hopelessGC
05-04 02:18 PM
AR11 is legal requirement. And that is the first step.
But apparently USCIS system doesnt update your address on pending applications, with a seach by Name. So in the second step, you need to provide the application receipt numbers and update your address on them.
Ok, so basically I need to call customer service and have them update address for all pending cases?
But apparently USCIS system doesnt update your address on pending applications, with a seach by Name. So in the second step, you need to provide the application receipt numbers and update your address on them.
Ok, so basically I need to call customer service and have them update address for all pending cases?
wallpaper Look Jennifer Lopez 2011
puntubabu
03-07 10:17 PM
Dark Child has no votes, someones gotta vote for him, hes got a really good layout.
looivy
03-23 02:15 PM
I recently spoke to one of the murhty attorneys about this and they mentioned that if the delay is because of company issues then you can travel back on AP but however if the delay is because of some security check then it is best to wait for it.
How do I determine if it is due to company issues or security check?
The consulate just sends standard reply and DOS does not disclose any information beyond status still pending.
How do I determine if it is due to company issues or security check?
The consulate just sends standard reply and DOS does not disclose any information beyond status still pending.
2011 hair Jennifer Lopez at 2011
sodh
07-24 12:57 AM
Hi,
My situation is as follows:
1) approved RIR labor 2002
2) approved perm labor 2005
3) approved i-140 2006 (PD 2005)
4) ALL of above for company-A. 2006 company-B took over.
My lawyer said i cannot file and have to start again with new labor as merger/acquistion was 'asset only' type.
I want to self-file i-485 giving the company "name change" letter as the only proof along with the rest of regular documents. Company-B employer is in 100% support of my application.
SHOULD I just waste $$$$ money or take a chance ? PLEASE HELP...TIRED OF WAITING FOR LAST 5 years :(
Regards,
-Ravi
Your Lawyer is right if the merger is only asset type and not transfer of shares between your old company and new company your application will be rejected.
My situation is as follows:
1) approved RIR labor 2002
2) approved perm labor 2005
3) approved i-140 2006 (PD 2005)
4) ALL of above for company-A. 2006 company-B took over.
My lawyer said i cannot file and have to start again with new labor as merger/acquistion was 'asset only' type.
I want to self-file i-485 giving the company "name change" letter as the only proof along with the rest of regular documents. Company-B employer is in 100% support of my application.
SHOULD I just waste $$$$ money or take a chance ? PLEASE HELP...TIRED OF WAITING FOR LAST 5 years :(
Regards,
-Ravi
Your Lawyer is right if the merger is only asset type and not transfer of shares between your old company and new company your application will be rejected.
more...
vbkris77
04-13 09:03 PM
I don't think child's country works.. Most of the guys would have been
out by now including myself.. . But let us know.. I will fly to my lawyers office if it is true ..
out by now including myself.. . But let us know.. I will fly to my lawyers office if it is true ..
anilsal
09-14 10:52 PM
When AP is approved, you get 3 copies. I went twice on intl trips and each time they took a copy. I am left with 1 copy of the AP.
Now I need to go on one last intl trip (I have applied for renewal). I just have one copy of AP with me.
How does it work? Will the officer just stamp the AP and make a copy?
Now I need to go on one last intl trip (I have applied for renewal). I just have one copy of AP with me.
How does it work? Will the officer just stamp the AP and make a copy?
more...
Catherine
06-27 11:16 PM
Thank you for the information, Tazike. I've heard many conflicting viewpoints on this but none that say you immediately lose your status - I will look into it.
I can say, though, that I've traveled in and out of the US on my green card since the divorce became final, including telling an immigration official that I was now divorced on my most recent return, and yet I have still been allowed back in each time. Perhaps I have just been lucky. Also, I did mention on that last journey that I have a waiver application currently submitted.
Fingers crossed...
I can say, though, that I've traveled in and out of the US on my green card since the divorce became final, including telling an immigration official that I was now divorced on my most recent return, and yet I have still been allowed back in each time. Perhaps I have just been lucky. Also, I did mention on that last journey that I have a waiver application currently submitted.
Fingers crossed...
2010 jennifer lopez twins 2011.
doesntmatter
05-20 09:47 PM
lfadgyas - Thanks a lot for replying to my query.
First I have to apologize I missed out a detail in my question - will update my post to reflect this too. After Nov, 2007 the status of the L1-Extension application has been changed to Denied on April 3, 2002.
I did have a question about working during L1-Extension, I have been doing research since my last post - please read below:
8cfr274a.12
-----------
20) A nonimmigrant alien within the class of aliens described in paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(8), (b)(9), (b)(10), (b)(11), (b)(12), (b)(13), (b)(14), (b)(16), and (b)(19) of this section whose status has expired but who has filed a timely application for an extension of such stay pursuant to �� 214.2 or 214.6 of this chapter. These aliens are authorized to continue employment with the same employer for a period not to exceed 240 days beginning on the date of the expiration of the authorized period of stay. Such authorization shall be subject to any conditions and limitations noted on the initial authorization. However, if the district director or service center director adjudicates the application prior to the expiration of this 240 day period and denies the application for extension of stay, the employment authorization under this paragraph shall automatically terminate upon notification of the denial decision.
Will that put my case in a different situation? If I did start counting, shouldn't I start counting after April 3, 2002 to Sept 2, 2002? That is less than 180 isn't it? Or is this not even applicable?
Thanks a lot for responding once again.
Do you or anybody have recommendations of Lawyers?
First I have to apologize I missed out a detail in my question - will update my post to reflect this too. After Nov, 2007 the status of the L1-Extension application has been changed to Denied on April 3, 2002.
I did have a question about working during L1-Extension, I have been doing research since my last post - please read below:
8cfr274a.12
-----------
20) A nonimmigrant alien within the class of aliens described in paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(5), (b)(8), (b)(9), (b)(10), (b)(11), (b)(12), (b)(13), (b)(14), (b)(16), and (b)(19) of this section whose status has expired but who has filed a timely application for an extension of such stay pursuant to �� 214.2 or 214.6 of this chapter. These aliens are authorized to continue employment with the same employer for a period not to exceed 240 days beginning on the date of the expiration of the authorized period of stay. Such authorization shall be subject to any conditions and limitations noted on the initial authorization. However, if the district director or service center director adjudicates the application prior to the expiration of this 240 day period and denies the application for extension of stay, the employment authorization under this paragraph shall automatically terminate upon notification of the denial decision.
Will that put my case in a different situation? If I did start counting, shouldn't I start counting after April 3, 2002 to Sept 2, 2002? That is less than 180 isn't it? Or is this not even applicable?
Thanks a lot for responding once again.
Do you or anybody have recommendations of Lawyers?
more...
paragpujara
12-21 07:46 PM
Refer to USCIS guide lines regarding AC 21. Hope this helps.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
I applied I-140 with a substitution labor in May'07. Then I applied I-485 on July2nd,2007. Got EAD on Aug20th. Two months back my I-140 was approved. Now I am on EAD. I am working with a very good financial corporation which they are asking me to join as full-time from Jan1st2008. I told my manager that I can join as a full-time from Feb20th 2008. Can any one throw some light on these doubts?
1. What happens if I move before 180 days of EAD to this new company and send AC21 to USCIS after finishing 180 days on EAD?
2. If I moved after 180 days what kind of queries we get from USCIS on AC21?
3. Do we need to make sure my employer also agrees what we are doing? What kind of documents we need from the existing employer?
4. Does my new company has to give same exact responsibilities as my labor certificate?
I would appreciate if any one replies to these posts. Thanks in advance.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
I applied I-140 with a substitution labor in May'07. Then I applied I-485 on July2nd,2007. Got EAD on Aug20th. Two months back my I-140 was approved. Now I am on EAD. I am working with a very good financial corporation which they are asking me to join as full-time from Jan1st2008. I told my manager that I can join as a full-time from Feb20th 2008. Can any one throw some light on these doubts?
1. What happens if I move before 180 days of EAD to this new company and send AC21 to USCIS after finishing 180 days on EAD?
2. If I moved after 180 days what kind of queries we get from USCIS on AC21?
3. Do we need to make sure my employer also agrees what we are doing? What kind of documents we need from the existing employer?
4. Does my new company has to give same exact responsibilities as my labor certificate?
I would appreciate if any one replies to these posts. Thanks in advance.
hair Jennifer Lopez Extra abs bare
go_guy123
10-11 10:54 AM
It seems that the bill S 1085 (the Reuniting Families Act (RFA) has become active again. I received e-mails from Senator Menedez and Senator Lautenberg talking about the bill. Senator Menendex mentioned the recapture employment-based visas that haven't been used in past years so that they may be used in future years. Among other things, he also mentioned that he will continue to address the concerns of employment-based visas in the context of comprehensive immigration reform. He is the sponsor of the S 1085 bill.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
Senator Menendez in charge of this...looks like Fox guarding the hen house. I suspect he is more interested in hostage taking "employment-based immigrants " for his
"comprehensive immigration reform". Dream act advocates know this and are openly attacking the "frenemies" or "two-faced" pro-immigrant politicians and Senetor Reid in the democratic party.
Senetor Lautenberg mentioned "Under current immigration law, employment-based immigration is limited to 140,000 visas, or green cards, per year. The process for obtaining employment-based visas can take years to complete, causing many of these visas to go unused. There is also an annual per-country limit that caps at seven percent the number of employment-based immigrants that can come from any one country. In some instances, this per-country cap causes employers to consider country of origin, not talent, when hiring foreign workers.
A bill has been introduced in the Senate that would address some of these delays and caps. The “Reuniting American Families Act” (S. 1085) would recapture unused employment-based visas from prior years. This bill would allow the Department of Homeland Security to issue any unused visas from Fiscal Years 1992-2007 and in the future roll over any unused visas from one year to the next. It would also increase the per-country cap for employment-based visas to ten percent of the annual total."
It seems that Senator Menendez is doing a lot of work to bring relief to all immigrants including employment based. It may be brought in the lame-duck session in December.
Please call your Senators to co-sponsor/support this bill.
Senator Menendez in charge of this...looks like Fox guarding the hen house. I suspect he is more interested in hostage taking "employment-based immigrants " for his
"comprehensive immigration reform". Dream act advocates know this and are openly attacking the "frenemies" or "two-faced" pro-immigrant politicians and Senetor Reid in the democratic party.
more...
NKR
03-06 04:21 PM
Guys:
Everyone is talking EB2....what are the prospects for EB3 - India??
Is it going to move forward..??
Good Luck..??
2002
Well.. Everybody stopped talking about EB2. It is predicted that EB2 will be unavailable till Oct 2008 and after that nobody knows how EB2 dates are going to move.
As for EB3, there could be a small movement of 2 to 3 months, I do not think there will be any more movement than that.
Everyone is talking EB2....what are the prospects for EB3 - India??
Is it going to move forward..??
Good Luck..??
2002
Well.. Everybody stopped talking about EB2. It is predicted that EB2 will be unavailable till Oct 2008 and after that nobody knows how EB2 dates are going to move.
As for EB3, there could be a small movement of 2 to 3 months, I do not think there will be any more movement than that.
hot by Silvio » Mon Feb 28, 2011
redddiv
07-18 07:02 AM
hi Guys,
I was thinking over this for quite some time. Why dont we hire one or two immigration attorneys on a full time basis. And lets start am immigration office where we can have all our immigration works (doubtful) but the future immigrant works ata marginally cheaper rates with high quality of service. If we keep a no profit no loss mantra, it would be helpful to everyone and also it will make this organization very strong.
Lets discuss its relevance? What does the Core think about this.?
I was thinking over this for quite some time. Why dont we hire one or two immigration attorneys on a full time basis. And lets start am immigration office where we can have all our immigration works (doubtful) but the future immigrant works ata marginally cheaper rates with high quality of service. If we keep a no profit no loss mantra, it would be helpful to everyone and also it will make this organization very strong.
Lets discuss its relevance? What does the Core think about this.?
more...
house 2011 Jennifer works
v2neha
02-17 07:23 PM
Very true - unfortunately my case that was received at SFO regional office in July'04 got transferred to PBEC in Oct'04. It is still rotting there! I read somewhere that BECs were supposed to follow adjudication process of CA SWAs and Regional offices due to their proven efficiency compared to other states. Wish they did - clearly they didn't
tattoo by Silvio » Mon Feb 28, 2011
loveiv
05-25 10:23 PM
Most of I-485 applications are currently stuck with the State Department's Visa Bulletin retrogression which are many years behind. However, aside delays which are attributed to the visa number retrogressions, the cases which were filed during the July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco period are expected to take nearly three years from the end of the USCIS itsself processing and adjudications in terms of the workloads, according to the CRS report. July 2007 VB fiasco filers, go figure!
According to the CRS report, the USCIS issues before the Congress are as follows from the perspectives of FY 2009 budget:
USCIS Issues for Congress. USCIS issues for Congress include the surgein immigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefitapplications.
Surge in Benefit Applications and Resulting Backlog. According to the testimony of USCIS Director Emilo T. Gonzalez, USCIS experienced an increasein its backlog of naturalization applications in the second half of FY2007.116 From May through July of 2007 USCIS received three and a half times more applications than during the same three months in the previous year.117 Consequently, published accounts indicate that processing time for applications filed during the FY2007 “surge” would be between 16-18 months, as compared to 6-7 months for applications filed in the same period during FY2006.118 For all immigration benefits, the USCIS director testified that the agency received over 1.2 million more applications during the FY2007 surge than in the same period during FY2006, for a total of over 3 million applications. According to media reports, USCIS officials believe that the backlog created by the application surge could take close to three years to clear. Although citizenship campaigns and a contentious national immigration debate have been cited as contributing factors, many observers believe most of the surge in
applications may be attributed to the USCIS fee increase of July 30, 2007. These fee adjustments followed an internal cost review and they increased application fees by a weighted average of 96% for each benefit. The cost of naturalization, formmigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefit applications.example, increased from $330 to $595. Critics of this new naturalization backlog have mainly raised concerns that applicants would not naturalize in time toparticipate in the 2008 election. USCIS did not include a request for direct appropriations to hire additional temporary personnel to adjudicate the backlog.
Use of FBI National Name Check Program. An additional potential issue for Congress concerns USCIS’ use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Name Check Program. USCIS officials have estimated that roughly 44% of 320,000 pending name checks for immigration benefit applications have taken more than six months to process, including applications for legal permanent residence (LPR) and naturalization. As a result, the White House has authorized USCIS to grant approximately 47,000 LPR applicants their immigration benefits without requiring completed FBI name checks. Critics of this decision believe it could expose the United States to more security threats. The USCIS ombudsman, however, has argued that USCIS employment of the FBI name check process is of limited value to public safety or national security because in most cases the applicants are living and working in the United States without restriction.
Source: www.immigration-law.com
Three years clock ticks from the day filed, one year is down, two to go.
According to the CRS report, the USCIS issues before the Congress are as follows from the perspectives of FY 2009 budget:
USCIS Issues for Congress. USCIS issues for Congress include the surgein immigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefitapplications.
Surge in Benefit Applications and Resulting Backlog. According to the testimony of USCIS Director Emilo T. Gonzalez, USCIS experienced an increasein its backlog of naturalization applications in the second half of FY2007.116 From May through July of 2007 USCIS received three and a half times more applications than during the same three months in the previous year.117 Consequently, published accounts indicate that processing time for applications filed during the FY2007 “surge” would be between 16-18 months, as compared to 6-7 months for applications filed in the same period during FY2006.118 For all immigration benefits, the USCIS director testified that the agency received over 1.2 million more applications during the FY2007 surge than in the same period during FY2006, for a total of over 3 million applications. According to media reports, USCIS officials believe that the backlog created by the application surge could take close to three years to clear. Although citizenship campaigns and a contentious national immigration debate have been cited as contributing factors, many observers believe most of the surge in
applications may be attributed to the USCIS fee increase of July 30, 2007. These fee adjustments followed an internal cost review and they increased application fees by a weighted average of 96% for each benefit. The cost of naturalization, formmigration benefit applications that occurred in FY2007 and which resulted in an increase in the agency’s backlog, and the use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) National Name Check program to vet immigration benefit applications.example, increased from $330 to $595. Critics of this new naturalization backlog have mainly raised concerns that applicants would not naturalize in time toparticipate in the 2008 election. USCIS did not include a request for direct appropriations to hire additional temporary personnel to adjudicate the backlog.
Use of FBI National Name Check Program. An additional potential issue for Congress concerns USCIS’ use of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) National Name Check Program. USCIS officials have estimated that roughly 44% of 320,000 pending name checks for immigration benefit applications have taken more than six months to process, including applications for legal permanent residence (LPR) and naturalization. As a result, the White House has authorized USCIS to grant approximately 47,000 LPR applicants their immigration benefits without requiring completed FBI name checks. Critics of this decision believe it could expose the United States to more security threats. The USCIS ombudsman, however, has argued that USCIS employment of the FBI name check process is of limited value to public safety or national security because in most cases the applicants are living and working in the United States without restriction.
Source: www.immigration-law.com
Three years clock ticks from the day filed, one year is down, two to go.
more...
pictures Pop star Jennifer Lopez has
GCAmigo
12-16 06:14 PM
it took 10 months to move one month..
dresses Jennifer Lopez Debuts New Song
chi_shark
09-04 12:12 PM
Tell your friend that it will be more fun to watch grass grow than filing for gc...
just kidding... if he just needs I-140 approved so he can continue to get 3 year H-1 extensions, then its a good idea to start PERM.
One of my good friend asked me this questions yesterday? I did not have an answer for him and wanted to ask if someone could have any suggestions on this.
Thanks you for your time.
His company wants to start his EB2 green card process. He was wondering if this a good time to do this? Is it recommended that he delay this process for 6 months or so? He is currently in his 3rd year of H1B.
Thanks
-M
just kidding... if he just needs I-140 approved so he can continue to get 3 year H-1 extensions, then its a good idea to start PERM.
One of my good friend asked me this questions yesterday? I did not have an answer for him and wanted to ask if someone could have any suggestions on this.
Thanks you for your time.
His company wants to start his EB2 green card process. He was wondering if this a good time to do this? Is it recommended that he delay this process for 6 months or so? He is currently in his 3rd year of H1B.
Thanks
-M
more...
makeup Jennifer Lopez 2011 Golden
sobers
02-08 02:58 PM
Intel chairman calls for immigration reform (Financial Times/ Feb 7, 2005)
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11221265/
Craig Barrett, chairman of Intel, the world's largest semiconductor maker, called for comprehensive immigration reform to make the US more competitive, during a live question-and-answer session on FT.com.
Mr Barrett, one of a number of technology leaders including Bill Gates to have criticised restrictions on foreign workers in the US, said the first step in simplifying the immigration process would be "to replace the current arbitrary quota system with an open market type approach".
The US's H1-B visa allows foreign engineers and scientists to work on a temporary basis in the US but is capped at 65,000 a year. Mr Barrett said this was inadequate: the current quota had been exhausted and there could be no new admissions until another came into effect in October this year.
Mr Barrett said demand was also greater than supply for green cards that allowed permanent employment, with the cap at 140,000 a year and long processing delays meaning individuals having to wait up to seven years to obtain one.
"These arbitrary caps undercut business's ability to hire and retain the number of highly educated people in the fields where we need to maintain our leading position," he said.
"Instead of arbitrary caps, a market-based approach that responds to demand is needed."
The tabular content relating to this article is not available to view. Apologies in advance for the inconvenience caused.
Mr Barrett was asked by an Intel employee why his company had stopped sponsoring its workers for green cards between 2001 and 2004. The Intel chairman said this was during the longest and deepest recession in the semiconductor industry. It had been waiting for business conditions to improve before resuming the process.
"We should just staple a green card to every advanced degree granted to a foreign national from a US university in science and engineering," he said in another answer.
Mr Barrett also advocated improvements in the US education system to make America more competitive in technology fields.
"Today, we compare ourselves to our neighbours � California to Arizona, Texas to Florida, etc. We do not compare ourselves to the rest of the world and recognise that the bar of achievement, the level necessary for competitiveness is continually being raised."
Craig Barrett: America should open its doors wide to foreign talent
--------
IV Moderators- please use this information in your presentations.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/11221265/
Craig Barrett, chairman of Intel, the world's largest semiconductor maker, called for comprehensive immigration reform to make the US more competitive, during a live question-and-answer session on FT.com.
Mr Barrett, one of a number of technology leaders including Bill Gates to have criticised restrictions on foreign workers in the US, said the first step in simplifying the immigration process would be "to replace the current arbitrary quota system with an open market type approach".
The US's H1-B visa allows foreign engineers and scientists to work on a temporary basis in the US but is capped at 65,000 a year. Mr Barrett said this was inadequate: the current quota had been exhausted and there could be no new admissions until another came into effect in October this year.
Mr Barrett said demand was also greater than supply for green cards that allowed permanent employment, with the cap at 140,000 a year and long processing delays meaning individuals having to wait up to seven years to obtain one.
"These arbitrary caps undercut business's ability to hire and retain the number of highly educated people in the fields where we need to maintain our leading position," he said.
"Instead of arbitrary caps, a market-based approach that responds to demand is needed."
The tabular content relating to this article is not available to view. Apologies in advance for the inconvenience caused.
Mr Barrett was asked by an Intel employee why his company had stopped sponsoring its workers for green cards between 2001 and 2004. The Intel chairman said this was during the longest and deepest recession in the semiconductor industry. It had been waiting for business conditions to improve before resuming the process.
"We should just staple a green card to every advanced degree granted to a foreign national from a US university in science and engineering," he said in another answer.
Mr Barrett also advocated improvements in the US education system to make America more competitive in technology fields.
"Today, we compare ourselves to our neighbours � California to Arizona, Texas to Florida, etc. We do not compare ourselves to the rest of the world and recognise that the bar of achievement, the level necessary for competitiveness is continually being raised."
Craig Barrett: America should open its doors wide to foreign talent
--------
IV Moderators- please use this information in your presentations.
girlfriend Jennifer Lopez Extra abs bare
webm
04-01 03:46 PM
I faced there are times that Email notification trigger didn't worked as expected.:(
hairstyles Look Jennifer Lopez 2011
gondalguru
07-05 01:25 AM
Actually it would have been greater mess if they would have allowed to file 500 to 700k persons if that number is correct. Mainly those who are missing the bus due to marriage and other reasons would have suffered a lot. PD date movement
should be as accurate as possible or gc number should be increased. Or if they allow to file everyone then processing of application should be based on PD.
I disagree. Who ever is able to file AOS gets associated benefits of EAD/AP/AC21 etc and it never hurts to have these benefits available.
I agree with your last suggestion. I-485 processing should be according to PD.
should be as accurate as possible or gc number should be increased. Or if they allow to file everyone then processing of application should be based on PD.
I disagree. Who ever is able to file AOS gets associated benefits of EAD/AP/AC21 etc and it never hurts to have these benefits available.
I agree with your last suggestion. I-485 processing should be according to PD.
vandanaverdia
09-12 07:08 PM
23 members & growing...
Wake up Washingtonians & Oregonians....
Wake up Washingtonians & Oregonians....
ajp5
11-02 12:31 AM
Talk to your company Liar (lawyer) first. My non-legal advise is
1. Ask lawyer to request more time for the RFE
2. If thats not possible - send what you can. eg W2 , paystubs etc etc. Try to get the client letter from your employer. If you get it in next 10 days, additional evidence is always welcome by USCIS I guess.
You cannot threaten your employer for something like this. Talk to them & resolve this with the help of your manager.....You have 1 last day ie Monday before last Fedex dropoff time.....reset your stopwatch.......maybe make a movie out of it and post it on youtube:)
1. Ask lawyer to request more time for the RFE
2. If thats not possible - send what you can. eg W2 , paystubs etc etc. Try to get the client letter from your employer. If you get it in next 10 days, additional evidence is always welcome by USCIS I guess.
You cannot threaten your employer for something like this. Talk to them & resolve this with the help of your manager.....You have 1 last day ie Monday before last Fedex dropoff time.....reset your stopwatch.......maybe make a movie out of it and post it on youtube:)
No comments:
Post a Comment