akred
03-30 06:17 PM
Last I knew every H1 is a non-resident alien.
Well you knew wrong. As long as you stayed in the US for more than 183 days in 2007, you are a resident for tax purposes.
If you are falling short of the 183 day requirement, you can opt to fulfill the 183 day requirement by counting 1/2 of the days of the prior year (2006) or 1/3rd of the days of the year before that (2005) that you were physically present in the US.
Well you knew wrong. As long as you stayed in the US for more than 183 days in 2007, you are a resident for tax purposes.
If you are falling short of the 183 day requirement, you can opt to fulfill the 183 day requirement by counting 1/2 of the days of the prior year (2006) or 1/3rd of the days of the year before that (2005) that you were physically present in the US.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
ski_dude12
09-27 10:25 AM
One of my co-workers had similar situation. He had PD in 2001 on EB3.
He talked to his employer to port to EB2. Porting process/approval took about a year but after that it took only 2 months to get approval.
You should be able to switch from EB3 to EB2.
Put pressure on employer or get some other company (reputed one) to take a AC21 and start processing EB2.
He talked to his employer to port to EB2. Porting process/approval took about a year but after that it took only 2 months to get approval.
You should be able to switch from EB3 to EB2.
Put pressure on employer or get some other company (reputed one) to take a AC21 and start processing EB2.
chanduv23
10-21 03:08 PM
Though the denial of this MTR is against the law by USCIS, one must consider following.
AC21 is a benefit for a long delayed adjustment of status applicant to change the employer before getting GC. This law was framed based on the fact that the employee working for a long period of time with sponser (either in non-immigrant visa or in EAD) and cannot change the job because of prolonged delay in approval of 485. However, one must remember that, the fundamental priciple of granting GC is based on the fact that intent of the employee working "permanetly" or some longer period of time for the sponser. If the employer can demonstrate successfully to the USCIS that the employee does not having the intent then USCIS may deny the 485. If one resigns just immediatly after the 180 days, it doubts the legitimacy of the intent. If employer argues that the employee was waiting just for 180 days and using the law to change the job, there is a reason for USCIS to belive the employer's claim about false intent of the emploee. But one can overrule this denial in court, if the employee demonstrates that he/she worked for the sponsor for a considerable period of time before and after filing 485, to prove his/her intent.
I have also heard from some members on forums that the merit of the case is taken into consideration when such a decision has to be made.
AC21 is a benefit for a long delayed adjustment of status applicant to change the employer before getting GC. This law was framed based on the fact that the employee working for a long period of time with sponser (either in non-immigrant visa or in EAD) and cannot change the job because of prolonged delay in approval of 485. However, one must remember that, the fundamental priciple of granting GC is based on the fact that intent of the employee working "permanetly" or some longer period of time for the sponser. If the employer can demonstrate successfully to the USCIS that the employee does not having the intent then USCIS may deny the 485. If one resigns just immediatly after the 180 days, it doubts the legitimacy of the intent. If employer argues that the employee was waiting just for 180 days and using the law to change the job, there is a reason for USCIS to belive the employer's claim about false intent of the emploee. But one can overrule this denial in court, if the employee demonstrates that he/she worked for the sponsor for a considerable period of time before and after filing 485, to prove his/her intent.
I have also heard from some members on forums that the merit of the case is taken into consideration when such a decision has to be made.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
johnnybhai
07-14 01:18 PM
Mahatma - I could post the details here, but then it will be all over the place and wont get updated in case of changes. So please refer the 'Contribute Now' tab and look for Checks.
more...
rdehar
07-20 04:10 PM
From what it looks like, I just want to say:
"Welcome to Backlog Part II."
"Welcome to Backlog Part II."
vayumahesh
12-02 10:38 AM
GeetaRam,
I would say to follow your attorney's advice though I don't think of any issues with going for premium processing as you are with the same employer. My friend has recently filed I-140 under regular processing and got approval within 2 1/2 months. Just make sure if your attorney submitted porting request while filing new I-140 under EB2. All the best.
I would say to follow your attorney's advice though I don't think of any issues with going for premium processing as you are with the same employer. My friend has recently filed I-140 under regular processing and got approval within 2 1/2 months. Just make sure if your attorney submitted porting request while filing new I-140 under EB2. All the best.
more...
ps57002
09-02 12:21 PM
Thanks all.
I'm in my mid thirties now. I came as a teen, fifteen.
So I wonder....should the dream act come through....could it work in my favor too lol? I came through no choice of my own (though legally) with my parents....
And do i get a GC for beating everyone on here :)
j/k.
I'm in my mid thirties now. I came as a teen, fifteen.
So I wonder....should the dream act come through....could it work in my favor too lol? I came through no choice of my own (though legally) with my parents....
And do i get a GC for beating everyone on here :)
j/k.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
augustus
04-30 10:08 AM
I did my part and called the Missouri Senator office. They said they will pass the message. I am not sure how effective it will be. But I will continue my efforts regardless. We come from a country where Gandhi got us independence through non-violence. I believe it is in our blood.
Remember Gandhi here and march ahead for what is purely discriminatory.
Indians can repeat this all over again, if only we put our hands together unity.
Jai Hind.
Remember Gandhi here and march ahead for what is purely discriminatory.
Indians can repeat this all over again, if only we put our hands together unity.
Jai Hind.
more...
ind_game
05-13 11:37 PM
Did you ever apply for EAD / AP?
I have EAD which expires on 07/30/2010. I have AP which expires on 10/29/2009
I have EAD which expires on 07/30/2010. I have AP which expires on 10/29/2009
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
pitha
07-06 05:23 PM
thats why aila lawsuit is important, if they can bend the rules for consular processing and a lot of other mischief for eating up 60k visas then they can bend there rules for giving us EAD as well when bulletin is revised.
See what I was saying. They are not supposed to grant CP appointments and approvals in July per the regulations. They have decided to bend the rules to approve the currently pending 485s and CPs. They came up with this lame excuse that since the visas were already shipped out to the consular posts ................yada yada. Point is as I said they can't do 18K CP applicatrions in a day at the consulates the way they seem to have done for the 485s. Even this I am not sure.
I doubt whether they have sent out all 60K 485 approvals either, they probably will in the course of the next month or thereabouts.
I'll say it again, they want 485s out but they don't want them in for whatever reason. It is getting clearer.
See what I was saying. They are not supposed to grant CP appointments and approvals in July per the regulations. They have decided to bend the rules to approve the currently pending 485s and CPs. They came up with this lame excuse that since the visas were already shipped out to the consular posts ................yada yada. Point is as I said they can't do 18K CP applicatrions in a day at the consulates the way they seem to have done for the 485s. Even this I am not sure.
I doubt whether they have sent out all 60K 485 approvals either, they probably will in the course of the next month or thereabouts.
I'll say it again, they want 485s out but they don't want them in for whatever reason. It is getting clearer.
more...
jchan
09-10 10:00 AM
Looks like last night's particle accelerator experiement sent us back in time!:D
haha this is a good one :)
haha this is a good one :)
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
priti8888
07-24 12:23 AM
mine too PD March 21 2003.... phew.. got stuck in BEC and then retrogression.. long wait.. and now 485 filed with long wait for EAD:)may be But hey, life is always that way, who knows what is next:)
March 2003!!??u were current in June.
If u applied 485 in June 07 u might have already been alloted a visa number...Call uscis to find out...A nicer IO may give u some details abt your case
March 2003!!??u were current in June.
If u applied 485 in June 07 u might have already been alloted a visa number...Call uscis to find out...A nicer IO may give u some details abt your case
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
shiankuraaf
07-14 09:58 PM
Just sent $50 to be received on 07/21/2008. Conf # 7YC45-CWJKT
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
matreen
10-17 01:58 AM
Guys,
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
I have already invoked my AC21 6 months before and joined a small consulting company, after four months I had an offer from client to join, I decided to join client as full time employee and working from past two months. Planning to send AC21 document by next month including offer letter etc.,
Now, my question is I have a part time job oppertunity to work from home for couple of hours in the weekend (tech support job - pay is not that great but it helps with current economic crises).
Can I allowed to work on part time job while I am working as a full time employee using AC21? (Remember I am on EAD - No more H1)
Is that going to cause any problem to my 485 process?
Will that be OK to run two payrolls on my social 1. Full Time 2. Part time?
I would appreciate your response as soon as possible, because I need accept the offer and follow the legnthy process - background check etc.,..
Thanks,
M
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
reddysn
06-04 02:12 PM
Veni
I guess you are also speculating .. When people read the notes from aila (point 4) ,people do speculate till it becomes or does not become law.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22481
It is really tricky to come up with a deadline for EB employment. US is set of laws and the law is same for every one it applies. for example:If you not from a retrogressed country you will get your GC even if you start now (before enactment of this bill).
Please know the difference between bill and law. If ever this particular bill becomes law the deadline for any cases filed under previous law will not be rejected, this is as clear as mud, to make the law same for all who applied/pending /approved on the day of enactment!!.:eek:
I guess you are also speculating .. When people read the notes from aila (point 4) ,people do speculate till it becomes or does not become law.
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22481
It is really tricky to come up with a deadline for EB employment. US is set of laws and the law is same for every one it applies. for example:If you not from a retrogressed country you will get your GC even if you start now (before enactment of this bill).
Please know the difference between bill and law. If ever this particular bill becomes law the deadline for any cases filed under previous law will not be rejected, this is as clear as mud, to make the law same for all who applied/pending /approved on the day of enactment!!.:eek:
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
h1b_professional
07-20 10:19 AM
Should we send emails to our Senators requesting them to vote for SKIL bill
Email campaign may be
Email campaign may be
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
soumeeram
03-09 12:13 PM
Eb2- i - 15-reb-04
eb3-i - 01-nov-01
eb3-i - 01-nov-01
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
eb3_nepa
07-06 12:53 PM
What the USCIS has done today is what they call "Locking the stables AFTER the horse has bolted" ;)
What a bunch of idiots, i swear this is WORSE than ANY of our home countries. Like I told my friend yesterday, atleast if the USCIS call center was based in India, the answers would have been consistent. They may have all been Wrong, but atleast they would be consistent.
What a bunch of idiots, i swear this is WORSE than ANY of our home countries. Like I told my friend yesterday, atleast if the USCIS call center was based in India, the answers would have been consistent. They may have all been Wrong, but atleast they would be consistent.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
santb1975
05-22 01:31 AM
We have several bills that are being discussed to provide releif for all of us stuck in the Green Card process. We have very few dedicated volunteers working very hard and knocking the doors of representatives across the country seeking support for our bills. We need to lobby hard to get releif for all of us in this election year and lobbying is not cheap. We need dollars to keep up our lobbying efforts. We need help with raising dollars that are needed to keep working for our cause. We do not have Star Players and/or Star Athletes raising funds to support our cause. We need to do it ourselves. We all need to come together as a dedicated team with a mission to raise the targeted dollar amount. Can we do it?. Can we all step up and raise the dollars we need for our cause?.
Yes we can. Let's do it
Click on Contribute Now (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=44) to make a contribution
Want to donate an amount not listed on the contributions page?. Login to paypal and send in your desired contribution to donations@immigrationvoice.org
Made a contribution already?. Get your friends to make a contribution as well
Yes we can. Let's do it
Click on Contribute Now (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=44) to make a contribution
Want to donate an amount not listed on the contributions page?. Login to paypal and send in your desired contribution to donations@immigrationvoice.org
Made a contribution already?. Get your friends to make a contribution as well
skv
06-28 02:35 PM
I got my certified yesterday 6/27
EB-2, India, Atlanta feb 21'07
All the best !!! Good to know.
EB-2, India, Atlanta feb 21'07
All the best !!! Good to know.
softwareguy
07-06 01:35 PM
July 2, 2007, State Department Notice to USCIS Regarding EB Visa Availability
The State Department�s Immigrant Visa Control office provided AILA a copy of the notice sent to USCIS Section 245 Adjudications on July 2, 2007. AILA Doc. No. 07070663.
I don't have access to AILA.com website but this is what I gathered. - Not sure what it means.
The State Department�s Immigrant Visa Control office provided AILA a copy of the notice sent to USCIS Section 245 Adjudications on July 2, 2007. AILA Doc. No. 07070663.
I don't have access to AILA.com website but this is what I gathered. - Not sure what it means.
