rbalaji5
10-16 07:01 PM
Wish you & your family a very very happy, healthy, recession free and prosperous Deepawali !!!
Sorry IV-ians -Story deleted due to bad comments.
Sorry IV-ians -Story deleted due to bad comments.
sam_hoosier
11-15 03:33 PM
Thank you all for your valuable input. I have a follow up question :
Will I be breaking any laws if I just do voluntary marketing and promotional work for my company in India.
Here is the situation :
My clients will be in USA and they will be paying my company in India. I will be on the board of the company , and will be doing voluntary marketing and promotional work for the company while residing in USA.
Thank you for your time.
As long as you dont get paid for the marketing & promotional work in the US, you will not be breaking any immigration laws.
Will I be breaking any laws if I just do voluntary marketing and promotional work for my company in India.
Here is the situation :
My clients will be in USA and they will be paying my company in India. I will be on the board of the company , and will be doing voluntary marketing and promotional work for the company while residing in USA.
Thank you for your time.
As long as you dont get paid for the marketing & promotional work in the US, you will not be breaking any immigration laws.
sundarpn
06-30 10:55 PM
eb3retro,
You changed on h1b transfer right? not on EAD?
I am just curious if a new employer can keep extending h1b based on previous employers I140 (and the fact that 180 days have passed since 485).
thanks
You changed on h1b transfer right? not on EAD?
I am just curious if a new employer can keep extending h1b based on previous employers I140 (and the fact that 180 days have passed since 485).
thanks
jungalee43
08-26 09:38 PM
Sailesh thanks for your advise.
Can some immigatin attorney post opinion / advice please? I understand that you may not know complete details of the case. But still I would highly appreciate your opinion.
Can some immigatin attorney post opinion / advice please? I understand that you may not know complete details of the case. But still I would highly appreciate your opinion.
more...
kishdam
01-08 12:41 PM
Do we need photo copies (about originals - having original labor is not possible it would have been submitted with I140; most employer keep the original I140 as well). Some companies dont provide copies of labor or I140.
Is it risky to change jobs and invoke AC21 in this situation? (This is the scenario: labor, I140 is approved. I485 is pending for six+ months. EAD and AP are approved and are with cadidate; have six months pay stubs/tax info to prove that have been original labor sponsored employer for six months after filing I485).
Thanks.
Is it risky to change jobs and invoke AC21 in this situation? (This is the scenario: labor, I140 is approved. I485 is pending for six+ months. EAD and AP are approved and are with cadidate; have six months pay stubs/tax info to prove that have been original labor sponsored employer for six months after filing I485).
Thanks.
gccovet
08-15 10:03 AM
Thanks for your replies.
What will happen to the 140? Do they need to file for any amendment?
If your new company has agreed to support the I-140, letter of acquisition will be enough. No worries. You may want to confer with a lawyer though.(Shell out few bucks, better to be safe, also for peace of mind)
GCCovet
What will happen to the 140? Do they need to file for any amendment?
If your new company has agreed to support the I-140, letter of acquisition will be enough. No worries. You may want to confer with a lawyer though.(Shell out few bucks, better to be safe, also for peace of mind)
GCCovet
more...
HumJumboHathuJumbo
01-08 12:41 PM
While I-485 is pending, how to change spouse's last name?. For that matter, how to change spouse's last completely in every agency(like ssn, paychecks, credit cards, green card, passport, drivers license). Is this list complete?. which one should i start first?.thanks
desi3933
05-11 05:53 AM
Thanks desi - AOS is what I was thinking as well but that doesn't seem to be one of the options listed when opening an account (the firm is Ameritrade - you check out their website https://wwwna.tdameritrade.com/cgi-bin/apps/IraApServlet). Guess they are just not aware of this status since it wasn't really designed to be a "status" and only recently have several people moved to AOS status given the backup for EB3 and EB2 China/ India
AOS is not a visa status. So, for https://wwwna.tdameritrade.com/cgi-bin/apps/IraApServlet one should select None for the visa status as the person is not maintaining any non-immigrant visa status.
AOS is period of authorized stay while I-485 application is pending.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
AOS is not a visa status. So, for https://wwwna.tdameritrade.com/cgi-bin/apps/IraApServlet one should select None for the visa status as the person is not maintaining any non-immigrant visa status.
AOS is period of authorized stay while I-485 application is pending.
_________________
Not a legal advice.
more...
morchu
04-29 06:14 PM
I agree, that for most of the cases "approved" is a safer approach.
But there can be some specific situations.
Lets say I-140 RFE received, to prove "ability to pay", and the response was not good enough to prove that. And before the I140 is approved/rejected, the employee quits and joins another company (after 180 days pending). The I140 is still portable, even if it is not approved, if the new employment matches AC21 conditions.
Even if it represents a small percentage of guys in this situation, it is still good to know that if a dieing company cannot support your I140 anymore because of "ability to pay", there is still hope.
This is a case where, the original employer still want to support your I-140, but "unable to" due to some other changed situations after filing of I140.
================================
Here is the answer from USCIS:
"Question 1. How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140
petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending
180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has
been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence
establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated
within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue
relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it�s merits. Then
adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or
similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than
post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a
response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A
"
=============================
so that just proves that since you dont know whether you would get an RFE or not, it makes sense for beneficiaries to stick with the sponsor till 140 is approved. to beneficiaries, it wont matter zip whether uscis uses approvable or approved.
But there can be some specific situations.
Lets say I-140 RFE received, to prove "ability to pay", and the response was not good enough to prove that. And before the I140 is approved/rejected, the employee quits and joins another company (after 180 days pending). The I140 is still portable, even if it is not approved, if the new employment matches AC21 conditions.
Even if it represents a small percentage of guys in this situation, it is still good to know that if a dieing company cannot support your I140 anymore because of "ability to pay", there is still hope.
This is a case where, the original employer still want to support your I-140, but "unable to" due to some other changed situations after filing of I140.
================================
Here is the answer from USCIS:
"Question 1. How should service centers or district offices process unapproved I-140
petitions that were concurrently filed with I-485 applications that have been pending
180 days in relation to the I-140 portability provisions under �106(c) of AC21?
Answer: If it is discovered that a beneficiary has ported off of an unapproved I-140 and I-485 that has
been pending for 180 days or more, the following procedures should be applied:
A. Review the pending I-140 petition to determine if the preponderance of the evidence
establishes that the case is approvable or would have been approvable had it been adjudicated
within 180 days. If the petition is approvable but for an ability to pay issue or any other issue
relating to a time after the filing of the petition, approve the petition on it�s merits. Then
adjudicate the adjustment of status application to determine if the new position is the same or
similar occupational classification for I-140 portability purposes.
B. If a request for additional evidence (RFE) is necessary to resolve a material issue, other than
post-filing issues such as ability to pay, an RFE can be issued to try to resolve the issue. When a
response is received, and if the petition is approvable, follow the procedures in part A
"
=============================
so that just proves that since you dont know whether you would get an RFE or not, it makes sense for beneficiaries to stick with the sponsor till 140 is approved. to beneficiaries, it wont matter zip whether uscis uses approvable or approved.
reverendflash
10-21 04:10 AM
oh well, we can't make it look too easy... :P
I actually have it right so far... win in game 1, loss in game 2, win games 3 & 4...
just my predjudiced and not so humble opinion.
Rev:elderly:
I actually have it right so far... win in game 1, loss in game 2, win games 3 & 4...
just my predjudiced and not so humble opinion.
Rev:elderly:
more...
bipin
03-17 05:53 PM
I was working with a company until November 2007. I went to India in Dec and came back in Feb and was out of project until April 2008. During this time my relation with my employer gone bad and he threatened to cancel my H1 & I140 application. I transferred my H1 to the new company and is on project and is working with them from May 2008 till now. For the 8 months I worked in 2008 I got a total salary of 50,000 based on annual salary of $75K. This is less than the prevailing wages. Since my W2 is only $50,000 I'm worried about my immigration prospects. I’m in my 6th year and just started my Labor process with the new company.
My current company is ready to help me, but they cannot run any payroll for last year, but can provide bonus for last year to make the total of last year up to $60k. They are a small co. and have never done this before.
How can we include this bonus in my W2 (I haven't filed my taxes so far, the company also hasn't filed their 2008 taxes)
My current company is ready to help me, but they cannot run any payroll for last year, but can provide bonus for last year to make the total of last year up to $60k. They are a small co. and have never done this before.
How can we include this bonus in my W2 (I haven't filed my taxes so far, the company also hasn't filed their 2008 taxes)
skp71
05-06 11:56 AM
We never know what's going to happen our job nowadays. What if something happen to my job or if I changed the job on AC21 or my FP has been expired or my company is no more existing or my company's name has been changed or I moved for good from this country? If they preapprove my case now, still it is going to be valid after 3 years??
If the PD is not current, why dont USCIS process the existing applications and keep it processed. This will reduce their work when the PD becomes current.
I do not see the logic why should not they process the pending applications when the PD is not current. Eventually they are going to get benefited from processing the applications.
WIth some concurrent filings, atleast if they process the applications the beneficiary would be entitled to get EAD.
If the PD is not current, why dont USCIS process the existing applications and keep it processed. This will reduce their work when the PD becomes current.
I do not see the logic why should not they process the pending applications when the PD is not current. Eventually they are going to get benefited from processing the applications.
WIth some concurrent filings, atleast if they process the applications the beneficiary would be entitled to get EAD.
more...
gc_kaavaali
05-07 12:30 PM
If one is on H1B...applied 485...almost done with 6 years...but got h1b approval for 3 years because of approved I-140...now 485 got denied...should i go back because i completed my six years? or can i stay as long as my H1 is valid (beyond 6 years)?
Googler
02-08 02:47 PM
bump
It would be really great to get clarification on this issue. Hope it's taken up by AILA in the immediate future like you indicated.
I'm not sure it will be taken up by AILA -- I was so surprised by the resistance I encountered when I asked a well known attorney with a blog (v. popular with IV members) to submit this question to the AILA committee which reviews topics for liason meetings, and it took several rounds of email and some very severe rhetoric from me to even get him to send it to the committee! I feel it is terrible that our self-professed advocates hesitate even to ASK a question, let alone propose specific reforms...
The deadline for submitting questions is Feb 15 -- so if you are interested, get in touch with your attorneys and send in the question. Maybe numbers will move them.
It would be really great to get clarification on this issue. Hope it's taken up by AILA in the immediate future like you indicated.
I'm not sure it will be taken up by AILA -- I was so surprised by the resistance I encountered when I asked a well known attorney with a blog (v. popular with IV members) to submit this question to the AILA committee which reviews topics for liason meetings, and it took several rounds of email and some very severe rhetoric from me to even get him to send it to the committee! I feel it is terrible that our self-professed advocates hesitate even to ASK a question, let alone propose specific reforms...
The deadline for submitting questions is Feb 15 -- so if you are interested, get in touch with your attorneys and send in the question. Maybe numbers will move them.
more...
kk_kk
07-16 06:01 PM
Thank you for your reply.
gcnirvana
06-25 07:51 PM
Employer pays everything except for my EAD/AP as my H1 is valid till 2010. And fortunately, USCIS surgeon billed my medical exams to my insurance. Not sure if it'll come back and bite me but as of now I didn't pay a dime :)
more...
ragz4u
03-28 09:23 AM
Fellow IV members,
How come the "Hard Limit" is not talked about / mentioned in any of the big websites? Shusterman.com / Aila.org et all. Is it possible to get an immigration attorney to explain this crucial issue of "Hard Limit" to IV core team ?
The research for this was conducted by the content team of IV. And as regards the big websites, Rajeev Khanna, Bender's online Matthew Oh all have provided references to IV's doc. So no need for any attorney to explain to the IV core team about this, since most of them have agreed and appreciated our efforts!
How come the "Hard Limit" is not talked about / mentioned in any of the big websites? Shusterman.com / Aila.org et all. Is it possible to get an immigration attorney to explain this crucial issue of "Hard Limit" to IV core team ?
The research for this was conducted by the content team of IV. And as regards the big websites, Rajeev Khanna, Bender's online Matthew Oh all have provided references to IV's doc. So no need for any attorney to explain to the IV core team about this, since most of them have agreed and appreciated our efforts!
sobers
02-16 04:11 PM
This story below just goes to show that if smart scientists and engineers are not available here (because of low skilled immigation and the decepit STEM education), then jobs will continue to be outsourced to where the job can be done. Not only does the U.S. lose brainpower, it loses significant tax revenue which would otherwise have been available if the jobs were located in the U.S. And then, not only do skilled immigrants bring their skills to work for America, they also help build the local economy (home/auto, other capital investments, etc besides local/state/county taxes...).
-------------
NEW YORK TIMES
By STEVE LOHR
Published: February 16, 2006
The globalization of work tends to start from the bottom up. The first jobs to be moved abroad are typically simple assembly tasks, followed by manufacturing, and later, skilled work like computer programming. At the end of this progression is the work done by scientists and engineers in research and development laboratories.
Skip to next paragraph
Report From Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation A new study that will be presented today to the National Academies, the nation's leading advisory groups on science and technology, suggests that more and more research work at corporations will be sent to fast-growing economies with strong education systems, like China and India.
In a survey of more than 200 multinational corporations on their research center decisions, 38 percent said they planned to "change substantially" the worldwide distribution of their research and development work over the next three years � with the booming markets of China and India, and their world-class scientists, attracting the greatest increase in projects.
Whether placing research centers in their home countries or overseas, the study said, companies often use similar criteria. The quality of scientists and engineers and their proximity to research centers are crucial.
The study contended that lower labor costs in emerging markets are not the major reason for hiring researchers overseas, though they are a consideration. Tax incentives do not matter much, it said.
Instead, the report found that multinational corporations were global shoppers for talent. The companies want to nurture close links with leading universities in emerging markets to work with professors and to hire promising graduates.
"The story comes through loud and clear in the data," said Marie Thursby, an author of the study and a professor at Georgia Tech's college of management. "You have to have an environment that fosters the development of a high-quality work force and productive collaboration between corporations and universities if America wants to maintain a competitive advantage in research and development."
The multinationals, representing 15 industries, were from the United States and Western Europe. The authors said there was no statistically significant difference between the American and European companies.
Dow Chemical is one company that plans to invest heavily in new research and development centers in China and India. It is building a research center in Shanghai, which will employ 600 technical workers when it is completed next year. Dow is also finishing plans for a large installation in India, said William F. Banholzer, Dow's chief technology officer.
Today, the company employs 5,700 scientists worldwide, about 4,000 of them in the United States and Canada, and most of the rest in Europe. But the moves overseas will alter that. "There will be a major shift for us," Mr. Banholzer said.
The swift economic growth in China and India, he said, is part of the appeal because products and processes often have to be tailored for local conditions. The rising skill of the scientists abroad is another reason. "There are so many smart people over there," Mr. Banholzer said. "There is no monopoly on brains, and none on education either."
Such views were echoed by other senior technology executives, whose companies are increasing their research employment abroad. "We go with the flow, to find the best minds we can anywhere in the world," said Nicholas M. Donofrio, executive vice president for technology and innovation at I.B.M., which first set up research labs in India and China in the 1990's. The company is announcing today that it is opening a software and services lab in Bangalore, India.
At Hewlett-Packard, which opened an Indian lab in 2002 and is starting one in China, Richard H. Lampman, senior vice president for research, points to the spread of innovation around the world. "If your company is going to be a global leader, you have to understand what's going on in the rest of the world," he said.
The globalization of research investment, industry executives and academics argued, need not harm the United States. In research, as in economics, they said, growth abroad does not mean stagnation at home � and typically the benefits outweigh the costs.
Still, more companies in the survey said they planned to decrease research and development employment in the United States and Europe than planned to increase employment.
In numerical terms, scientists and engineers in research labs represent a relatively small part of the national work force. Like the debate about offshore outsourcing in general, the trend, which may point to a loss of competitiveness, is more significant than the quantity of jobs involved.
The American executives who are planning to send work abroad express concern about what they regard as an incipient erosion of scientific prowess in this country, pointing to the lagging math and science proficiency of American high school students and the reluctance of some college graduates to pursue careers in science and engineering.
"For a company, the reality is that we have a lot of options," Mr. Banholzer of Dow Chemical said. "But my personal worry is that an educated, innovative science and engineering work force is vital to the economy. If that slips, it is going to hurt the United States in the long run."
Some university administrators see the same trend. "This is part of an incredible tectonic shift that is occurring," said A. Richard Newton, dean of the college of engineering at the University of California, Berkeley, "and we've got to think about this more profoundly than we have in the past. Berkeley and other leading American universities, he said, are now competing in a global market for talent. His strategy is to become an aggressive acquirer. He is trying to get Tsinghua University in Beijing and some leading technical universities in India to set up satellite schools linked to Berkeley. The university has 90 acres in Richmond, Calif., that he thinks would be an ideal site.
"I want to get them here, make Berkeley the intellectual hub of the planet, and they won't leave," said Mr. Newton, who emigrated from Australia 25 years ago.
The corporate research survey was financed by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, which supports studies on innovation. It was designed and written by Ms. Thursby, who is also a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and her husband, Jerry Thursby, who is chairman of the economics department at Emory University in Atlanta.
-------------
NEW YORK TIMES
By STEVE LOHR
Published: February 16, 2006
The globalization of work tends to start from the bottom up. The first jobs to be moved abroad are typically simple assembly tasks, followed by manufacturing, and later, skilled work like computer programming. At the end of this progression is the work done by scientists and engineers in research and development laboratories.
Skip to next paragraph
Report From Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation A new study that will be presented today to the National Academies, the nation's leading advisory groups on science and technology, suggests that more and more research work at corporations will be sent to fast-growing economies with strong education systems, like China and India.
In a survey of more than 200 multinational corporations on their research center decisions, 38 percent said they planned to "change substantially" the worldwide distribution of their research and development work over the next three years � with the booming markets of China and India, and their world-class scientists, attracting the greatest increase in projects.
Whether placing research centers in their home countries or overseas, the study said, companies often use similar criteria. The quality of scientists and engineers and their proximity to research centers are crucial.
The study contended that lower labor costs in emerging markets are not the major reason for hiring researchers overseas, though they are a consideration. Tax incentives do not matter much, it said.
Instead, the report found that multinational corporations were global shoppers for talent. The companies want to nurture close links with leading universities in emerging markets to work with professors and to hire promising graduates.
"The story comes through loud and clear in the data," said Marie Thursby, an author of the study and a professor at Georgia Tech's college of management. "You have to have an environment that fosters the development of a high-quality work force and productive collaboration between corporations and universities if America wants to maintain a competitive advantage in research and development."
The multinationals, representing 15 industries, were from the United States and Western Europe. The authors said there was no statistically significant difference between the American and European companies.
Dow Chemical is one company that plans to invest heavily in new research and development centers in China and India. It is building a research center in Shanghai, which will employ 600 technical workers when it is completed next year. Dow is also finishing plans for a large installation in India, said William F. Banholzer, Dow's chief technology officer.
Today, the company employs 5,700 scientists worldwide, about 4,000 of them in the United States and Canada, and most of the rest in Europe. But the moves overseas will alter that. "There will be a major shift for us," Mr. Banholzer said.
The swift economic growth in China and India, he said, is part of the appeal because products and processes often have to be tailored for local conditions. The rising skill of the scientists abroad is another reason. "There are so many smart people over there," Mr. Banholzer said. "There is no monopoly on brains, and none on education either."
Such views were echoed by other senior technology executives, whose companies are increasing their research employment abroad. "We go with the flow, to find the best minds we can anywhere in the world," said Nicholas M. Donofrio, executive vice president for technology and innovation at I.B.M., which first set up research labs in India and China in the 1990's. The company is announcing today that it is opening a software and services lab in Bangalore, India.
At Hewlett-Packard, which opened an Indian lab in 2002 and is starting one in China, Richard H. Lampman, senior vice president for research, points to the spread of innovation around the world. "If your company is going to be a global leader, you have to understand what's going on in the rest of the world," he said.
The globalization of research investment, industry executives and academics argued, need not harm the United States. In research, as in economics, they said, growth abroad does not mean stagnation at home � and typically the benefits outweigh the costs.
Still, more companies in the survey said they planned to decrease research and development employment in the United States and Europe than planned to increase employment.
In numerical terms, scientists and engineers in research labs represent a relatively small part of the national work force. Like the debate about offshore outsourcing in general, the trend, which may point to a loss of competitiveness, is more significant than the quantity of jobs involved.
The American executives who are planning to send work abroad express concern about what they regard as an incipient erosion of scientific prowess in this country, pointing to the lagging math and science proficiency of American high school students and the reluctance of some college graduates to pursue careers in science and engineering.
"For a company, the reality is that we have a lot of options," Mr. Banholzer of Dow Chemical said. "But my personal worry is that an educated, innovative science and engineering work force is vital to the economy. If that slips, it is going to hurt the United States in the long run."
Some university administrators see the same trend. "This is part of an incredible tectonic shift that is occurring," said A. Richard Newton, dean of the college of engineering at the University of California, Berkeley, "and we've got to think about this more profoundly than we have in the past. Berkeley and other leading American universities, he said, are now competing in a global market for talent. His strategy is to become an aggressive acquirer. He is trying to get Tsinghua University in Beijing and some leading technical universities in India to set up satellite schools linked to Berkeley. The university has 90 acres in Richmond, Calif., that he thinks would be an ideal site.
"I want to get them here, make Berkeley the intellectual hub of the planet, and they won't leave," said Mr. Newton, who emigrated from Australia 25 years ago.
The corporate research survey was financed by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, which supports studies on innovation. It was designed and written by Ms. Thursby, who is also a research associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and her husband, Jerry Thursby, who is chairman of the economics department at Emory University in Atlanta.
yetanotherguyinline
04-15 01:04 PM
I had the same issue and I just sent in paper returns.
AjP
May 27th, 2005, 11:11 AM
I absolutely agree with everyone, background need to be more blurry and the guy in upper right corner need to disappear :), try to edit it in Photoshop, may be make background B&W and more blurry or completely replace it, definitely for this type of picture better use lenses with f/1.4-f/2.8 and fill shadows with flash
gsc999
04-20 02:11 PM
I have met the congressmen of my area, in person, have called senators of my state. I think singing and ringing can go hand in hand :) don't you sometime listen to music at work ?
:)
:)
No comments:
Post a Comment