waitin_toolong
07-29 05:04 AM
how is the baby supposed to sponsor the parents ??
wallpaper Avril Lavigne and Deryck
gcisadawg
04-12 12:14 AM
There is bigger problem than H1 approval i.e. overstaying. If overstay more then six months you will barred for 3 years. So go out as soon as possible and come back with another H1
Since his denial was on March 31st, would the overstay clock starts from March 31st or from original I-94 expiry date? My understanding was that one can work legally using H1B receipt notice. Hence, OP was legal atleast till March 31st, 2009, correct?
-GCisaDawg
Since his denial was on March 31st, would the overstay clock starts from March 31st or from original I-94 expiry date? My understanding was that one can work legally using H1B receipt notice. Hence, OP was legal atleast till March 31st, 2009, correct?
-GCisaDawg
krishnam70
03-13 05:23 PM
but i asked this question to find the legality of this issue before reporting someone to the USCIS that i know is doing this.I just used I instead of someone in my thread to start the discussion.
Who do i complain to in this case?
Vow quite a turnaround. First you say its you who want to do it and when you get the heat you claim otherwise.
Either way this is pure 'FRAUD' . If you are the person who is doing it USCIS will have ways to track it and it will come back during your Naturalization or at any time when u enter the country. If you are just trying to report this to authorities you can do so at your state DOL or write a letter to USCIS with details if you have it.
- cheers
kris
Who do i complain to in this case?
Vow quite a turnaround. First you say its you who want to do it and when you get the heat you claim otherwise.
Either way this is pure 'FRAUD' . If you are the person who is doing it USCIS will have ways to track it and it will come back during your Naturalization or at any time when u enter the country. If you are just trying to report this to authorities you can do so at your state DOL or write a letter to USCIS with details if you have it.
- cheers
kris
2011 Avril Lavigne and Deryck
polapragada
09-04 12:41 AM
i see perm approvals with PD of may 16th...(chicago)
my Pd is may 2nd..how did they miss my case?????
is there anyway i can check my labor status??? :confused:
Checking Status of PERM can be done your Employer or Lawyer
In DOL web site with the C-08xxx-xxxxx Number
Employee can't check the status directly
my Pd is may 2nd..how did they miss my case?????
is there anyway i can check my labor status??? :confused:
Checking Status of PERM can be done your Employer or Lawyer
In DOL web site with the C-08xxx-xxxxx Number
Employee can't check the status directly
more...
Hello_Hello
11-30 09:48 PM
I have no idea what Mr. Chopra is talking about, as far as I know US administration has become more foreigner unfriendly in last 10 years and Obama administration is even worse. i don't know of 1 friendly law passed in last decade.
The Startup Case For Immigration Reform - Maureen Farrell - Scaling Up - Forbes (http://blogs.forbes.com/maureenfarrell/2010/11/23/startups%E2%80%99-case-for-immigration/?boxes=Homepagechannels)
The United States� Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra says President Obama has tried to lower administrative barriers for bringing foreign nationals into the US for professional development. �In his first year the President wanted to make sure scientists around the world who wanted to visit the US to participate in conferences and seminars could do that,� says Chopra. �We have streamlined that process and efforts so they can participate in ways that are a lot more friendly to their participation.�
�
The Startup Case For Immigration Reform - Maureen Farrell - Scaling Up - Forbes (http://blogs.forbes.com/maureenfarrell/2010/11/23/startups%E2%80%99-case-for-immigration/?boxes=Homepagechannels)
The United States� Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra says President Obama has tried to lower administrative barriers for bringing foreign nationals into the US for professional development. �In his first year the President wanted to make sure scientists around the world who wanted to visit the US to participate in conferences and seminars could do that,� says Chopra. �We have streamlined that process and efforts so they can participate in ways that are a lot more friendly to their participation.�
�
seeking_GC
07-12 02:25 AM
Any idea on when the lawsuit actually gets to court?
more...
kicca
01-25 10:49 AM
^^^
2010 Avril%20Lavigne%20%20Deryck%
GCD
07-27 08:37 PM
My lawyer filed the I-485, EAD and AP package for me and my wife. She put a G-28 notice for each application (with our and her signatures). She missed signing the AP G-28 for my wife. I asked her about this. She said it should be fine. They would not consider her notice of representation for this particular case, and would mail the AP approval directly at our home address.
I hope we are fine and our application doesn't get rejected since we had one check for all the applications.
Please reply. Thanks a lot.
I hope we are fine and our application doesn't get rejected since we had one check for all the applications.
Please reply. Thanks a lot.
more...
desi3933
09-09 04:19 PM
What is the difference between 1099 and W2 ?
Thanks,
theOne
W2 versus 1099 (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=463647)
Thanks,
theOne
W2 versus 1099 (http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=463647)
hair avril-lavigne-and-deryck-
jkays94
04-13 09:56 AM
I agree with gc_check this would avoid people getting into GC line in front of people have been waiting for years. Where is the link to submit comments?
Here you go, you can use this as a draft and keep the relevant parts of the comments or adjust accordingly : http://capwiz.com/aila2/issues/alert/?alertid=8652851
Here you go, you can use this as a draft and keep the relevant parts of the comments or adjust accordingly : http://capwiz.com/aila2/issues/alert/?alertid=8652851
more...
SAP
04-07 03:36 PM
Folks,
can i invoke a AC21 on future gc..I did not work for this company, i am tired of my current company, they have exploited me and my personality is changing and i forgotten to live life, want to port and move on to a new company ? is AC21 on future GC consider legal or fraud.?
Future GC labor PD : Dec 2002
Category: EB3.
I140 : approved 2004
I485: RFE on expired medicals; new medicals submitted.
EAD/AP : so far five renewals( though i did not use EAD i did use AP for travel)
Will a letter from the future GC compnay stating the position is no longer availablle due to this enormous amount of time suffice ?
your postive comments and if you have been in this situation pls tell me how you managed.
Thanks
SAP
can i invoke a AC21 on future gc..I did not work for this company, i am tired of my current company, they have exploited me and my personality is changing and i forgotten to live life, want to port and move on to a new company ? is AC21 on future GC consider legal or fraud.?
Future GC labor PD : Dec 2002
Category: EB3.
I140 : approved 2004
I485: RFE on expired medicals; new medicals submitted.
EAD/AP : so far five renewals( though i did not use EAD i did use AP for travel)
Will a letter from the future GC compnay stating the position is no longer availablle due to this enormous amount of time suffice ?
your postive comments and if you have been in this situation pls tell me how you managed.
Thanks
SAP
hot Avril Lavigne, Deryck Whibley
gc_on_demand
12-05 10:24 AM
bump
more...
house Avril Lavigne And Deryck
ngopikrishnan
08-22 07:20 PM
I heard Finnan, Fleischut & Associates is very good.
http://www.fleischut.com
http://www.fleischut.com
tattoo Avril Lavigne et son mari
we_can
01-29 04:49 PM
i just noticed your post. i am from portland, oregon. so count me in also. i had posted a message on the orgon state chapter a while ago and have not had a single response yet. Inspite of the large numbers of members in seattle and portland areas, i too am sad to this kind of inactivity and non-response.
members from northwest (oregon, washington and idaho): This state chapter initiative is very important for our efforts. We are doing this for ourselves and I am pretty sure that these efforts will not harm your career or work in anyway. So, please do reply so that we could all get active and show that we in the Northwest can work for our situations and for iv's efforts in our own way.
we_can
members from northwest (oregon, washington and idaho): This state chapter initiative is very important for our efforts. We are doing this for ourselves and I am pretty sure that these efforts will not harm your career or work in anyway. So, please do reply so that we could all get active and show that we in the Northwest can work for our situations and for iv's efforts in our own way.
we_can
more...
pictures Deryck Whibley is speaking out
needhelp!
02-18 02:44 PM
Just a gentle reminder to post us an update if you've got some by now.
Also he is against H1b Mis-use. Now does he understand PPL like us in Middle of Nowhere.
Also he is against H1b Mis-use. Now does he understand PPL like us in Middle of Nowhere.
dresses Avril Lavigne amp; Deryck Whibley
Blog Feeds
01-27 08:30 AM
Summary
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
(LINK TO FULL REPORT BELOW)
Congress created the H-1B program in 1990 to enable U.S. employers to hire temporary, foreign workers in specialty occupations. The law capped the number of H-1B visas issued per fiscal year at 65,000. Since then, the cap has fluctuated with legislative changes. Congress asked GAO to assess the impact of the cap on the ability of domestic companies to innovate, while ensuring that U.S. workers are not disadvantaged. In response, GAO examined what is known about (1) employer demand for H-1B workers; (2) how the cap affects employer costs and decisions to move operations overseas; (3) H-1B worker characteristics and the potential impact of raising the cap; and (4) how well requirements of the H-1B program protect U.S. workers. GAO analyzed data from 4 federal agencies; interviewed agency officials, experts, and H-1B employers; and reviewed agency documents and literature.
In most years, demand for new H-1B workers exceeded the cap: From 2000 to 2009, demand for new H-1B workers tended to exceed the cap, as measured by the numbers of initial petitions submitted by employers who are subject to the cap. There is no way to precisely determine the level of any unmet demand among employers, since they tend to stop submitting (and the Department of Homeland Security stops tracking) petitions once the cap is reached each year. When we consider all initial petitions, including those from universities and research institutions that are not subject to the cap, we find that demand for new H-1B workers is largely driven by a small number of employers. Over the decade, over 14 percent of all initial petitions were submitted by cap-exempt employers, and only a few employers (fewer than 1 percent) garnered over one-quarter of all H-1B approvals. Most interviewed companies said the H-1B cap and program created costs, but were not factors in their decisions to move R&D overseas: The 34 H-1B employers GAO interviewed reported that the cap has created some additional costs, though the cap's impact depended on the size and maturity of the company. For example, in years when visas were denied by the cap, most large firms reported finding other (sometimes more costly) ways to hire their preferred job candidates. On the other hand, small firms were more likely to fill their positions with different candidates, which they said resulted in delays and sometimes economic losses, particularly for firms in rapidly changing technology fields. Limitations in agency data and systems hinder tracking the cap and H-1B workers over time: The total number of H-1B workers in the U.S. at any one time--and information about the length of their stay--is unknown, because (1) data systems among the various agencies that process such individuals are not linked so individuals cannot be readily tracked, and (2) H-1B workers are not assigned a unique identifier that would allow for tracking them over time--particularly if and when their visa status changes. Restricted agency oversight and statutory changes weaken protections for U.S. workers: Elements of the H-1B program that could serve as worker protections--such as the requirement to pay prevailing wages, the visa's temporary status, and the cap itself--are weakened by several factors. First, program oversight is fragmented and restricted. Second, the H-1B program lacks a legal provision for holding employers accountable to program requirements when they obtain H-1B workers through a staffing company. Third, statutory changes made to the H-1B program have, in combination and in effect, increased the pool of H-1B workers beyond the cap and lowered the bar for eligibility. Taken together, the multifaceted challenges identified in this report show that the H-1B program, as currently structured, may not be used to its full potential and may be detrimental in some cases. This report offers several matters for congressional consideration, including that Congress re-examine key H-1B program provisions and make appropriate changes as needed. GAO also recommends that the Departments of Homeland Security and Labor take steps to improve efficiency, flexibility, and monitoring of the H-1B program. Homeland Security disagreed with two recommendations and one matter, citing logistical and other challenges; however, we believe such challenges can be overcome. Labor did not respond to our recommendations.
Recommendations
Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.
Director:Andrew SherrillTeam:Government Accountability Office: Education, Workforce, and Income SecurityPhone:(202) 512-7252
Matters for Congressional Consideration
Recommendation: To ensure that the H-1B program continues to meet the needs of businesses in a global economy while maintaining a balance of protections for U.S. workers, Congress may wish to consider reviewing the merits and shortcomings of key program provisions and making appropriate changes as needed. Such a review may include, but would not necessarily be limited to (1) the qualifications required for workers eligible under the H-1B program, (2) exemptions from the cap, (3) the appropriateness of H-1B hiring by staffing companies, (4) the level of the cap, and (5) the role the program should play in the U.S. immigration system in relationship to permanent residency.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To reduce duplication and fragmentation in the administration and oversight of the H-1B application process, consistent with past GAO matters for congressional consideration, Congress may wish to consider eliminating the requirement that employers first submit a Labor Condition Application (LCA) to the Department of Labor for certification, and require instead that employers submit this application along with the I-129 application to the Department of Homeland Security's U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services for review.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the Department of Labor's ability to investigate and enforce employer compliance with H-1B program requirements, Congress may wish to consider granting the department subpoena power to obtain employer records during investigations under the H-1B program.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To help ensure the full protection of H-1B workers employed through staffing companies, Congress may wish to consider holding the employer where an H-1B visa holder performs work accountable for meeting program requirements to the same extent as the employer that submitted the LCA form.
Status: In process
Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.
Recommendations for Executive Action
Recommendation: To help ensure that the number of new H-1B workers who are subject to the cap--both entering the United States and changing to H-1B status within the United States--does not exceed the cap each year, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should take steps to improve its tracking of the number of approved H-1B applications and the number of issued visas under the cap by fully leveraging the transformation effort currently under way, which involves the adoption of an electronic petition processing system that will be linked to the Department of State's tracking system. Such steps should ensure that linkages to the Department of State's tracking system will provide Homeland Security with timely access to data on visa issuances, and that mechanisms for tracking petitions and visas against the cap are incorporated into U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services' business rules to be developed for the new electronic petition system.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To address business concerns without undermining program integrity, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services should, to the extent permitted by its existing statutory authority, explore options for increasing the flexibility of the application process for H-1B employers, such as (1) allowing employers to rank their applications for visa candidates so that they can hire the best qualified worker for the jobs in highest need; (2) distributing the applications granted under the annual cap in allotments throughout the year (e.g. quarterly); and (3) establishing a system whereby businesses with a strong track-record of compliance with H-1B regulations may use a streamlined application process.
Agency Affected: Department of Homeland Security
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the transparency and oversight of the posting requirement on the Labor Condition Application (LCA), as part of its current oversight role, the Employment and Training Administration should develop and maintain a centralized Web site, accessible to the public, where businesses must post notice of the intent to hire H-1B workers. Such notices should continue to specify the job category and worksite location noted on the LCA and required by statute on current noncentralized postings.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
Recommendation: To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its investigations of employer compliance with H-1B requirements, the Employment and Training Administration should provide Labor's Wage and Hour Division searchable access to the LCA database.
Agency Affected: Department of Labor
Status: In process
Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.
VIEW FULL REPORT (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d1126.pdf)
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2011/01/25/h-1b-visa-program-reforms-are-needed-to-minimize-the-risks-and-costs-of-current-program.aspx?ref=rss)
more...
makeup Deryck Whibley: avril lavigne
dante1271
08-05 07:01 PM
Like your thoughts on these topic... pardon me for my ignorance but whats the big deal about Name Check? will this take longer than the rest of the processing stages?
girlfriend Deryck Whibley of
phillyag
07-20 02:14 PM
Any expected timelines for getting the receipt notice from USCIS? I filed on Jul17th.
hairstyles Deryck Whibley Avril Lavigne
Appu
04-02 12:40 AM
You guys probably verified this already but -
if you read (the intended) Sec 218D (amendment to the INA) and Sec 602 of S.2454, they do not exclude legal aliens.
All that is required under 218D is that a person must have been in the US on or before Jan 7, 2004 and have proof of employment.
Why shouldn't a legal nonimmigrant visa holder apply for AOS under 218D?
What am I missing here?
if you read (the intended) Sec 218D (amendment to the INA) and Sec 602 of S.2454, they do not exclude legal aliens.
All that is required under 218D is that a person must have been in the US on or before Jan 7, 2004 and have proof of employment.
Why shouldn't a legal nonimmigrant visa holder apply for AOS under 218D?
What am I missing here?
inspectorfox
07-22 09:01 PM
Can a senior member kindly address these questions posted for the last couple days. A quick response will be highly appreciated.
My case is very similar to yours. I had applied my I-140 in Oct 2006. Got an RFE for Ability to Pay which was responded to in Feb 2006. LUD changed twice in Feb and there was no progress. I upgraded to premium processing in June but there was no progress in my case even after 15 days past. Recently I got to know thru my lawyer that my case has been moved to the TSC Review Department for a background check and a decision is pending. I have taken an INFOPASS appointment to meet with an immigration officer to follow up about my case on Friday.
There are lot of people who are now stuck in background checks at I-140 stage which was very uncommon before.
I would advise you to follow up with you lawyer to get more details on your case. My lawyer actually spoke with the Immigration Officer at TSC.
Goodluck!
My case is very similar to yours. I had applied my I-140 in Oct 2006. Got an RFE for Ability to Pay which was responded to in Feb 2006. LUD changed twice in Feb and there was no progress. I upgraded to premium processing in June but there was no progress in my case even after 15 days past. Recently I got to know thru my lawyer that my case has been moved to the TSC Review Department for a background check and a decision is pending. I have taken an INFOPASS appointment to meet with an immigration officer to follow up about my case on Friday.
There are lot of people who are now stuck in background checks at I-140 stage which was very uncommon before.
I would advise you to follow up with you lawyer to get more details on your case. My lawyer actually spoke with the Immigration Officer at TSC.
Goodluck!
desi3933
09-05 05:13 PM
I would recommend LLC, as then you have limited liability. You can actually register it using legalzoom for a price much cheaper than CPA. In no way am I endorsing legalzoom, it is just one of the many websites that do this. You might wanna look for a better and cheaper one.
Please don't give incorrect answers.
All three corporation types (C-Corp, S-Corp, and LLC) have limited liability to its shareholders.
The main difference in these corp types are
1. How much record keeping is done
2. The way taxes are computed and filed with IRS
3. The kind of expenses allowed to deduct
4. C-Corp and LLC can carryover profits to next year(s), but S-Corp has to pass on profit (or loss) to the shareholders at the end of every calendar year.
For S-Corp, the shareholders must be Permanent Resident or US Citizen.
I have corporation of my own and this is C-Corp (due to kind of expenses I can deduct and/or write-off). I did all the incorporation work myself without any help from CPA. Incorporation is pretty straight forward and very easy. There are good books in Nolo Press on Corporate Incorporation.
____________________________________
Proud Indian American and Legal Immigrant
Please don't give incorrect answers.
All three corporation types (C-Corp, S-Corp, and LLC) have limited liability to its shareholders.
The main difference in these corp types are
1. How much record keeping is done
2. The way taxes are computed and filed with IRS
3. The kind of expenses allowed to deduct
4. C-Corp and LLC can carryover profits to next year(s), but S-Corp has to pass on profit (or loss) to the shareholders at the end of every calendar year.
For S-Corp, the shareholders must be Permanent Resident or US Citizen.
I have corporation of my own and this is C-Corp (due to kind of expenses I can deduct and/or write-off). I did all the incorporation work myself without any help from CPA. Incorporation is pretty straight forward and very easy. There are good books in Nolo Press on Corporate Incorporation.
____________________________________
Proud Indian American and Legal Immigrant
No comments:
Post a Comment