LostInGCProcess
09-10 12:53 PM
Please help me understand this:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
The Dept. of State's web site has the visa bulletin for SEpt 2008 as:
EB INDIA
--------------------
1st C
2nd 01AUG06
3rd U
And the US Consulate's web site at Mumbai has:
EB INDIA
------------
E1 Current
E2 1 April 2003
So, how come Consulates got the latest information? Why not post this on the DOS page too by the DOS?
I am so sick and tired of this whole process of GC. I am starting to question myself if this entire process of wait, is worth at all? If you are illegal, you are free in this country, if you are legal they scrutiny your papers with a microscope....I am sick, totally sick. There is a limit to patience, too.:mad::mad::mad:
wallpaper Mickey Happy Birthday Graphic
Robert Kumar
03-15 05:43 PM
btw you can check it out at
welcome to the icert portal (http://icert.doleta.gov/)
!!! T h a n k y o u !!!
welcome to the icert portal (http://icert.doleta.gov/)
!!! T h a n k y o u !!!
asdcrajnet
07-06 07:15 AM
just dug!!!
2011 Happy Birthday! Glitter
dhesha
09-08 11:49 AM
I think, we should try to make a law that says to give the citizenship after 5 years from the day when I-1485 was filed (and not when it was approved). This will benefit majority of us who have waited forever after filing I-1485 and does not deserve to spend another 5 years if they wish to take Citizenship.
more...
h1xfer485
08-13 05:08 PM
The Mexico F2A and Employment Third preference cut-off dates" are �unavailable� for both August and September..blah blah..
MAY BE it talks specifically about "Mexico EB3". otherwise it would have been: "Mexico F2A and all EB3"...
MAY BE it talks specifically about "Mexico EB3". otherwise it would have been: "Mexico F2A and all EB3"...
santb1975
06-03 09:33 PM
Let's keep moving forward
more...
kshitijnt
04-30 05:09 PM
atleast there was bipartisan frustration on part of congressmen on both sides except for the king guy
2010 Happy Birthday Pooh Bear
arkrish68
09-27 12:45 PM
Arrived in early 2001
started processing GC in 2003
filed 1st application in 2003 - application went to backlog elimination center
left the company, filed second application in March 2006 - EB2
got I 140 approval in 2006
applied for I485 in June 2007
Waiting till today for the I485 approval
started processing GC in 2003
filed 1st application in 2003 - application went to backlog elimination center
left the company, filed second application in March 2006 - EB2
got I 140 approval in 2006
applied for I485 in June 2007
Waiting till today for the I485 approval
more...
nk2006
07-05 12:17 PM
Bill Clinton & Hillary Clinton is coming to TANA in Washington.. i am from bay area.. i know lot of people are going this.. please take a print out and talk personally, explain our problems.. Please Thanks
I suggested this other day - nobody responded. Please anyone attending TANA can you please contact organizers and see if they can arrange couple minutes of Hillary's time to highlight this issue.
I suggested this other day - nobody responded. Please anyone attending TANA can you please contact organizers and see if they can arrange couple minutes of Hillary's time to highlight this issue.
hair Glitter Graphic BBCode for
glus
07-06 12:41 PM
I wonder what.....something is coooking and they will be some changes soon. I have a feeling they are in fear of the lawsuit and media coverage as this thing has in fact taken off....
more...
mirage
08-03 11:45 PM
Pani,
Thanks for Drafting this letter. I would add Rep. Zoe Logfren(Chairwoman of the immigartion subcommittee in the house & Senator John Cornyn Chairman of the immigartion subcommittee in the Senate) officials usually respond when things are addressed to Lawmakers too..
Guys please send out this letter.
I will appreciate if you could add these 2 in your 'Copy to' section...
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
Thanks
Thanks for Drafting this letter. I would add Rep. Zoe Logfren(Chairwoman of the immigartion subcommittee in the house & Senator John Cornyn Chairman of the immigartion subcommittee in the Senate) officials usually respond when things are addressed to Lawmakers too..
Guys please send out this letter.
I will appreciate if you could add these 2 in your 'Copy to' section...
Senator John Cornyn
Chairman - United States Senate Judiciary subCommittee on
Immigration, Border Security and Citizenship
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Main: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman - United States House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security, and International Law
102 Cannon HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone (202) 225-3072
Thanks
hot Happy Birthday
munnu77
03-16 10:20 AM
I just called ....
They said they r trying to fix it...
They said they r trying to fix it...
more...
house Birthday Glitter graphics
Libra
09-11 10:45 PM
So far 15000 contributions as per count on this thread. we reached half way in 4 days. 15k more to go in 4 more days. com' on guys we can do it.
thank you all whoever contributed so far.
thank you all whoever contributed so far.
tattoo Happy Birthday Megan!
satyasaich
08-14 06:55 PM
"""The Mexico F2A and Employment Third preference cut-off dates are �unavailable� for both August and September, since those FY-2008 annual limits have been reached. The Visa Office had originally anticipated that this would be a temporary situation. Then with the start of the new fiscal year in October the cut-off dates would have returned to those which had applied during June. However, continued heavy demand in those categories may require the establishment of cut-off dates which are earlier than those which had applied in June. A formal decision determination of the October cut-off dates will not be possible until early September. """
Let's understand it ! I'm sure you are aware about July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco. It made every category "C". Before that in June 2007 bulletin - they moved dates for EB3 & EB2 singnificantly. For EB3 India - it moved from May 2001 to Jun 2003 - People who filed their AOS are 'June' applicants and People who filed because of July 2007 bulletin are 'July/Aug' applicants
DOS refering to these June applicants means having PD earlier than Jun 2003. I hope its clear to you.
If one thinks with cool head, what you said makes sense. also if you remember when EB3 (I) was actually retrgoressed on Jan1/2005, the PD was jun/2002. Then it was retrogressed all the way back to 1999 or something. Later on, slowly it came up to March/2001 & stopped there for a while due to the so called 'Hump' (due to 245i cases, i think)
AND slowly but steadily PD for EB-I crawled up to Nov/2001 until May2007.
Suddenly in June'07, the PD was advanced to June/2003 and i know so many pending cases were cleared around july and august of 2007.
So far what i've mentioned are all facts only.
Now looking forward for fiscal year allocations starting from Oct'2008, i can say the PD for EB-I will begin atleast Jun'2002. May be even a better PD but i'm not sure. For sure there is a good chance of making progress to end of 2003 when it comes to Sep'2009. This is based on availability of only those visa numbers as mandated by law as of today.
Any comments
Let's understand it ! I'm sure you are aware about July 2007 Visa Bulletin fiasco. It made every category "C". Before that in June 2007 bulletin - they moved dates for EB3 & EB2 singnificantly. For EB3 India - it moved from May 2001 to Jun 2003 - People who filed their AOS are 'June' applicants and People who filed because of July 2007 bulletin are 'July/Aug' applicants
DOS refering to these June applicants means having PD earlier than Jun 2003. I hope its clear to you.
If one thinks with cool head, what you said makes sense. also if you remember when EB3 (I) was actually retrgoressed on Jan1/2005, the PD was jun/2002. Then it was retrogressed all the way back to 1999 or something. Later on, slowly it came up to March/2001 & stopped there for a while due to the so called 'Hump' (due to 245i cases, i think)
AND slowly but steadily PD for EB-I crawled up to Nov/2001 until May2007.
Suddenly in June'07, the PD was advanced to June/2003 and i know so many pending cases were cleared around july and august of 2007.
So far what i've mentioned are all facts only.
Now looking forward for fiscal year allocations starting from Oct'2008, i can say the PD for EB-I will begin atleast Jun'2002. May be even a better PD but i'm not sure. For sure there is a good chance of making progress to end of 2003 when it comes to Sep'2009. This is based on availability of only those visa numbers as mandated by law as of today.
Any comments
more...
pictures Send this glitter to your
santb1975
05-22 07:58 AM
Good suggestion
Come forward and contribute for your own cause.
Come forward and contribute for your own cause.
dresses Hey Rick, Happy Birthday!
julsun
01-19 01:39 PM
But I don't have 4 weeks. I have to travel on january 29th.
Another thing is do I need to show on departure do I need to show the AP Approval. If I don't then if I leave US and my friend mail it to my place abroad is that ok as my USCIS online application status check system shows my I-131 approved on January 8 and mailed.
You can try it at your local USCIS office after taking infopass appointment. But they may ask you to pay money again for the same. Hope this helps.
Another thing is do I need to show on departure do I need to show the AP Approval. If I don't then if I leave US and my friend mail it to my place abroad is that ok as my USCIS online application status check system shows my I-131 approved on January 8 and mailed.
You can try it at your local USCIS office after taking infopass appointment. But they may ask you to pay money again for the same. Hope this helps.
more...
makeup irthday glitter graphics.
makemygc
10-25 11:59 PM
I've sent the mails and strongly encourage everyone to come out and take an early action before this gets worse. Even if you are not affected right now, support the cause to make sure that you will not be affected in the future.
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
Also, just wanted to point out some notes that letter says that Yates memo is attached, so if you are blindly copy and pasting make sure that you attach the Memo to your email or a copy to your letter.
I would suggest OP to add the copy of yates memo and the follow up memo to the posting.
Thanks
MakeMyGC
Issue/Background:
It seems USCIS is not following AC21 regulations in some cases � especially when underlying I140 is revoked by previous employer � and are incorrectly denying I485 applications. As we know, AC21 regulations and related guidelines, provide some relief and allow job changes without affecting the I485 application. As per these rules if the employee changes employment after 180 days of submitting I485 application, there is no need to redo I140 even-if old employer revokes the old I140.
In recent days USCIS seems to be denying lot of I485 applications � ignoring their own AC21 regulations. A few of IV volunteers (pd_recapturing, gc4me, chanduv et al) have started an effort to address this. You can get more info on this, at this thread: http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=21716.
This issue can affect a lot of us and it negates all the flexibility/relief that we acquired by getting EAD�s and advantages we got thru recent admin reform.
What needs to be done:
After some initial discussions and planning (thanks to pd-capturing, chandu, et al) it is decided to write letters to Ombudsman and service center heads to point out this and request them to correct it ASAP. Please participate and send letters. To succeed we need to send it in thousands.
Pasting the letter and the addresses below.
More info: (thanks to gc4me for addresses and letter template):
======================
Everyone please send the letter/email to 3 persons.
1. Ombudsman
2. Director, NSC
3. Director, TSC
======================
Ombudsman:
cisombudsman@dhs.gov
Mailing Address:
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
ATTN: Recommendations
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
=======================
Nebraska Service Center
Director: Gerard Heinauer
General Correspondence (Inquiries) (Sending applications or petitions to this address will delay their processing)
USCIS NSC
P.O. Box 82521
Lincoln, NE 68501-2521
NOTE: If using overnight delivery by any private service provider, send your package to:
USCIS
Nebraska Service Center
850 S Street
P.O. Box (Insert Correct P.O. Box Number)
Lincoln, NE 68508
Be sure to include the appropriate P.O. Box number on the shipping label.
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Suite 7000
Washington, DC 20529
or email: USCIS-COMPLAINT@DHS.GOV
=====================
Director: David Roark
General
Correspondence:
USCIS TSC
PO Box 851488
Mesquite, TX 75185-1488
Customer Feedback:
Contact:
Assistant Chief
Internal Security and Investigative Operations
USCIS, 111 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.
Ste 7000, Washington, DC 20529
============================
Letter
============================
Date: Today()
To
Mr. Michael Timothy Dougherty
The Ombudsman
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman
United States Department of Homeland Security
Mail Stop 1225
Washington, D.C. 20528-1225
Re: Issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines
Dear Sir,
This is to bring your attention to the issues caused by USCIS not following AC21 guidelines.
The American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act of 2000 (AC21) allows for a change of employer on any I-485 Adjustment of Status Application that has been pending for 180 days or more, without the need to file a new I-140 petition, provided the applicant�s new employment is in a similar/same occupation.
According to the Memo released by William R Yates on August 4th 2003, the original I-140 is valid if it is approvable and form I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days. (Attached for your reference is the memo dated August 4th 2003 from William R Yates and the follow-up memo dated May 12th 2005 with relevant sections highlighted).
Due to unreasonable delays caused by retrogression, many candidates have lawfully changed employers in accordance with the AC21 statute. Even though there is no requirement that USCIS be notified after a job change, some applicants have done so to prove that they are in compliance with this regulation. If the previous employer has withdrawn the previously approved I-140, AC21 guidelines state that if the applicant has not submitted evidence of a new qualifying offer of employment, the applicant be sent an NOID (Notice of Intent to Deny) to deny the I-485 application or a RFE (Request for Evidence) . If the response to the NOID/RFE is timely and indicates that the alien has a new offer of employment in the same or similar occupation, USCIS may consider the approved Form I-140 to remain valid with respect to the new offer of employment and may continue regular processing of the Form I-485.
Over the past few months, a disturbing pattern has emerged with cases where the applicant has changed employers. USCIS has started to deny I-485applications where the underlying I-140 has been withdrawn by the previous employer without issuing an NOID or RFE. Even those applicants who have notified USCIS of change in employers have had their I-485 denied.
After the denial of I-485, the applicant has to file a MTR (Motion to reconsider) with USCIS to re-open the case. In addition to the financial burden of filing and legal fees, the applicant has to stop working because of the denial of the I-485 until the case is re-opened. This could be anywhere from a month to a few months. Needless to say, employers are unwilling to keep the job position open for such a long period and the applicant in most cases is looking at potential loss of employment. The applicant who has followed the law to the fullest extent is unfairly punished on account of USCIS not following the AC21 provisions.
This is a request for you to intervene to ensure that the AC21 regulations are followed when adjudicating an I-485 application. If the applicant notifies USCIS of a change in employment under AC21, this should be added the applicant�s physical file and electronic records. If there is no such notification and the previous employer withdraws the I-140, the applicant should be issued a NOID/RFE instead of denying the I-485 application.
Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact.
Thank you in advance for your kind attention and cooperation in this matter.
Thanks,
Your Name
Your Address
Your Phone Number
girlfriend glitter-graphics.com
gsrknth
07-14 02:55 PM
Great Idea.
Confirmation: 7YB6J-R6KW8
Confirmation: 7YB6J-R6KW8
hairstyles To use Happy Birthday graphic
willIWill
12-10 07:12 PM
Repenting that i miised the chance, and should have applied at that time.
Even if you had applied then when single, no difference my friend.
One still needs to retain the H1 so their dependants could have the H4. So, until the dates open up again there is no end in sight for the other benefits such as EAD etc.
If it is any solace, you actually did not miss the boat!
Even if you had applied then when single, no difference my friend.
One still needs to retain the H1 so their dependants could have the H4. So, until the dates open up again there is no end in sight for the other benefits such as EAD etc.
If it is any solace, you actually did not miss the boat!
vparam
09-18 09:41 PM
vparam/ anyone,
i have 2 questions
when i move into my own LLC how far do I need to go in terms of documents/ pay-stubs to prove to the USCIS that it's a legitimate company/ job offer? i guess i am a bit confused as to how to present to USCIS my dual role as owner/ employee with 140 job description?
also from your experiences is it practical (in terms of taxation) to just run your own payroll (from consulting) through your LLC - meaning you are the only employee in your company?
thanks in advance,
manderson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ref (Murthy): " Foreign nationals can port their cases to a self-employed position! This is a very favorable stance, as many foreign nationals desire to establish their own companies and, in that way, control their own destinies. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong among many immigrants. The Memo reiterates the need to show that the new position or job is the same or similar. It also states that the new employer and job offer must be legitimate.
�MurthyDotCom
In these situations, the USCIS is to focus upon whether the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed. That is, the petitioning company must have intended to employ the foreign national beneficiary and the foreign national beneficiary must have intended to accept the position at the time of filing the I-140 and the I-485."
Source: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
I think the 2nd paragraph means USCIS might want additional RFEs from your 140 employer later on to prove that original 140 employment offer was valid.
Easy way out... if you are married then your spouse could be the president (owner) and you could be a SW dev or whast so ever it states in 140/ labor.
you need a bank account for your company, you could run your payroll by buying quicken business and issue check for you as employee... Mind your business is separate from you employment... that you cannot take all the earning as salary, some as salary, some as profits is possible
i have 2 questions
when i move into my own LLC how far do I need to go in terms of documents/ pay-stubs to prove to the USCIS that it's a legitimate company/ job offer? i guess i am a bit confused as to how to present to USCIS my dual role as owner/ employee with 140 job description?
also from your experiences is it practical (in terms of taxation) to just run your own payroll (from consulting) through your LLC - meaning you are the only employee in your company?
thanks in advance,
manderson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ref (Murthy): " Foreign nationals can port their cases to a self-employed position! This is a very favorable stance, as many foreign nationals desire to establish their own companies and, in that way, control their own destinies. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong among many immigrants. The Memo reiterates the need to show that the new position or job is the same or similar. It also states that the new employer and job offer must be legitimate.
�MurthyDotCom
In these situations, the USCIS is to focus upon whether the original job offer was really the intended employment at the time the I-140 and I-485 were filed. That is, the petitioning company must have intended to employ the foreign national beneficiary and the foreign national beneficiary must have intended to accept the position at the time of filing the I-140 and the I-485."
Source: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
I think the 2nd paragraph means USCIS might want additional RFEs from your 140 employer later on to prove that original 140 employment offer was valid.
Easy way out... if you are married then your spouse could be the president (owner) and you could be a SW dev or whast so ever it states in 140/ labor.
you need a bank account for your company, you could run your payroll by buying quicken business and issue check for you as employee... Mind your business is separate from you employment... that you cannot take all the earning as salary, some as salary, some as profits is possible
map_boiler
07-05 01:17 PM
I just used the letter above (slightly edited) to email senators Bennett and Hatch from Utah.
Today I made my first $100.00 contribution to IV. Go IV!
Today I made my first $100.00 contribution to IV. Go IV!
No comments:
Post a Comment