR EVEN IF YOU HAVE THREE YEAR EXTN IF USCIS DECIDES TO DO SO.
2011 iPhone 5 Photos?
Raju
06-13 08:59 AM
I am currently on OPT but it expires in three weeks. I will be forced to go back to F1 status since H1B was real bad this year.
My question is: If I go back to F1 status and then find a research position at a non-profit org/institute of higher education, is it possible for me to file for H1B being on student status??
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE HELP??!!
Yes you can.
My question is: If I go back to F1 status and then find a research position at a non-profit org/institute of higher education, is it possible for me to file for H1B being on student status??
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE HELP??!!
Yes you can.
more...
desi3933
05-15 04:17 PM
I believe that in the original post, Keerthi indicated that he was in India.
I apologize for the confusion.
I understood that you have replied for mchhokar's question.
Is it ok to file H1b while L1 is on appeal.. IS USCIS ok with this fact.. Filing the visas simultaneously under two categorie?
Please accept my apologizes and thanks for the clarification.
I apologize for the confusion.
I understood that you have replied for mchhokar's question.
Is it ok to file H1b while L1 is on appeal.. IS USCIS ok with this fact.. Filing the visas simultaneously under two categorie?
Please accept my apologizes and thanks for the clarification.
sk2006
04-23 01:03 AM
First and foremost we are a nation of laws, or as we are all anticipated? But years of previous administrations have neglected the illegal immigrant problem, to the detriment of American workers.
.
.
Brittanicus,
Would you or NumbersUSA, still be so mad on illegal immigration if illegal immigrants were WHITE EUROPEANS instead of brown skinned mexian people?
Please search your soul and reply to this question honestly.
.
.
Brittanicus,
Would you or NumbersUSA, still be so mad on illegal immigration if illegal immigrants were WHITE EUROPEANS instead of brown skinned mexian people?
Please search your soul and reply to this question honestly.
more...
WillIBLucky
12-22 01:48 PM
I did not say that you cannot. I only said if the previous I140 was revoked due to fraud by USICS then you cannot port the PD to your new application.
Yes even if the I140 is cancelled by previous employer but was clean then you can still use the PD with your new application.
Check in the Sheela murthy chat session dated : December 18, 2006 and search for "my employer cancels I-I40?"
Looks like we can port the priority date ..., even our employers cancels I-140....
Yes even if the I140 is cancelled by previous employer but was clean then you can still use the PD with your new application.
Check in the Sheela murthy chat session dated : December 18, 2006 and search for "my employer cancels I-I40?"
Looks like we can port the priority date ..., even our employers cancels I-140....
2010 REAL IPHONE ROOT
immigrationvoice1
03-18 04:49 PM
I checked with my employer's immigration department. They said, revoking I-140 is not mandated by law however, revoking H1B is. I-140 was revoked primarily by my employers during the labor substitution days to pass on the underlying labor for the I-140 to another consultant once the original consultant left the company.
more...
meg_z
08-04 03:41 PM
guys many of us are considering going back to india.. any idea on whether those who have 40 credits will be eligible for social security from india...
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
Not sure about SS benefit. You can't do anything anyway with it now. If you are young, consider it gone even if you were US citizen at the moment.
If you withdraw your 401K now, you will have to pay taxes, plus 10% penalty probably. Depanding on your employer's 401K program policy, some allows money to stay if it exceeds certain minimum. Be sure to check the vesting policy. You can always roll it over to an IRA of your choice.
also any adivice o what is the best way to transfer 401 to india.. withdraw immeditately or wait till 591/2 years..
Not sure about SS benefit. You can't do anything anyway with it now. If you are young, consider it gone even if you were US citizen at the moment.
If you withdraw your 401K now, you will have to pay taxes, plus 10% penalty probably. Depanding on your employer's 401K program policy, some allows money to stay if it exceeds certain minimum. Be sure to check the vesting policy. You can always roll it over to an IRA of your choice.
hair iPhone 5: Clone Definitely
Vitriol
04-13 09:12 AM
Gurus, your inputs please: Can I take up a position in India with an American Firm while on H1B?
more...
immigrationvoice1
03-18 04:49 PM
I checked with my employer's immigration department. They said, revoking I-140 is not mandated by law however, revoking H1B is. I-140 was revoked primarily by my employers during the labor substitution days to pass on the underlying labor for the I-140 to another consultant once the original consultant left the company.
hot I have discovered the real
seahawks
06-26 02:39 PM
While filing for my wife's G-325A form, her last name was filled in first name and first name as last name. We got our FP notice yesterday and thats when I went back and reviewed all the forms I filed. I was wondering if any of you know what can be done so that an honest mistake can be corrected?
Any input appreciated. I understand it is for information purpose only and not many of us are attorneys, so no disclosure required :)
Any input appreciated. I understand it is for information purpose only and not many of us are attorneys, so no disclosure required :)
more...
house Fake iPhone 5 Picture One
cdeneo
04-02 10:12 PM
Related question:
You get on the EAD track and take up a contract offer. Now as I understand it, AC21 will not apply to the contract offer and the contracting employer will not give a letter stating to continue the GC process since you are on contract. If the original sponsoring employer revokes the I-140 petition (I-140 approved and 180 days have passed post 485 submission), this would basically cause a NOID and the only way to not have the 485 filing denied would be to reply to the NOID with information of a full time offer in a same or similar job and the new employer willing to continue the GC process - is this accurate?
Again, this is merely assuming that I-140 is revoked by the employer who had started the GC process once the employee leaves and takes up another job on contract using EAD. This would mean that there is risk in this scenario (where the I-140 petition is revoked) to take up employment on contract.
Would like to hear from others of what they think about this?
The deal is: GC application is for a future job offer. That means, the company that files for your GC tells the USCIS that they will employ you in the xyz position once you get the green card.
According to the law, you are not required to have worked for that employer at all. Therefore, yes, you can get an employment letter from any employer (180 days after filing I-485), as long as the offer is bonafide, the job is full time & permanent, and the job duties & occupation is similar to the one mentioned in your labor certification.
Technically, you can work for a company like TekSystems on EAD, and when time comes, provide USCIS with a bonafide employment letter from any company that wants to hire you when you get the GC.
Now, some people have raised concerns over the question of "intent". How do you reinforce the fact that you indeed intend to join the new employer when you get the GC? For this reason, when people switch jobs using AC21, they generally go to work for a company that will give them the employement letter.
Ofcourse, the above discussion is in light of what we know today. The USCIS is working on modifying some of the provisions, so things may change a bit in the near future.
Ams
You get on the EAD track and take up a contract offer. Now as I understand it, AC21 will not apply to the contract offer and the contracting employer will not give a letter stating to continue the GC process since you are on contract. If the original sponsoring employer revokes the I-140 petition (I-140 approved and 180 days have passed post 485 submission), this would basically cause a NOID and the only way to not have the 485 filing denied would be to reply to the NOID with information of a full time offer in a same or similar job and the new employer willing to continue the GC process - is this accurate?
Again, this is merely assuming that I-140 is revoked by the employer who had started the GC process once the employee leaves and takes up another job on contract using EAD. This would mean that there is risk in this scenario (where the I-140 petition is revoked) to take up employment on contract.
Would like to hear from others of what they think about this?
The deal is: GC application is for a future job offer. That means, the company that files for your GC tells the USCIS that they will employ you in the xyz position once you get the green card.
According to the law, you are not required to have worked for that employer at all. Therefore, yes, you can get an employment letter from any employer (180 days after filing I-485), as long as the offer is bonafide, the job is full time & permanent, and the job duties & occupation is similar to the one mentioned in your labor certification.
Technically, you can work for a company like TekSystems on EAD, and when time comes, provide USCIS with a bonafide employment letter from any company that wants to hire you when you get the GC.
Now, some people have raised concerns over the question of "intent". How do you reinforce the fact that you indeed intend to join the new employer when you get the GC? For this reason, when people switch jobs using AC21, they generally go to work for a company that will give them the employement letter.
Ofcourse, the above discussion is in light of what we know today. The USCIS is working on modifying some of the provisions, so things may change a bit in the near future.
Ams
tattoo Uniquely Simple iPhone 5
krishnam70
02-22 12:48 PM
This is possibly a repeat/trivial question for the gurus here - but I am seeking latest upto date information. So here it goes..
I have been on H1B since Oct06 ( after OPT), working for the same company as Electrical Engineer in full time position. I haven't traveled to India ( or anywhere out of US) since Aug 2003 when I came here for my MS.
I am planning to travel to India this Dec and probably to UK in July. And so I planned to get my H1B stamped from Canada in May/June. But my company attorney has advised me that its better to go for stamping in India - as because of the Tech Alert List, there have been significant delays for some people.
I wanted to know if anybody has any real time experience. And what is the advise of the gurus - India or Canada?
Thanks a lot - your help is much appreciated!
Unless its absolutely necessary that you go out of the country I would not advise you to leave. In recent days I have heard of people with even valid H1 stamps and with projects on hand being turned back from POE by IO's despite getting assurances from the employee's manager that the position is critical. The question from the IO was they could find ton's of people here in the US who have similar skills and there is no need for a H1 guy to do it.
Do not want to spread the panic but ....Be careful..
- good luck
kris
I have been on H1B since Oct06 ( after OPT), working for the same company as Electrical Engineer in full time position. I haven't traveled to India ( or anywhere out of US) since Aug 2003 when I came here for my MS.
I am planning to travel to India this Dec and probably to UK in July. And so I planned to get my H1B stamped from Canada in May/June. But my company attorney has advised me that its better to go for stamping in India - as because of the Tech Alert List, there have been significant delays for some people.
I wanted to know if anybody has any real time experience. And what is the advise of the gurus - India or Canada?
Thanks a lot - your help is much appreciated!
Unless its absolutely necessary that you go out of the country I would not advise you to leave. In recent days I have heard of people with even valid H1 stamps and with projects on hand being turned back from POE by IO's despite getting assurances from the employee's manager that the position is critical. The question from the IO was they could find ton's of people here in the US who have similar skills and there is no need for a H1 guy to do it.
Do not want to spread the panic but ....Be careful..
- good luck
kris
more...
pictures the real iPhone 5.
Harivinder
11-20 12:08 PM
I think the Core team should try to contact her ASAP to make her aware of your situation. Her schedule will me more tight after January, and it might we very very difficult to get her attention for few months after that.
dresses Category: iPhone 5 Reviews
pappu
08-15 11:24 AM
See this and if it helps you courtesy Murthy.com (http://murthy.com/news/n_tscnsc.html)
Second I-140 Allowed without Revocation of Earlier I-140 Petition
The TSC confirmed that, in some cases it is possible for the employer to file two or more I-140 petitions for the same beneficiary, based on a single labor certification, in multiple EB categories. If the job requirements are proper for EB2, the case could be filed in either category. Thus, multiple I-140s could be filed in some cases. If the first was filed in EB3, there would be no need to withdraw it in order to file in EB2. The TSC recommended submitting copies of the approved I-140 with the later-filed I-140 petition.
This could be quite helpful in situations where the I-140 petition is incorrectly filed in the wrong, lower category. We do hear about such instances from time to time. It seems that if the I-140 was filed in EB3, but the case would meet EB2, the TSC would permit the re-filing of the I-140 petition without revocation of the earlier EB3 filing.
08/15/2006: Multiple I-140 Petitions: Uniform Policy in Negative Fashion?
* We reported on August 3, 2006 USCIS lack of uniform policy on multiple petitions on a single EB-2 labor certification application. It appears that the disease has spread to the TSC adopting a similar negative policy of denying EB-3 petition when EB-2 and EB-3 petitions are filed concurrently using single certified EB-2 labor certification application on the ground that "original" of the certified application was not available for the EB-3 I-140 petition since the original had to accompany the EB-2 I-140 petition. Obviously this is a deviation from the traditional INS/USCIS policy in a negative way and we hope that the USCIS leaders are not turning around from the liberal policies under Yates-Divine era to the narrow-restrictive policies.
Second I-140 Allowed without Revocation of Earlier I-140 Petition
The TSC confirmed that, in some cases it is possible for the employer to file two or more I-140 petitions for the same beneficiary, based on a single labor certification, in multiple EB categories. If the job requirements are proper for EB2, the case could be filed in either category. Thus, multiple I-140s could be filed in some cases. If the first was filed in EB3, there would be no need to withdraw it in order to file in EB2. The TSC recommended submitting copies of the approved I-140 with the later-filed I-140 petition.
This could be quite helpful in situations where the I-140 petition is incorrectly filed in the wrong, lower category. We do hear about such instances from time to time. It seems that if the I-140 was filed in EB3, but the case would meet EB2, the TSC would permit the re-filing of the I-140 petition without revocation of the earlier EB3 filing.
08/15/2006: Multiple I-140 Petitions: Uniform Policy in Negative Fashion?
* We reported on August 3, 2006 USCIS lack of uniform policy on multiple petitions on a single EB-2 labor certification application. It appears that the disease has spread to the TSC adopting a similar negative policy of denying EB-3 petition when EB-2 and EB-3 petitions are filed concurrently using single certified EB-2 labor certification application on the ground that "original" of the certified application was not available for the EB-3 I-140 petition since the original had to accompany the EB-2 I-140 petition. Obviously this is a deviation from the traditional INS/USCIS policy in a negative way and we hope that the USCIS leaders are not turning around from the liberal policies under Yates-Divine era to the narrow-restrictive policies.
more...
makeup Uniquely Simple iPhone 5
youngindia
06-08 01:27 AM
Its not abt H1-B abuse, its abt the way it was brought up. Instead of looking into his own house (USCIS and DOL) Sen.Durbin held Indian companies responsible and almost started bashing them. Little did he anticipate that they will come back in this way.
H1-B abuse is a different issue. Sen. Durbin should have looked into rulemaking part of the game than bashing players of the game.
When the US was instrumental in doing WTO negotiations during late 90's (BTW-your's truely grew up during that period witnessing this through newspaper articles - was an exact reversal of roles played by India and US then)they never realized that globalizing markets would lead to globalizing labor market also. Now, IT has become a virtual industry with a pretty much open labor market. Professionals making Rs.50000 ($1200) are competing with those making $5000 a month. US politicians made a classic judgement error in 90's. Now, protectionist measures are being brought in by the very same people who championed globalization for a decade.
The letter puts things in perspective for sen. Durbin. It seems to carry a veiled warning about backlash of these protectionist measures on the US companies doing business in India. Starting from McDonalds,subway,coke (now even Walmart) to Ford, GM, IBM, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Abott, J&J, JP Morgan, Bank of America and many more have huge business interests in India. The size of Indian market totals upto atleast 0.8 billion human individuals with need for housing, auto, computers, electronics, healthcare, finance, consumer products etc. Losing an inch of it can make an international co. nervous.
As far as Indian consumers go they now have options- British, German, Japanese, French and now even the Indian companies.
Durbin tried to scare a cat, unfortunately for him it turned out to be a big wild cat- aTiger.
H1-B abuse is a different issue. Sen. Durbin should have looked into rulemaking part of the game than bashing players of the game.
When the US was instrumental in doing WTO negotiations during late 90's (BTW-your's truely grew up during that period witnessing this through newspaper articles - was an exact reversal of roles played by India and US then)they never realized that globalizing markets would lead to globalizing labor market also. Now, IT has become a virtual industry with a pretty much open labor market. Professionals making Rs.50000 ($1200) are competing with those making $5000 a month. US politicians made a classic judgement error in 90's. Now, protectionist measures are being brought in by the very same people who championed globalization for a decade.
The letter puts things in perspective for sen. Durbin. It seems to carry a veiled warning about backlash of these protectionist measures on the US companies doing business in India. Starting from McDonalds,subway,coke (now even Walmart) to Ford, GM, IBM, Pfizer, Merck, Novartis, Abott, J&J, JP Morgan, Bank of America and many more have huge business interests in India. The size of Indian market totals upto atleast 0.8 billion human individuals with need for housing, auto, computers, electronics, healthcare, finance, consumer products etc. Losing an inch of it can make an international co. nervous.
As far as Indian consumers go they now have options- British, German, Japanese, French and now even the Indian companies.
Durbin tried to scare a cat, unfortunately for him it turned out to be a big wild cat- aTiger.
girlfriend not being a real iPhone 4
ch_murthy
06-08 06:20 PM
Hi
I wanted to know how long it took for I-140 approval. I also got Labor by PERM filed in Dec05 and will be filing I-140, EB2.
Thanks
Mine filed on March 6th and got approved on May 25th.:)
I wanted to know how long it took for I-140 approval. I also got Labor by PERM filed in Dec05 and will be filing I-140, EB2.
Thanks
Mine filed on March 6th and got approved on May 25th.:)
hairstyles Alleged iPhone 4 Appears with
![real iphone 5 pictures. [Real Or Fake?] iPhone 5](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uBLen92knSr3K0NmEirAsYMS5upU5ZCNT1aeZRNkv-XcIv4u_ErckxvIViCaV06lZoMeLqyrc7-PJMNMrGNH4vWjGBvMVCTdA6BtiylmYsvnc-UXvh7VJnP-gxCx-wxl2ackO8vO0W6c9FQwd6BHmbJSHeokETfETfqJU_t61nfyTVOt7zclO_JHoJlrrNU5FW0zvMJl04Pdikz4XzPcR4R6ru1oWD2tkU=s0-d "[Real Or Fake?] iPhone 5")
cdeneo
04-02 10:31 PM
The new employer does need to support you thru the GC process, again unclear if this is something that is needed in the AC21 letter or not.
The main thing per my understanding is that AC21 does not apply to contract positions - one would hope that the previous employer does not revoke the I-140 petition causing a NOID/RFE.
My question still stands - if the sponsoring employer revokes the approved I-140 petition post 180 days of 485 filing - this would cause problems if the person has taken up a contract position on EAD unless one can respond to the NOID/RFE stating a full time offer in hand for future employment, etc.
It is not very clear if the new employer needs to explicitly state that they would like to continue your GC. I understand that a major chunk of employers will have reservation stating this in an offer letter.
My understanding is that to invoke AC21, employer needs to provide an offer letter for a full time position. Please clarify.
The main thing per my understanding is that AC21 does not apply to contract positions - one would hope that the previous employer does not revoke the I-140 petition causing a NOID/RFE.
My question still stands - if the sponsoring employer revokes the approved I-140 petition post 180 days of 485 filing - this would cause problems if the person has taken up a contract position on EAD unless one can respond to the NOID/RFE stating a full time offer in hand for future employment, etc.
It is not very clear if the new employer needs to explicitly state that they would like to continue your GC. I understand that a major chunk of employers will have reservation stating this in an offer letter.
My understanding is that to invoke AC21, employer needs to provide an offer letter for a full time position. Please clarify.
perm2gc
12-22 06:08 PM
Efren Hernandez III, Director of the Business and Trade Services Branch at INS in Washington, D.C. announced in late December 2001 that the INS does not recognize or provide any "grace period" for maintaining status after employment termination. Mr. Hernandez explained this strict interpretation by reasoning that there is no difference between H1B holders and other non-immigrants, like students, to justify a stay in the U.S. beyond the explicit purpose of their admission. Mr. Hernandez admits that this may cause hardship to some terminated or laid off H1B workers, but believes that the INS position is legally justified.
Although the INS' strict interpretation of the law may have legal justification, the result to others seems harsh and unreasonable, considering the fact that the lay off or termination is completely beyond the control of the H1B worker. This strict INS position may also appear to be contrary to the purpose of allowing H1B workers admission to the U.S. since they helped to fill a critical need in our economy when the U.S. was suffering acute shortages of qualified, skilled workers. Perhaps, it would be more fair if the INS were to allow a reasonable grace period, perhaps 60 days, as mentioned in the June 19, 2001 INS Memo.
H1B workers should not be equated to other non-immigrants. For example, H1Bs can be distinguished from students. Students, in most cases, have exclusive control over whether they can maintain their status. Generally they determine whether they remain in school and satisfy the purpose of their admission to the U.S. If they choose not to remain in school, or they do not maintain certain passing grades or do not have sufficient funds, then they are no longer considered to be students maintaining their status and should return to their home countries. On the other hand, H1B workers enter the U.S. to engage in professional employment based on the needs of U.S. employers. They do not have exclusive control over whether they are laid off.
Although we are in a soft economy with massive employee cutbacks in a variety of fields, many of these H1B workers are able to find new employment within reasonable timeframes. Some companies, at least, are in need of these workers. Salaries have dropped in many cases and recruitment of workers from outside the U.S. has significantly slowed; but, to a large extent, the need for these existing workers remains. It would benefit U.S. companies and suit the purpose of the H1B visa program to allow a reasonable grace period for these laid-off H1B workers to seek new employment within a realistic time frame.
Adding to the woes of H1B workers, Mr. Hernandez addressed the issue of extensions of stay following brief status lapses. In short, the regulations require that an individual be in status at the time an extension of status is requested. Failure to maintain status will result in the H1B petition being granted, if appropriate, without an extension of stay. No I-94 card will be attached to the approval notice. Instead, the beneficiary will be directed to obtain a visa at a U.S. consulate in a foreign country and, only afterward, will return to lawful H1B status by re-entering the U.S. Although INS has a regulation that allows the Service to overlook brief lapses in status, extraordinary circumstances are required. Mr. Hernandez stated that even very short lapses in status are not justified in the context of terminated H1B workers, absent extraordinary circumstances.
Mr. Hernandez specifically negated the existence of a ten-day grace period following employment termination. There are ten-day grace periods allowed in three other instances. These are (a) the H1B worker can be admitted to the U.S. up to 10 days prior to the validity of his/her petition; (b) the H1B worker has a ten-day grace period following the expiration of the period of admission; and (c) in the case of denials of extensions, the H1B worker is given up to ten days to depart the U.S. Unfortunately, termination of employment is not covered by any of these exceptions. Some find it hard to see why a terminated H1B worker should be treated any differently from the H1B worker whose period of H1B admission has expired. There is far less warning and predictability in cases of layoffs or of other terminations.
Rumors are also circulating about a 30-day grace period should INS deny an H1B petition or extension of status and require the person to depart the U.S. There is also a 60-day time frame, proposed by the INS itself in the June 19, 2001 Memo, analyzing the American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act (AC21). In this memo, the INS discussed the law allowing a person to be eligible for H1B extensions beyond 6 years if the person previously held either H1B status or had an H1B visa. The INS surmised that the law envisioned that one who previously held H1B status should be entitled, possibly up to 60 days, to the benefits of that section of AC21. Efren Hernandez clarified that none of these grace periods applies in the case of an H1B worker who is terminated or laid off
Although the INS' strict interpretation of the law may have legal justification, the result to others seems harsh and unreasonable, considering the fact that the lay off or termination is completely beyond the control of the H1B worker. This strict INS position may also appear to be contrary to the purpose of allowing H1B workers admission to the U.S. since they helped to fill a critical need in our economy when the U.S. was suffering acute shortages of qualified, skilled workers. Perhaps, it would be more fair if the INS were to allow a reasonable grace period, perhaps 60 days, as mentioned in the June 19, 2001 INS Memo.
H1B workers should not be equated to other non-immigrants. For example, H1Bs can be distinguished from students. Students, in most cases, have exclusive control over whether they can maintain their status. Generally they determine whether they remain in school and satisfy the purpose of their admission to the U.S. If they choose not to remain in school, or they do not maintain certain passing grades or do not have sufficient funds, then they are no longer considered to be students maintaining their status and should return to their home countries. On the other hand, H1B workers enter the U.S. to engage in professional employment based on the needs of U.S. employers. They do not have exclusive control over whether they are laid off.
Although we are in a soft economy with massive employee cutbacks in a variety of fields, many of these H1B workers are able to find new employment within reasonable timeframes. Some companies, at least, are in need of these workers. Salaries have dropped in many cases and recruitment of workers from outside the U.S. has significantly slowed; but, to a large extent, the need for these existing workers remains. It would benefit U.S. companies and suit the purpose of the H1B visa program to allow a reasonable grace period for these laid-off H1B workers to seek new employment within a realistic time frame.
Adding to the woes of H1B workers, Mr. Hernandez addressed the issue of extensions of stay following brief status lapses. In short, the regulations require that an individual be in status at the time an extension of status is requested. Failure to maintain status will result in the H1B petition being granted, if appropriate, without an extension of stay. No I-94 card will be attached to the approval notice. Instead, the beneficiary will be directed to obtain a visa at a U.S. consulate in a foreign country and, only afterward, will return to lawful H1B status by re-entering the U.S. Although INS has a regulation that allows the Service to overlook brief lapses in status, extraordinary circumstances are required. Mr. Hernandez stated that even very short lapses in status are not justified in the context of terminated H1B workers, absent extraordinary circumstances.
Mr. Hernandez specifically negated the existence of a ten-day grace period following employment termination. There are ten-day grace periods allowed in three other instances. These are (a) the H1B worker can be admitted to the U.S. up to 10 days prior to the validity of his/her petition; (b) the H1B worker has a ten-day grace period following the expiration of the period of admission; and (c) in the case of denials of extensions, the H1B worker is given up to ten days to depart the U.S. Unfortunately, termination of employment is not covered by any of these exceptions. Some find it hard to see why a terminated H1B worker should be treated any differently from the H1B worker whose period of H1B admission has expired. There is far less warning and predictability in cases of layoffs or of other terminations.
Rumors are also circulating about a 30-day grace period should INS deny an H1B petition or extension of status and require the person to depart the U.S. There is also a 60-day time frame, proposed by the INS itself in the June 19, 2001 Memo, analyzing the American Competitiveness in the Twenty First Century Act (AC21). In this memo, the INS discussed the law allowing a person to be eligible for H1B extensions beyond 6 years if the person previously held either H1B status or had an H1B visa. The INS surmised that the law envisioned that one who previously held H1B status should be entitled, possibly up to 60 days, to the benefits of that section of AC21. Efren Hernandez clarified that none of these grace periods applies in the case of an H1B worker who is terminated or laid off
TexDBoy
06-10 02:51 AM
Are those requested documents not part of standard documentation when we submit our 485 application.
My lawyer asked me to submit all the I-20s and H1B copies when we applied for 485 ....
Again, its interesting that they are looking for status as back as 1998 and not from the last entry ...
My lawyer asked me to submit all the I-20s and H1B copies when we applied for 485 ....
Again, its interesting that they are looking for status as back as 1998 and not from the last entry ...
No comments:
Post a Comment