dontcareanymore
07-30 03:49 AM
I read about new guidelines about not leaving USA before applying for reentry permit and biometrics are taken. Please see the note below:
http://pubweb.fdbl.com/news1.nsf/9abe5d703b986cff86256e310080943a/992527a7be4829e88525748a007ab59f?OpenDocument
If the link does not work, fo to fragomen's web site , select resources --> US Immigration head lines and the following topic:
USCIS Clarifies Biometrics Requirement for Reentry Permit Applicants.
I am sure other immigration firms have similar info.
http://pubweb.fdbl.com/news1.nsf/9abe5d703b986cff86256e310080943a/992527a7be4829e88525748a007ab59f?OpenDocument
If the link does not work, fo to fragomen's web site , select resources --> US Immigration head lines and the following topic:
USCIS Clarifies Biometrics Requirement for Reentry Permit Applicants.
I am sure other immigration firms have similar info.
GreenCardLegion
03-01 05:26 PM
I am in the same boat as you. I landed in Sep 2006 and have valid Canadian PR till Sep 2011. My 3 year expiry is nearing. And I am really confused with my EB3 India 2004 PD in retro. But also I have gotten married and not applied my wife on my Canadian PR at all. So that is another problem. I intend to voluntarily relinquish my Canadian PR status and then re-apply brand new with my wife this year as US H1B and GC process rules with USCIS is getting weirder by the day.
Also you can absolutely without any problem go and stay for next two years (730 days) before your first PR card expires even though you were out of Canada or were never resident there for first 3 years and retain your Canadian PR status. I know it for sure.
Also you can absolutely without any problem go and stay for next two years (730 days) before your first PR card expires even though you were out of Canada or were never resident there for first 3 years and retain your Canadian PR status. I know it for sure.
Ramba
01-11 07:23 PM
Clearly Explaining
I am working on Company A in H1B status my GC sponsored Company B for Future Employment and they applied 140 its Approved suddenly dates became current I applied AOS with 140 Approved in July afte that we got our EADS APs FPs all etc. my sponsored employer asked to join then I joined in Company B on EAD status
what ever the payment terms which I discussed within a month he changed his words according to law he only pay salary but I am working on percentage basis I liitle bit fed up with those issues
I stayed with them only one month and one more month
when can I Use AC21 for safe side
You must have have good faith intent of working for longterm with sponser. Also, sponser should have full faith intent of hiring you permanently. Now the question is how to measure that? The simple measurement is the time period you worked with sponser either in H1B or EAD or GC. If you worked only one month, your intension is false. If your sponser reports to USCIS, you worked only one month and left the job, and you had no intension to work permanently, USCIS can deny your 485.
As per law, the employer should pay only the wage mentioned in your LC/140. Thats what the employer agrred to pay you as a salary.
I am working on Company A in H1B status my GC sponsored Company B for Future Employment and they applied 140 its Approved suddenly dates became current I applied AOS with 140 Approved in July afte that we got our EADS APs FPs all etc. my sponsored employer asked to join then I joined in Company B on EAD status
what ever the payment terms which I discussed within a month he changed his words according to law he only pay salary but I am working on percentage basis I liitle bit fed up with those issues
I stayed with them only one month and one more month
when can I Use AC21 for safe side
You must have have good faith intent of working for longterm with sponser. Also, sponser should have full faith intent of hiring you permanently. Now the question is how to measure that? The simple measurement is the time period you worked with sponser either in H1B or EAD or GC. If you worked only one month, your intension is false. If your sponser reports to USCIS, you worked only one month and left the job, and you had no intension to work permanently, USCIS can deny your 485.
As per law, the employer should pay only the wage mentioned in your LC/140. Thats what the employer agrred to pay you as a salary.
PavanV
09-14 02:13 AM
shreekhand, I think peshwa's comments are about right, its human psychology, the slaves organized and demanded their rights, but it took a long time to get that , but they were some among the slaves who did feel that they were going to get freedom from their masters if they really worked hard, do you think they would have gotten freedom if they had did just that ?
more...
cdeneo
09-21 06:24 PM
The text provided on the link below has the following section:
================
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
==========================================
Does this mean if I-140 is approved and I-485 petition has been pending less than 180 days, one can still change jobs using AC21?
Can someone please clarify? Thanks!
Look at this document. This should answer lot of questions regarding AC21
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2005,0520-ac21.pdf
Thanks
Karthik
================
Question 10. Should service centers or district offices deny portability cases on the sole basis that the alien has left his or her employment with the I-140 petitioner prior to the I-485 application pending for 180 days?
Answer: No. The basis for adjustment is not actual (current) employment but prospective employment. Since there is no requirement that the alien have ever been employed by the petitioner while the I-140 and/or I-485 was pending, the fact that an alien left the I-140 petitioner before the I-485 has been pending 180 days will not necessarily render the alien ineligible to port. However, in all cases an offer of employment must have been bona fide. This means that, as of the time the I-140 was filed and at the time of filing the I-485 if not filed concurrently, the I-140 petitioner must have had the intent to employ the beneficiary, and the alien must have intended to undertake the employment, upon adjustment. Adjudicators should not presume absence of such intent and may take the I-140 and supporting documents themselves as prima facie evidence of such intent, but in appropriate cases additional evidence or investigation may be appropriate.
==========================================
Does this mean if I-140 is approved and I-485 petition has been pending less than 180 days, one can still change jobs using AC21?
Can someone please clarify? Thanks!
Look at this document. This should answer lot of questions regarding AC21
http://www.ilw.com/immigdaily/news/2005,0520-ac21.pdf
Thanks
Karthik
tdasara
11-20 12:57 AM
How long does it take for DATV (UK Transit Visa) to be approved? I'll be mailing my biometrics and application early next week and travel just before Christmas.
more...
bobzibub
01-11 10:36 AM
Use dice.ca monster.ca or workopolus.com or something.
It is true that the US will be heading for quite difficult times ahead.
They've just posted a $T1.2 deficit and that is pre-Obama infrastructure program. They may have to deflate the dollar in order to pay it off as the countries that normally buy US treasuries are experiencing their own crunches. The financial bailout has the affect of being a huge wealth transfer from the middle class to the wealthy where there already is growing income inequality. Plus the Iraq war costs muchos dineros. In summary, I am bearish about the US economy, dollar, and future prospects over the next decades. Some economists say that the Bush (Jr.) years cost the economy (If I remember correctly) around T$9. A staggering amount.
Canada has her fiscal house in order if not political house in order. (There will likely be yet another election in the next few months.). Canada has been posting government surpluses provincially and federally in the last decade or so, so Canada is prepared for what will likely be a mild recession. (The belief is that they'll be out of recession 2nd half 2009) Plus the banking system was not allowed to go leverage wonky like down here. So there is no big bailout, and no big financial issues. There are some credit issues but I believe that they are spillover from the US. Canada has buttressed the banks but to place them on an even keel with bailed out US banks. Scotia bank, for example, has rejected the efforts saying they're not needed.
Wages are lower and taxes are higher but if you have a family it may be beneficial because daycare and other child related expenses are subsidized. I think it is 9 or 12 months paid maternity leave, for example.
Job market is pretty tough. Though there is likely more unemployment now in the US due to differences of measurement.
Pick your poison!
It is true that the US will be heading for quite difficult times ahead.
They've just posted a $T1.2 deficit and that is pre-Obama infrastructure program. They may have to deflate the dollar in order to pay it off as the countries that normally buy US treasuries are experiencing their own crunches. The financial bailout has the affect of being a huge wealth transfer from the middle class to the wealthy where there already is growing income inequality. Plus the Iraq war costs muchos dineros. In summary, I am bearish about the US economy, dollar, and future prospects over the next decades. Some economists say that the Bush (Jr.) years cost the economy (If I remember correctly) around T$9. A staggering amount.
Canada has her fiscal house in order if not political house in order. (There will likely be yet another election in the next few months.). Canada has been posting government surpluses provincially and federally in the last decade or so, so Canada is prepared for what will likely be a mild recession. (The belief is that they'll be out of recession 2nd half 2009) Plus the banking system was not allowed to go leverage wonky like down here. So there is no big bailout, and no big financial issues. There are some credit issues but I believe that they are spillover from the US. Canada has buttressed the banks but to place them on an even keel with bailed out US banks. Scotia bank, for example, has rejected the efforts saying they're not needed.
Wages are lower and taxes are higher but if you have a family it may be beneficial because daycare and other child related expenses are subsidized. I think it is 9 or 12 months paid maternity leave, for example.
Job market is pretty tough. Though there is likely more unemployment now in the US due to differences of measurement.
Pick your poison!
gnutin
02-22 12:21 PM
If you have the native font installed on your system, you can type in native alphabet on the DS-160. I did this on a Mac and it was pretty straightforward. Simply choose the Devanagari-QWERTY font and type the name like you would in English and it did a good job. Another option is to copy-paste from a website that has your name in native alphabet. Wikipedia is your friend if you decide to do that.
more...
patiently_waiting
06-17 06:09 PM
Hi,
My EB3 Priority date is Feb 2004. I have approved I-140 and have a copy of approval I-140
notice. I have not filed 485. This is my 10th year in H1b visa.
My H1B visa is ending in Nov 2010. Due to family situation, I am planning to go to
India for 1 year, My employer may or may not apply for my H1B renewal.
If my current employer cancels my approved I-140 & did not extend my H1b visa, Is it
possible for me to port that approved I-140 priority date (Feb 2004) when I am filing Green card through some other employer in the EB2 or EB1 category in
the future ?
Any one, Please kindly give your suggestions.
Thanks
My EB3 Priority date is Feb 2004. I have approved I-140 and have a copy of approval I-140
notice. I have not filed 485. This is my 10th year in H1b visa.
My H1B visa is ending in Nov 2010. Due to family situation, I am planning to go to
India for 1 year, My employer may or may not apply for my H1B renewal.
If my current employer cancels my approved I-140 & did not extend my H1b visa, Is it
possible for me to port that approved I-140 priority date (Feb 2004) when I am filing Green card through some other employer in the EB2 or EB1 category in
the future ?
Any one, Please kindly give your suggestions.
Thanks
flthere
08-12 06:01 PM
That wud be nice, even if they combine the fees :)
more...
shreekhand
09-13 11:39 PM
gc_peshwa,
You like to make extraneous comparisons ? Comparing yourself to Nazi treatment of jews in the 1930's and 40's. :confused: Had a bad day or lost your mental balance like Raghunathrao peshwa ?? :rolleyes:
You like to make extraneous comparisons ? Comparing yourself to Nazi treatment of jews in the 1930's and 40's. :confused: Had a bad day or lost your mental balance like Raghunathrao peshwa ?? :rolleyes:
satyasaich
06-23 02:17 PM
In case of filing for a spouse (wife or husband) and dependent children, form I-764 clearly ask to provide evidence. Atleast most recent year Tax Returns are REQUIRED as per the form. My attorney updated me to present additional 2 years of federal tax returns (not the state) as well, which are optional. Remember these are REQUIRED alongwith W2s or 1099s.
more...
Sachin_Stock
02-02 07:06 PM
Content removed.
sundarpn
06-30 04:04 PM
eb3retro,
Did u change employers on EAD? or H1b transfer?
Also when you renewed EAD & AP:
1. Did you do it yourself? or did u have your new employer do it?
2. Did u get any RFE's when you renewed your EAD/AP well after you switched employers. (I assume you changed addresses in this process).
thx
Did u change employers on EAD? or H1b transfer?
Also when you renewed EAD & AP:
1. Did you do it yourself? or did u have your new employer do it?
2. Did u get any RFE's when you renewed your EAD/AP well after you switched employers. (I assume you changed addresses in this process).
thx
more...
thomachan72
09-16 01:17 PM
Why even this discussion. there are many who no longer work for the sponsor even before getting the GC. What do you think happens if they find out? have you heard of anybody whose GC was affected?
ameryki
04-19 11:44 AM
This is from reading in other threads here, if you switch to EAD and give up your H1 status you can no longer go back to the same H1 petition. You will have to apply for H1 again and then be part of the H1 lottery. Again this is my understanding I am not a lawyer.
more...
rdehar
08-26 12:44 PM
Hello My current Consultancy is not paying me well, they are holding $1000 from my monthly pay check. :( I have a long term contract with client where I am currently working. I am think of H1 Transfer to other consultancy.
I want to know is this the right time to go for H1 Transfer? :confused: Are H1 Transfers getting rejected?
What happens if my H1 transfer got rejected? My H1 with the existing will remain right? Will my current consultancy knows if my H1 Transfer is rejected?
H1 Transfer rejecting = H1 Visa rejection? :confused:
Please let me know.
Thanks a lot.
If they are holding your money, file a complaint with DoL. Or at least, tell you employer that you are going to file it and see what happens.
H1 transfers are really tricky nowadays -- there is a big risk.
Afaik, any "long term contract" is a worthless piece of paper unless signed in presence of an attorney.
I want to know is this the right time to go for H1 Transfer? :confused: Are H1 Transfers getting rejected?
What happens if my H1 transfer got rejected? My H1 with the existing will remain right? Will my current consultancy knows if my H1 Transfer is rejected?
H1 Transfer rejecting = H1 Visa rejection? :confused:
Please let me know.
Thanks a lot.
If they are holding your money, file a complaint with DoL. Or at least, tell you employer that you are going to file it and see what happens.
H1 transfers are really tricky nowadays -- there is a big risk.
Afaik, any "long term contract" is a worthless piece of paper unless signed in presence of an attorney.
thesparky007
04-25 07:25 PM
thanks
slowroasted
slowroasted
imm_pro
05-15 11:15 PM
This is awsome..also on the newsdesk..:):):):):)
Feinstein, Lofgren use Iraq spending bill to push for guest-worker program
05-15) 19:18 PDT Washington - -- Two of California's most immigrant-dependent industries - agriculture and Silicon Valley - are pushing narrow measures through Congress in an effort to employ foreign workers at opposite ends of the labor market, people who pick vegetables and the postgraduate engineers and scientists of Silicon Valley.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein attached a farm guest-worker program to the giant Iraq spending bill today in a last-ditch effort to remedy a shortage of workers in California's produce fields as the federal government continues to crack down on illegal immigration and the political climate proves hostile to more sweeping measures.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, teaming with Republicans, is pushing several bills to give permanent residence to top engineering talent.
"It's an emergency," Feinstein said of the farm worker situation. "If you can't get people to prune, to plant, to pick, to pack, you can't run a farm."
Her addition to the Iraq spending bill would give temporary legal status to 1.3 million farm workers over the next five years, but it would provide no path to citizenship or permanent residency. It passed the Senate Appropriations Committee 17 to 12 today.
Workers applying for the program would have to prove they had worked on U.S. farms for at least 150 days or 863 hours, or had earned at least $17,000, during the last four years. They would have to remain working in agriculture for the next five years, when the program would expire.
The move marks an end for now to efforts to give farm workers a path to citizenship after a sweeping immigration bill crashed in the Senate last June. Feinstein has been trying all year to attach a bill called AgJobs but has met nothing but dead-ends.
Western Growers, representing California farmers, and the United Farm Workers of American union joined in backing the bill. Western Growers President Tom Nassif said large growers are accelerating efforts to move their farming operations to Mexico. The 15 growers out of several hundred who responded to a survey and were willing to talk about their plans moved 84,000 acres worth of crop production to Mexico this year, twice as many acres as last year, Nassif said.
"Once the acreage moves to Mexico, it's there permanently," Nassif said. "Much of the remaining open space in California is agricultural land. If it's not farmed, we'd be growing condos or cementing it over with office buildings."
The tightening of the border has made it increasingly difficult, dangerous and expensive for laborers to return to the United States if they leave, disrupting the traditional circular flow of farm workers from Mexico to California's fields in the Salinas and Central valleys. Most farm workers arrive illegally, and farmers complain that an existing guest worker program called H2A is cumbersome and ineffective. Feinstein's bill would streamline that program's rules.
Growers are apprehensive about a new administration effort, temporarily stopped by a federal court, that would require employers to match workers with a valid Social Security number or be heavily fined. The Department of Homeland Security is refining the rule to get past court objections.
United Farmworkers President Arturo Rodriguez said farming is facing "a very real emergency" and applauded the bill as a "critical but temporary fix to a much larger problem."
Feinstein acknowledged that the chances of getting the bill all the way through Congress, even attached to war spending, is "uphill all the way."
On the other side of the Capitol, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, is teaming with conservative Republicans to try to push similar discreetly targeted measures for Silicon Valley. She has dropped efforts for now to expand the controversial H-1B program for temporary high-skilled workers, which again this year ran out of its 85,000 visas on the first day they were released. Lofgren said the program needs changes, given its wide use by Indian offshoring companies.
Instead, Lofgren has introduced a passel of five small-bore immigration bills, among them one that would allow masters' and doctoral graduates from U.S. universities to apply immediately for permanent residence, skipping the H-1B program altogether.
"Most people would agree if you get your Ph.D in engineering from an American university, you've got something to offer this country," Lofgren said. "Right now, we have no ability to keep those people here ... we send them home to compete against Americans. It would make more sense to keep them here to help us compete."
Lofgren has even teamed up on one bill, to "recapture" unused permanent resident slots, with Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican famous as the author of immigration crackdown legislation, never enacted, that was so harsh it led to the nation's first large-scale Latino protests in 2006.
"What's happened is that with the shortage of very high-level people, multinational companies are sending their project teams offshore," Lofgren said. "Not only the top hot-shot leading the team, but all the support jobs that go with that hot shot. Among the people I've met is a guy who spent four years at Harvard, seven at Stanford's engineering school, then did practical training and has been here six years on an H1B, and he's in limbo. He's an extremely talented person and has no idea what his future is going to be. He's being recruited in Australia and Europe, and he's ready to bail out. What he needs is not more temporary time."
Members of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group of business executives spent Thursday lobbying Congress on high-skilled immigration and tax breaks for solar energy and research and development.
"This is no time to say to high-skilled workers in a global economy that we don't want you," said Barry Cinnamon, chief executive of Akeena Solar in Los Gatos. "We're happy to have that argument with anyone."
E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com
Feinstein, Lofgren use Iraq spending bill to push for guest-worker program
05-15) 19:18 PDT Washington - -- Two of California's most immigrant-dependent industries - agriculture and Silicon Valley - are pushing narrow measures through Congress in an effort to employ foreign workers at opposite ends of the labor market, people who pick vegetables and the postgraduate engineers and scientists of Silicon Valley.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein attached a farm guest-worker program to the giant Iraq spending bill today in a last-ditch effort to remedy a shortage of workers in California's produce fields as the federal government continues to crack down on illegal immigration and the political climate proves hostile to more sweeping measures.
Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, teaming with Republicans, is pushing several bills to give permanent residence to top engineering talent.
"It's an emergency," Feinstein said of the farm worker situation. "If you can't get people to prune, to plant, to pick, to pack, you can't run a farm."
Her addition to the Iraq spending bill would give temporary legal status to 1.3 million farm workers over the next five years, but it would provide no path to citizenship or permanent residency. It passed the Senate Appropriations Committee 17 to 12 today.
Workers applying for the program would have to prove they had worked on U.S. farms for at least 150 days or 863 hours, or had earned at least $17,000, during the last four years. They would have to remain working in agriculture for the next five years, when the program would expire.
The move marks an end for now to efforts to give farm workers a path to citizenship after a sweeping immigration bill crashed in the Senate last June. Feinstein has been trying all year to attach a bill called AgJobs but has met nothing but dead-ends.
Western Growers, representing California farmers, and the United Farm Workers of American union joined in backing the bill. Western Growers President Tom Nassif said large growers are accelerating efforts to move their farming operations to Mexico. The 15 growers out of several hundred who responded to a survey and were willing to talk about their plans moved 84,000 acres worth of crop production to Mexico this year, twice as many acres as last year, Nassif said.
"Once the acreage moves to Mexico, it's there permanently," Nassif said. "Much of the remaining open space in California is agricultural land. If it's not farmed, we'd be growing condos or cementing it over with office buildings."
The tightening of the border has made it increasingly difficult, dangerous and expensive for laborers to return to the United States if they leave, disrupting the traditional circular flow of farm workers from Mexico to California's fields in the Salinas and Central valleys. Most farm workers arrive illegally, and farmers complain that an existing guest worker program called H2A is cumbersome and ineffective. Feinstein's bill would streamline that program's rules.
Growers are apprehensive about a new administration effort, temporarily stopped by a federal court, that would require employers to match workers with a valid Social Security number or be heavily fined. The Department of Homeland Security is refining the rule to get past court objections.
United Farmworkers President Arturo Rodriguez said farming is facing "a very real emergency" and applauded the bill as a "critical but temporary fix to a much larger problem."
Feinstein acknowledged that the chances of getting the bill all the way through Congress, even attached to war spending, is "uphill all the way."
On the other side of the Capitol, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose, is teaming with conservative Republicans to try to push similar discreetly targeted measures for Silicon Valley. She has dropped efforts for now to expand the controversial H-1B program for temporary high-skilled workers, which again this year ran out of its 85,000 visas on the first day they were released. Lofgren said the program needs changes, given its wide use by Indian offshoring companies.
Instead, Lofgren has introduced a passel of five small-bore immigration bills, among them one that would allow masters' and doctoral graduates from U.S. universities to apply immediately for permanent residence, skipping the H-1B program altogether.
"Most people would agree if you get your Ph.D in engineering from an American university, you've got something to offer this country," Lofgren said. "Right now, we have no ability to keep those people here ... we send them home to compete against Americans. It would make more sense to keep them here to help us compete."
Lofgren has even teamed up on one bill, to "recapture" unused permanent resident slots, with Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican famous as the author of immigration crackdown legislation, never enacted, that was so harsh it led to the nation's first large-scale Latino protests in 2006.
"What's happened is that with the shortage of very high-level people, multinational companies are sending their project teams offshore," Lofgren said. "Not only the top hot-shot leading the team, but all the support jobs that go with that hot shot. Among the people I've met is a guy who spent four years at Harvard, seven at Stanford's engineering school, then did practical training and has been here six years on an H1B, and he's in limbo. He's an extremely talented person and has no idea what his future is going to be. He's being recruited in Australia and Europe, and he's ready to bail out. What he needs is not more temporary time."
Members of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group of business executives spent Thursday lobbying Congress on high-skilled immigration and tax breaks for solar energy and research and development.
"This is no time to say to high-skilled workers in a global economy that we don't want you," said Barry Cinnamon, chief executive of Akeena Solar in Los Gatos. "We're happy to have that argument with anyone."
E-mail Carolyn Lochhead at clochhead@sfchronicle.com
getta05
03-27 10:09 AM
Hi,
I have an EAD and am in the process of buying a business.
How long do I have to wait in order to apply for GC?
Tnx
Geeta05
I have an EAD and am in the process of buying a business.
How long do I have to wait in order to apply for GC?
Tnx
Geeta05
skp71
05-06 10:10 AM
If that's the case why should they pre-adjudicate 485s? Lot of guys getting REFs whose PD is 2003. If USCIS wants to approve after 3-4 years, they would not preapprove 485s. That logic won't work out.
If you think out-off-box.... guess what? If US-govt wants to give employment-based-green card based on priority date. Then there won�t be any new immigration law in place without clearing Backlog center cases/queue and I140.
So what... As per the labor department web site, the DOL needs another 17/18 months to clear all pending labors.
I guess any new bill to become law will take another 19 to 24 months. Keep your spirit going to support the best immigration-bill.
My 2 cents.
If you think out-off-box.... guess what? If US-govt wants to give employment-based-green card based on priority date. Then there won�t be any new immigration law in place without clearing Backlog center cases/queue and I140.
So what... As per the labor department web site, the DOL needs another 17/18 months to clear all pending labors.
I guess any new bill to become law will take another 19 to 24 months. Keep your spirit going to support the best immigration-bill.
My 2 cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment