chandra140
10-13 01:48 PM
I got the 140 denial notice.
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
The USCIS did not mentioned any reason like my valid labour is expired.Not sure is the denial is because of 180 day rule or not.
Here is the reason...
The petitioner did not submit an individual labour certification for the beneficiary or evidence of schedule A designation.As such, the beneficiary is ineligible for classification as a member of the preofessions holding an advanced degree or an alien of exceptional ability.
cchada
09-02 09:50 PM
Congrates ...
Does PCC taken at Indian Consulate in US is vaild or do we need get form local police station and Passport office in India ????
Does PCC taken at Indian Consulate in US is vaild or do we need get form local police station and Passport office in India ????
[[C|-|E]]
April 17th, 2004, 09:06 AM
Wow ! I like these shoots :). I have in mind to do something similar, but I don�t have a macro-lens yet, so... I suposse I have to wait :). But, anyway, I really like your picks ! :).
karthikgk
02-19 12:54 PM
All,
Even though there are other threads on this topic, I wanted to start a separate thread, as I had some unique questions. I am at the zenith of frustration and at the age of 37, I feel like my career is slipping away while waiting for GC :(
My employment scenario:
- Been with the current employer since Jan 2001
- Less than 5 years experience before I joined the current employer
- Have an MBA that was not used to the GC application (applied in July 2003) since I was a programmer at the time of GC application
My GC scenario:
- Applied for GC in July 2003 under EB3
- Applied for I-485 in July 2007
- Approved I140 and EAD in hand
- Even though I have EAD, I continue to use my H1
My new role in the job:
- After being in the job for as long as I have been, I am now doing Business Development that makes use of my MBA
My questions:
1) Lawyer asked me to wait it out for the GC instead of trying to convert the application to GC2. Lawyer says new labor applications are getting under scrutiny a lot more than before and he think it is prudent to wait. Is this reasonable?
2) What are my other options - do you think I can ask my employer to apply fresh EB2 application for the business development role and show my MBA? Not sure if they will agree to my request, but wanted to make sure that it is even possible to do that.
3) Can I change my job based on H1? Or change the job based on EAD? If either way I change my job, can I then ask the new employer to apply for my GC under EB2? If I change the job, and if my current employer agrees (I don't why he would, but just for understanding sake), can I retain my current EB3 application?
Any advice is greatly appreciated. I am at a point of giving it up and going back to India, but then that is another big decision,
Regards,
Even though there are other threads on this topic, I wanted to start a separate thread, as I had some unique questions. I am at the zenith of frustration and at the age of 37, I feel like my career is slipping away while waiting for GC :(
My employment scenario:
- Been with the current employer since Jan 2001
- Less than 5 years experience before I joined the current employer
- Have an MBA that was not used to the GC application (applied in July 2003) since I was a programmer at the time of GC application
My GC scenario:
- Applied for GC in July 2003 under EB3
- Applied for I-485 in July 2007
- Approved I140 and EAD in hand
- Even though I have EAD, I continue to use my H1
My new role in the job:
- After being in the job for as long as I have been, I am now doing Business Development that makes use of my MBA
My questions:
1) Lawyer asked me to wait it out for the GC instead of trying to convert the application to GC2. Lawyer says new labor applications are getting under scrutiny a lot more than before and he think it is prudent to wait. Is this reasonable?
2) What are my other options - do you think I can ask my employer to apply fresh EB2 application for the business development role and show my MBA? Not sure if they will agree to my request, but wanted to make sure that it is even possible to do that.
3) Can I change my job based on H1? Or change the job based on EAD? If either way I change my job, can I then ask the new employer to apply for my GC under EB2? If I change the job, and if my current employer agrees (I don't why he would, but just for understanding sake), can I retain my current EB3 application?
Any advice is greatly appreciated. I am at a point of giving it up and going back to India, but then that is another big decision,
Regards,
more...
Ryall
09-05 07:45 PM
haha :P I agree the pixel stretch can look awesome (as in the case of Dans splash - great job by the way!)... I just think it is more often used when it would have been better to leave it out or try something different - but it can definitly be the way to go in the right situation.
Peace
Peace
learning01
05-24 05:27 PM
From Bllomberg Update on CIR in Senate:
................
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove today spoke for the second time in two weeks at a private meeting of House Republicans to seek a compromise between the Senate and the House.
Rove, during his appearance, heard complaints from representatives who oppose the Senate's immigration proposal, according to lawmakers who attended.
``Even I, optimistic as I am about a lot of things around here, see an immigration bill -- with so few calendar days left - - hard to reconcile,'' said Representative Mark Foley, a Florida Republican who attended the meeting.
Majority
Ron Bonjean, a spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, said Hastert won't move a final compromise measure to the House floor unless it is supported by a majority of the House's 231 Republicans -- not a majority of all House members.
``The speaker believes in passing an immigration bill with a majority of the majority,'' Bonjean said.
Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay told reporters that passage of a final measure may be helpful in fall elections in which Republicans have ``the wind in our face'' as they work to keep control of the House.
LINK (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aGou1DNa_4Ic&refer=top_world_news) at Bloomber.com
Call me paranoid...but I am wondering the exact same thing that how come Tancredo, et.al. are not making any noises...if you remember last time these congressmen were making a lot of noise and the bill went nowhere, now in hindsight, I think internally they knew that the bill will not pass the senate at that time and were making the most of it. Similarly, the silence is ominous because it means they probably have some surprises lined up at the conference. BTW, do we know who will be on the conference from both the Senate as well as the house? Also, are the conference proceedings publicised?
................
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove today spoke for the second time in two weeks at a private meeting of House Republicans to seek a compromise between the Senate and the House.
Rove, during his appearance, heard complaints from representatives who oppose the Senate's immigration proposal, according to lawmakers who attended.
``Even I, optimistic as I am about a lot of things around here, see an immigration bill -- with so few calendar days left - - hard to reconcile,'' said Representative Mark Foley, a Florida Republican who attended the meeting.
Majority
Ron Bonjean, a spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, said Hastert won't move a final compromise measure to the House floor unless it is supported by a majority of the House's 231 Republicans -- not a majority of all House members.
``The speaker believes in passing an immigration bill with a majority of the majority,'' Bonjean said.
Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay told reporters that passage of a final measure may be helpful in fall elections in which Republicans have ``the wind in our face'' as they work to keep control of the House.
LINK (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aGou1DNa_4Ic&refer=top_world_news) at Bloomber.com
Call me paranoid...but I am wondering the exact same thing that how come Tancredo, et.al. are not making any noises...if you remember last time these congressmen were making a lot of noise and the bill went nowhere, now in hindsight, I think internally they knew that the bill will not pass the senate at that time and were making the most of it. Similarly, the silence is ominous because it means they probably have some surprises lined up at the conference. BTW, do we know who will be on the conference from both the Senate as well as the house? Also, are the conference proceedings publicised?
more...
calaway42
10-20 02:25 AM
what painter program?
mrajatish
11-17 12:00 PM
Yes, I think this is absolutely true - infact, I have given myself till 2007 end for that specific reason. If nothing changes by 2007 June/July, I will start looking at Australia, Canada, UK and India (most likely I will go back to India).
I might come back when this country changes, and believe me, it will change, esp. when people from baby-boomer generation retires.
I might come back when this country changes, and believe me, it will change, esp. when people from baby-boomer generation retires.
more...
tonyHK12
01-11 09:28 AM
The second part also sounds pretty reasonable to me:
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
This PAV would be issued upon successful completion of an application process that would involve the following:
1. Providing documentary evidence (school records, doctor�s records, etc.) that the applicant was in the United States before he or she reached their thirteenth birthday and be no older than twenty-five at the time they file their application;
2. Background checks for any prior convictions involving fraud, assault, reckless driving or DWI, failure to appear at any immigration hearing, or any past record of voluntary or involuntary deportation. Any such convictions would lead to a presumption of an unsuccessful application;
3. Evidence of the withholding of any relevant information, or submitting false information would result in the automatic failure of an application. Any failure of an application would result in the applicant returning to his previous immigration status;
4. Failure of an application due to withholding information or providing false information would subject the applicant to expedited removal proceedings;
5. Waivers of any requirement connected with the application process could only be made on a case by case basis by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security setting out in detail the "compelling evidence" underlying such a waiver and the evidence used to support such a determination.
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following authorizations:
1. PAV holders would be allowed to legally work and obtain a U.S. passport (on the condition of turning in any other passports) for foreign travel;
2. It would allow holders to establish residency in any state according to that state's requirements and be on equal footing with other legal immigrants with regard to state and local laws and policies;
The Permanent Administrative Visa would carry with it the following prohibitions:
1. Holders of the PAV would not be able to sponsor family members and relatives for LPR status;
2. Holding an PAV would not imply any safe harbor for applicant's family members;
3. Holders of PAVs would not be eligible to receive means-tested public welfare benefits;
4. Holders of PAVs would not be able to adjust their immigration status for a period of 10 years and then only through an administrative hearing in which the holder presented compelling evidence that such an adjustment is in the public interest. Such evidence would consist of, but not be limited to, applicant's work history, community service, military service, family circumstances, and the results of policy and security checks.
A One-time Only Policy: Consistent with the knowledge that adjusting the status of illegal immigrants brings with it the expectation that adjustments of the same kind will be made in the future, the language authorizing this initiative will explicitly state that:
1. That no further adjustments to legal status will be made for children brought into the country illegally after the date on which this bill becomes law;
2. That parents who bring their young children into the country illegally after the date of enactment will be subject to expedited removal proceedings.
GCwaitforever
02-27 04:21 PM
Leslie,
Check this out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_visa
Check this out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V_visa
more...
pamposh
10-26 08:34 AM
Do not believe on online status. Couple of my frds got their EAD and still online status is " Case Received and Pending". Looks like they are not updating the status on regular basis.
I am one of those as well. My online status shows the regular "case received on so n so" message. I got my EAD about 10 days ago n so is with my spouse.
I am one of those as well. My online status shows the regular "case received on so n so" message. I got my EAD about 10 days ago n so is with my spouse.
gulute
10-02 02:39 PM
Did you use an approved labor?
the RFE was on Ability to Pay
the RFE was on Ability to Pay
more...
msyedy
02-08 01:10 PM
I am new member to this forum. My friend referred me here.
I have a very unique case scenario and need help if anyone is aware of this.
Background :
I worked for company X which went bankrupt and was absorbed by company Y. 3 months after I started
working for Y I got I-140 approved from company X(not sure how but got it).I had filed for I-140 abt.
2 months before I joined Y(then still an employee of X) and had opted for CP and not AOS(had
the option of concurrent filing but did not use which i regret till date). Since the X case was of
no use now I filed a fresh LC from Y and am still waiting for notification from BPC for recruitment(TR case).
I am planning to use the PD from earlier approved I-140 which is sept. 1999 when my LC gets approved.
Issue :
Last week I received a mail from NVC which was forwarded to me by the previous employers attorney.
The letter's main content says
"THIS LETTER SHALL SERVE AS YOUR NOTIFICATION THAT A VISA NUMBER IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE.
FAILURE TO PURSUE YOUR VISA APPLICATION BY COMPLYING WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW WILL COMMENCE
PROCEEDINGS TO TERMINATE YOUR IMMIGRANT VISA REGISTRATION ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THIS LETTER".
It mentions "Section 203(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act requires the Secretary of State
to terminate the registration of any alien who fails to apply for an immigrant visa within one year
following notification of the availability of a visa number".
Letter is Dated Dec. 3 2006.
Question :
I want to know if this will in anyway prevent me from using my old case PD with my current case?
My interpretation of this is that only the registration with NVC gets cancelled but the
underlying LC and I-140 approved are not affected and I can still use the old PD on my
current case. Pls. help.
The letter talks about VISA application registration. To file for I-485 you need a visa number available for you. The letter states that you currently have one and you should apply...meaning file (1-485 form which is Application To Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status) within one year from the date of the letter.
Registration itself means a visa number will be unvailable and you cannot use your old PD. You have only one year from the date of letter to use the visa number with that PD.
You should get your new labor approval within this one year limit and can file for I-485. I suggest that you should file perm because you never know when the BPC will approve that labor. Perm max will be approved in 6 months time(Most case)
In the end you trust your attorney. Talk to a good lawyer...
I have a very unique case scenario and need help if anyone is aware of this.
Background :
I worked for company X which went bankrupt and was absorbed by company Y. 3 months after I started
working for Y I got I-140 approved from company X(not sure how but got it).I had filed for I-140 abt.
2 months before I joined Y(then still an employee of X) and had opted for CP and not AOS(had
the option of concurrent filing but did not use which i regret till date). Since the X case was of
no use now I filed a fresh LC from Y and am still waiting for notification from BPC for recruitment(TR case).
I am planning to use the PD from earlier approved I-140 which is sept. 1999 when my LC gets approved.
Issue :
Last week I received a mail from NVC which was forwarded to me by the previous employers attorney.
The letter's main content says
"THIS LETTER SHALL SERVE AS YOUR NOTIFICATION THAT A VISA NUMBER IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE.
FAILURE TO PURSUE YOUR VISA APPLICATION BY COMPLYING WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS BELOW WILL COMMENCE
PROCEEDINGS TO TERMINATE YOUR IMMIGRANT VISA REGISTRATION ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THIS LETTER".
It mentions "Section 203(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act requires the Secretary of State
to terminate the registration of any alien who fails to apply for an immigrant visa within one year
following notification of the availability of a visa number".
Letter is Dated Dec. 3 2006.
Question :
I want to know if this will in anyway prevent me from using my old case PD with my current case?
My interpretation of this is that only the registration with NVC gets cancelled but the
underlying LC and I-140 approved are not affected and I can still use the old PD on my
current case. Pls. help.
The letter talks about VISA application registration. To file for I-485 you need a visa number available for you. The letter states that you currently have one and you should apply...meaning file (1-485 form which is Application To Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status) within one year from the date of the letter.
Registration itself means a visa number will be unvailable and you cannot use your old PD. You have only one year from the date of letter to use the visa number with that PD.
You should get your new labor approval within this one year limit and can file for I-485. I suggest that you should file perm because you never know when the BPC will approve that labor. Perm max will be approved in 6 months time(Most case)
In the end you trust your attorney. Talk to a good lawyer...
solaris27
08-15 08:58 AM
Q. How soon can I leave my petitioning employer once I get my green card approval?
A. There is no brief answer to this question. Let me explain. The basic premise (or theory) behind permanent residence through offer of employment is that an employee is accepting a job on a "permanent" bases. What does "permanent" mean? Does it mean for ever. Obviously not. That would be unreasonable. But "permanent" also does not mean that you pack your bags the moment you receive your green card. So what is the answer? No one really knows. Each case has to be determined upon its own merits. Normally, I would say working for one year or more with the same employer after getting your GC is PROBABLY enough indication of permanency. Less than 4-5 months is perhaps evidence to the contrary
But REMEMBER, this is just my own guess. Technically speaking, the moment you decide that you will leave after a certain period of time, "permanent" intent is gone. Catch-22 eh? Well that is the way it is.
There may be considerable relaxation in this interpretation because in the year 2001 Congress enacted a law that permits employees to leave an employer even while their I-485 is pending. We do not have the regulations or any detailed guidance on these issues.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
----------------------------------------------
Q. I did not willingly left the GC sponsor employer but actually after three months I got my GC, i got laid off from the project and due to the bad economy , my employer was not able to get me other project so he gave me letter saying that he wont be able to pay me salary since he doesnt have any project for me.And, after getting that letter I resigned from GC sponsor employer.
This is the whole scenario, now considering it, Am I still at risk?
A. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
Q. I am employed at the XYZ University (XYZU). I applied for 485 myself (without attorney). My 485 was approved last month and I got my passport stamped in July. My contract with XYZU is coming to an end. My job is renewed every year based on the availability of funding. I have been with XYZU for the last 5 years. There is a possibility that they (XYZU) may not extend the contract because the research grant I got is coming to an end in september.
Will my termination from the job at XYZU affect my Green Card in the future, and is it better to be terminated from service (based on unavailability of funding) by the WVU or is it better to offer my resignation?
A. I think it is better to be terminated. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
A. There is no brief answer to this question. Let me explain. The basic premise (or theory) behind permanent residence through offer of employment is that an employee is accepting a job on a "permanent" bases. What does "permanent" mean? Does it mean for ever. Obviously not. That would be unreasonable. But "permanent" also does not mean that you pack your bags the moment you receive your green card. So what is the answer? No one really knows. Each case has to be determined upon its own merits. Normally, I would say working for one year or more with the same employer after getting your GC is PROBABLY enough indication of permanency. Less than 4-5 months is perhaps evidence to the contrary
But REMEMBER, this is just my own guess. Technically speaking, the moment you decide that you will leave after a certain period of time, "permanent" intent is gone. Catch-22 eh? Well that is the way it is.
There may be considerable relaxation in this interpretation because in the year 2001 Congress enacted a law that permits employees to leave an employer even while their I-485 is pending. We do not have the regulations or any detailed guidance on these issues.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
----------------------------------------------
Q. I did not willingly left the GC sponsor employer but actually after three months I got my GC, i got laid off from the project and due to the bad economy , my employer was not able to get me other project so he gave me letter saying that he wont be able to pay me salary since he doesnt have any project for me.And, after getting that letter I resigned from GC sponsor employer.
This is the whole scenario, now considering it, Am I still at risk?
A. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
Q. I am employed at the XYZ University (XYZU). I applied for 485 myself (without attorney). My 485 was approved last month and I got my passport stamped in July. My contract with XYZU is coming to an end. My job is renewed every year based on the availability of funding. I have been with XYZU for the last 5 years. There is a possibility that they (XYZU) may not extend the contract because the research grant I got is coming to an end in september.
Will my termination from the job at XYZU affect my Green Card in the future, and is it better to be terminated from service (based on unavailability of funding) by the WVU or is it better to offer my resignation?
A. I think it is better to be terminated. There are no clear rules as we have stated above. But, In my opinion, there is no risk in this scenario. You acted in good faith to continue the job, but your employer could not continue to employ you.
more...
maacho
02-13 01:47 PM
H1B or not to Be is the question ?
join IV for the answers ;)
join IV for the answers ;)
leoindiano
07-11 11:50 AM
open a infopass, go to a local service center, they will schedule and u get it done, Dont loose this great chance.
I waited, opened SR's with 0 luck. Then i tried above and it worked. Luckily they scheduled same day as inforpass for me.
I waited, opened SR's with 0 luck. Then i tried above and it worked. Luckily they scheduled same day as inforpass for me.
more...
pnara2
01-24 12:37 PM
Appreciate your response. Thanks for the useful information.
mss007
04-21 03:05 PM
I am July 2007 filer, submitted I485, EAD/AP for me and my wife but as of now no LUDs on both I485s. Submitted at NSC but transferred to TSC this is happend at that time only now the case is pending at TSC.
EAD renewed last year got one year only now we have to renew this year again.
Many of my friends and their familes updated LUDs on 485 and even I read many threads in this forum regarding soft LUDs once or twice but mine is nothing... don't know:confused:
I took infopass appointment to know the status of my I 485. They said the case is pending it may take time and also said mail the letter to TSC and ask them what is the status? but she didn't say name check pending etc.., I don't where is stuck my application these I had wait once the processing time comes then they will update but nothing done....
Any one is facing same kind of situation?
Please let me Know.
PD Aug 2006 EB2
I485 pending at TSC, ND Sep 2007
no LUDs on 485 :(
FP done Nov 2007
EAD renewed last year got one year only now we have to renew this year again.
Many of my friends and their familes updated LUDs on 485 and even I read many threads in this forum regarding soft LUDs once or twice but mine is nothing... don't know:confused:
I took infopass appointment to know the status of my I 485. They said the case is pending it may take time and also said mail the letter to TSC and ask them what is the status? but she didn't say name check pending etc.., I don't where is stuck my application these I had wait once the processing time comes then they will update but nothing done....
Any one is facing same kind of situation?
Please let me Know.
PD Aug 2006 EB2
I485 pending at TSC, ND Sep 2007
no LUDs on 485 :(
FP done Nov 2007
a2006
11-29 12:05 AM
Some Qatar air flight transit through London. In that case you will need a transit visa.
If we have an AP, then do we still require a transit visa?
I am thinking of traveling by qatar airlines. I believe they dont have any transit visa requirement.
If we have an AP, then do we still require a transit visa?
I am thinking of traveling by qatar airlines. I believe they dont have any transit visa requirement.
WAIT_FOR_EVER_GC
06-21 02:04 PM
suggestions? ^^^^^^^
1) Read the requirement of EB2. Find out who are eligible in this category (Experience and bla bla bla)
Masters Degree, Managerial Position, Bachelor + 5 years are eligible. I am saying this because my friends have applied in these three categories to be eligible for eb2.
2) Your new Labor (PERM) in Eb2 might take up 8-10 months.
3) Apply I-140, I do not know if we have Premium Processing for it.
4) Once I-140 is Approved you can port the EB3 priority date to Eb2.
In your case 04 Eb3 will be now 04 Eb2.
The I -485 will have the old priority date 04 Eb2.
Most of the porting that I have heard is done by jumping ship. You ask your new employer to file in Eb2 and after your I-140 is approved you apply the old priority to EB2.
1) Read the requirement of EB2. Find out who are eligible in this category (Experience and bla bla bla)
Masters Degree, Managerial Position, Bachelor + 5 years are eligible. I am saying this because my friends have applied in these three categories to be eligible for eb2.
2) Your new Labor (PERM) in Eb2 might take up 8-10 months.
3) Apply I-140, I do not know if we have Premium Processing for it.
4) Once I-140 is Approved you can port the EB3 priority date to Eb2.
In your case 04 Eb3 will be now 04 Eb2.
The I -485 will have the old priority date 04 Eb2.
Most of the porting that I have heard is done by jumping ship. You ask your new employer to file in Eb2 and after your I-140 is approved you apply the old priority to EB2.
webm
02-14 09:28 AM
"If your RD for the 485 is later than that that means they didn't get to look at your file yet even though your PD is current."
I heard it is based on ND(Notice Date) not RD(ReceivedDate) of 485.
HTH,
I heard it is based on ND(Notice Date) not RD(ReceivedDate) of 485.
HTH,
No comments:
Post a Comment