laststraw
11-09 05:47 PM
I just went through PERM and I140, both of them approved without audit/RFE, where the requirement was Masters + 10 years experience. The job role required this. The requirement should match the job role and what the company would do if they are hiring a new person for the job.
And I believe someone had asked whether you have 7 years experience after obtaining masters. That is not required. In my case I had only 4 years experience after masters, but more than 12 years total. The job requirement stated that Masters + 10 years and not Masters + 10 years after masters.
Hope this helps.
And I believe someone had asked whether you have 7 years experience after obtaining masters. That is not required. In my case I had only 4 years experience after masters, but more than 12 years total. The job requirement stated that Masters + 10 years and not Masters + 10 years after masters.
Hope this helps.
small2006
07-11 11:35 AM
Hi Folks,
I am one of those guys who has EAD/AP and as per the latest (Aug 08) bulletin, my PD is current.
I just called USCIS and got my 3rd service request number since Oct 2007. So far nothing has happened.
I want to know if this is going to have a negative impact on my 485 approval in anyway? Am I not supposed to have my FP done before they can approve my 485? Isn't that a pre-requisite? I just don't want to miss one more boat due to USCIS screw ups.
Please advise/suggest...
Thanks.
Moderator: apologies for cross-posting but I needed an answer soon.
I am one of those guys who has EAD/AP and as per the latest (Aug 08) bulletin, my PD is current.
I just called USCIS and got my 3rd service request number since Oct 2007. So far nothing has happened.
I want to know if this is going to have a negative impact on my 485 approval in anyway? Am I not supposed to have my FP done before they can approve my 485? Isn't that a pre-requisite? I just don't want to miss one more boat due to USCIS screw ups.
Please advise/suggest...
Thanks.
Moderator: apologies for cross-posting but I needed an answer soon.
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
WeShallOvercome
08-03 12:19 PM
Hopefully we will get them soon! Keeping fingers crossed! Just imagine the wait times for AP, EAD and eventually GC. Just forget about it!
At this time the guys who are seeking company are those who got their checks cleared, you have 99% of july population with you , if that gives you some comfort.
At this time the guys who are seeking company are those who got their checks cleared, you have 99% of july population with you , if that gives you some comfort.
more...
Queen Josephine
May 17th, 2005, 09:15 AM
Awesome idea!
Anymore idea anyone while I'm out and about on my day off?;)
Joe, if you haven't noticed by now, I'm a photoshop person, so when I looked at your photos, I picked one that I thought promised the most interest if processed in photoshop, so I liked the 3rd one since it contained elements that draw the eye along into the distance.... I also processed it in photoshop (NO, I did not add or alter anything....just worked with layers and color enhancement... everything you see is in your original photo).
Here's what it looks like with the shadows lifted and the original sky brought out.
Anymore idea anyone while I'm out and about on my day off?;)
Joe, if you haven't noticed by now, I'm a photoshop person, so when I looked at your photos, I picked one that I thought promised the most interest if processed in photoshop, so I liked the 3rd one since it contained elements that draw the eye along into the distance.... I also processed it in photoshop (NO, I did not add or alter anything....just worked with layers and color enhancement... everything you see is in your original photo).
Here's what it looks like with the shadows lifted and the original sky brought out.
nixstor
07-11 11:09 AM
Why not? USCIS already approved 60K 485 applications in 2 weeks time. How come they cannot do the same with some extra money (i.e. premium processing). They can do anything if want to do.
:mad:
Premium processing does not necessarily mean that it should be done in 15 days. It depends on the complexity of the application. We all know how complex 485 is because of the name check.
The premium processing can cost 1000-1500/more for 485 and should be done in 6 months. They can use the PP money to expedite their name checks. I am not sure what kind of issues USCIS will have implementing this
:mad:
Premium processing does not necessarily mean that it should be done in 15 days. It depends on the complexity of the application. We all know how complex 485 is because of the name check.
The premium processing can cost 1000-1500/more for 485 and should be done in 6 months. They can use the PP money to expedite their name checks. I am not sure what kind of issues USCIS will have implementing this
more...
TomPlate
12-12 03:56 PM
I am there file in July 2007.
GotFreedom?
07-20 01:50 PM
If your I-485 is already approved, you already have a GC (your status is permanent resident) regardless if you have the physical card in possession or not. You do not need EAD to work in the US. You are allowed to work wherever you may choose without worrying about work authorization. Your GC is your work authorization as well.
Sorry to hear about your job loss. With I-485 already approved, you should be able to apply for the unemployment benefits but I do not know what kind of implications it might have when you go for citizenship. I beleive, you are elegible to reap the benefits of the social benefits even if its considered burden.
Sorry to hear about your job loss. With I-485 already approved, you should be able to apply for the unemployment benefits but I do not know what kind of implications it might have when you go for citizenship. I beleive, you are elegible to reap the benefits of the social benefits even if its considered burden.
more...
h1techSlave
10-01 11:02 AM
I just wanted to point out that a delayed FBI name check is useless any way.
If the purpose of the name check is to identify criminals, that process must be completed within a few hours. If the checking process takes more than 24 hours, than what is the use of the check?
Currently the FBI name check system is a bonanza for a criminal. He/She will have 2 - 3 years to commit the crime, before the FBI catches up with him/her.
I think the system was originally designed to check the names of people outside the country. In that case, a delay is not at all harmful.
If the purpose of the name check is to identify criminals, that process must be completed within a few hours. If the checking process takes more than 24 hours, than what is the use of the check?
Currently the FBI name check system is a bonanza for a criminal. He/She will have 2 - 3 years to commit the crime, before the FBI catches up with him/her.
I think the system was originally designed to check the names of people outside the country. In that case, a delay is not at all harmful.
NWISE
03-31 02:59 PM
If there is a loophole and it is being exploited, plug the loophole, not scrap the program. If my head hurts, I don't cut off my head.
And loopholes will be exploited, if they exist. I would do it (and I'm sure majority of us would) if we could. Nothing illegal in that.
Kind of similar to how large corporates avoid paying taxes using every loophole and trick in the book even when they earn billions, while we end up paying tax on every dollar we earn.
P.S. I'm not saying falsifying documents is acceptable... that's illegal and that's an enforcement issue, not taking an advantage issue.
My 2 cents.
And loopholes will be exploited, if they exist. I would do it (and I'm sure majority of us would) if we could. Nothing illegal in that.
Kind of similar to how large corporates avoid paying taxes using every loophole and trick in the book even when they earn billions, while we end up paying tax on every dollar we earn.
P.S. I'm not saying falsifying documents is acceptable... that's illegal and that's an enforcement issue, not taking an advantage issue.
My 2 cents.
more...
psaxena
02-04 06:02 PM
Lets meet up on the weekend in a park or something, we can do the potluck. It will be an open place , so no restriction or shortage of space if there are a lot of people. Would be a good social networking and also the meeting as well.
I am open to all the suggestions. I am pretty new to the website, can administrator provide the list, that can be used to communicate
Thanks
I am open to all the suggestions. I am pretty new to the website, can administrator provide the list, that can be used to communicate
Thanks
ash0210
11-21 07:06 PM
gc_in_30_yrs, I will file new Labor in PERM with this new job Responsibilites..! :D
I am sure ash0210 will get a job in USCIS to write rules for issuing GCs.
Just kidding. I like your analogy.
I am sure ash0210 will get a job in USCIS to write rules for issuing GCs.
Just kidding. I like your analogy.
more...
gsc999
01-17 10:46 PM
Hello Northern California,
We are going to kick start a huge "Sign & Dine" campaign in Northern California to support Administrative Fix effort. This is the time to show your support.
This is what we need:
- We need you to join us and show support for IV at a social event this Sunday(01/20) @ 11:30 a.m. in Sunnyvale. PM me or join Nor. Cal IV Yahoo group for details regarding address of the venue. We will have the Admin Fix letters ready for you to sign. So come and put your signatures and we will have some tasty snacks ready for you to eat***
- We need volunteers to call other IV members and motivate them to join the Admin Fix letter campaign
- We need volunteers to do some foot work in areas that have high legal immigrant traffic. I have done this, trust me, it is exciting work. We will provide you with flyers etc, we just need your time.
- Any other way you can help
Cheers!
***If you don't sign, that means no snacks
We are going to kick start a huge "Sign & Dine" campaign in Northern California to support Administrative Fix effort. This is the time to show your support.
This is what we need:
- We need you to join us and show support for IV at a social event this Sunday(01/20) @ 11:30 a.m. in Sunnyvale. PM me or join Nor. Cal IV Yahoo group for details regarding address of the venue. We will have the Admin Fix letters ready for you to sign. So come and put your signatures and we will have some tasty snacks ready for you to eat***
- We need volunteers to call other IV members and motivate them to join the Admin Fix letter campaign
- We need volunteers to do some foot work in areas that have high legal immigrant traffic. I have done this, trust me, it is exciting work. We will provide you with flyers etc, we just need your time.
- Any other way you can help
Cheers!
***If you don't sign, that means no snacks
s.m.srinivas
03-31 01:58 PM
Hi All,
I had H1B of Company A. This H1B expires in this September 2009. In May 2008, I got a good offer from Company B, and they applied for "Transfer of my H1B". Since June 4th 2008, I started working for Company B with the receipt in Hand. Since From June 3rd 2008, till Feb 2009, my case was in pending status. On Feb 13th 2009, USCIS did put RFE for some documents about Company B. During that period, I had emergency to travel to India, so I did go to India for 3 weeks, returned back on March 12th with old employer (Company A's) VISA only, as it is still valid till sept 2009 & more over my case of transfering visa to Company B is still on Pending status. After I returned back, Company B did reply to RFE & I got a email from USCIS saying that they have received it on March 23rd 2009. On March 30th I received one more email from USCIS, saying that my H1B transfer is denied & the denial notice will have the reason as well as options for you. Still I am yet to receive the denial notice.
With these things on board I have following questions
Am I out of status?
Company A visa is valid till september 2009, so can I go back to Company A?
If Yes, then if I go back to Company A, can I apply for Extension from them freshly with premium processing or something
What is the chances that Company B appeal for the denial and get it stamped in these situation?
What are my other options?
Please do suggest me, as I believe as soon as I receive the notice formally to company B, I need to seize working and I will out of status with immediate effect. The time I have is to adjust things is between today & the day I receive the denial notice...
I had H1B of Company A. This H1B expires in this September 2009. In May 2008, I got a good offer from Company B, and they applied for "Transfer of my H1B". Since June 4th 2008, I started working for Company B with the receipt in Hand. Since From June 3rd 2008, till Feb 2009, my case was in pending status. On Feb 13th 2009, USCIS did put RFE for some documents about Company B. During that period, I had emergency to travel to India, so I did go to India for 3 weeks, returned back on March 12th with old employer (Company A's) VISA only, as it is still valid till sept 2009 & more over my case of transfering visa to Company B is still on Pending status. After I returned back, Company B did reply to RFE & I got a email from USCIS saying that they have received it on March 23rd 2009. On March 30th I received one more email from USCIS, saying that my H1B transfer is denied & the denial notice will have the reason as well as options for you. Still I am yet to receive the denial notice.
With these things on board I have following questions
Am I out of status?
Company A visa is valid till september 2009, so can I go back to Company A?
If Yes, then if I go back to Company A, can I apply for Extension from them freshly with premium processing or something
What is the chances that Company B appeal for the denial and get it stamped in these situation?
What are my other options?
Please do suggest me, as I believe as soon as I receive the notice formally to company B, I need to seize working and I will out of status with immediate effect. The time I have is to adjust things is between today & the day I receive the denial notice...
more...
Alabaman
08-21 02:52 PM
If your calculations are right then this is really really bad.
reddymjm
05-21 01:55 PM
hi,
Just want to find out the process to apply for interim EAD...I applied for EAD renewal on 8th of may and my EAD expires August 16th...i doubt i get my EAD before my current expires...i just want to find out whether i can apply for interim EAD or ??? if yes, what are the current procedures? I e-filed my EAD application and sent all documents to TSC...please help gurus.
It is no longer available.
Just want to find out the process to apply for interim EAD...I applied for EAD renewal on 8th of may and my EAD expires August 16th...i doubt i get my EAD before my current expires...i just want to find out whether i can apply for interim EAD or ??? if yes, what are the current procedures? I e-filed my EAD application and sent all documents to TSC...please help gurus.
It is no longer available.
more...
freddyCR
January 5th, 2005, 08:07 AM
Just some saturation on the reds...but that's how it looks in real life
LayoffBlog
01-27 01:32 PM
Caterpillar, seeing sales for its bulldozers and other heavy equipment sinking in a worldwide economic mire, said Monday that its business was �whipsawed� during the fourth quarter and that it would eliminate 20,000 jobs in the face of a �very tough� 2009.Caterpillar announced the staff reductions as part of its fourth quarter earnings report, released [...]http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=layoffblog.com&blog=5255291&post=1235&subd=layoffblog&ref=&feed=1
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/caterpillar-to-lay-off-20000/)
More... (http://layoffblog.com/2009/01/26/caterpillar-to-lay-off-20000/)
cool_desi_gc
11-15 07:32 AM
My name was misspelt on my FP notice as well.when i went for FP couple of weeks back, they could not make the change there.I told them about the name misspelt, they informed that I have to call the 1-800 number and get it changed.
miteshm
07-21 04:03 PM
I am curious - Did you get a receipt notice for your wife? I have E-filed for AP for my family. I have got the paper receipt for me but not for my family. I am wondering if there is a pattern here.
Thanks,
Mitesh
Hi,
I have absolutely the same story happened to my wife.
I'm July 2007 filer, she is a dependent. She never received AP which was approved and mailed on September 2007.
Called USCIS on October, November and December 2007. No results.
Took Infopass on January 2008. We were told that we have to apply for a new one.
On April 2008 we applied for NEW AP. I attached a cover letter, explaining everything and asking to put approval start date from the actual approval date and not the date of expiration of previous AP, which is September 2008 because it was lost. They ignored the letter!
On June 2008 we received new AP with Start Date September 2008.
My wife need to travel on August 2008.
I made infopass appointment on July 2008. I do not have any hope. At least I can try. Going to ask about FBI Name Check.
I read, somebody got AP issued by local CIS office during the infopass. But I think it's rare.
Any suggestions?
Misha
I485 EB3 filed on July 2, 2007
PD: December 2005
Thanks,
Mitesh
Hi,
I have absolutely the same story happened to my wife.
I'm July 2007 filer, she is a dependent. She never received AP which was approved and mailed on September 2007.
Called USCIS on October, November and December 2007. No results.
Took Infopass on January 2008. We were told that we have to apply for a new one.
On April 2008 we applied for NEW AP. I attached a cover letter, explaining everything and asking to put approval start date from the actual approval date and not the date of expiration of previous AP, which is September 2008 because it was lost. They ignored the letter!
On June 2008 we received new AP with Start Date September 2008.
My wife need to travel on August 2008.
I made infopass appointment on July 2008. I do not have any hope. At least I can try. Going to ask about FBI Name Check.
I read, somebody got AP issued by local CIS office during the infopass. But I think it's rare.
Any suggestions?
Misha
I485 EB3 filed on July 2, 2007
PD: December 2005
skumar9
04-13 11:07 AM
My date is also not Current(Eb3 2006 ) got RFE today requesting The TB test. Think they opened the case and working. :)
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий