rajuram
11-10 10:09 PM
bump
wallpaper una nueva pic de amor
desi3933
02-12 01:42 PM
....
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
The things that do make some sense is wastage of visa numbers in 2010. We have some facts to support the "theory" but not enough.
We still have 7 months left for FY2010, so only assertion that there will be EB visa unused is only a "theory" at best.
What doesn't make sense is Ron's assertion that USCIS wasted 13K EB visas in 2009. Facts simply don't support that.
I agree. He has not backed his claim on that thread as well. Someone has posted a question in that thread regarding source of the spillover. The author of the blog responded with legal statute that explains how unused numbers of FB & EB from previous years are used for next year. But no link to justify 13,000 number.
A fact in itself is nothing. It is valuable only for the idea attached to it, or for the proof which it furnishes. - Claude Bernard
I know you lawyers can, with ease, twist words and meanings as you please. - John Gay
_________________
Not a legal advice.
sunty
11-10 11:27 PM
vin13,
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
I was not aware of any conference call being organized by IV, otherwise I would have certainly been there, for I really believe quarterly spillover can ease a lot of our pain and can be a good starting point to re-galvanize the community.
I think IV leadership should show the way here so that there is a chance we might see quarterly spillover in the January Bulletin. First it was the USCIS and now its the DOS that we need to wake from its slumber.
2011 2011 Dos imagenes,una de amor
needhelp!
09-26 12:31 PM
What paragraph ? what is the update in the CNN link ? i don't see any, every where its h1B..can somebody pl. help..
Original text:
"Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill.
The demonstrators said that potential employees-who are needed in growing fields such as engineering and software development-are being shut out because of a lack of H-1B visas. "
Updated text:
Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill. The demonstrators were protesting long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already in the U.S. The lags make it difficult for businesses in fields such as engineering and software development to secure and keep foreign skilled labor in the country, they say.
But I agree with you that everywhere it is H1, so it is hard to notice that rally was NOT about H1.
Original text:
"Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill.
The demonstrators said that potential employees-who are needed in growing fields such as engineering and software development-are being shut out because of a lack of H-1B visas. "
Updated text:
Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill. The demonstrators were protesting long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already in the U.S. The lags make it difficult for businesses in fields such as engineering and software development to secure and keep foreign skilled labor in the country, they say.
But I agree with you that everywhere it is H1, so it is hard to notice that rally was NOT about H1.
more...
immi2006
06-12 02:46 PM
i think most of us make excelletn candidates to become Senators :-) if not at least a good immigration lawyer..
delax
07-13 08:19 AM
This is just a stunt. WHy did she wait allthese days to write this letter. Now when everything falls in place by others efforts, she wants people to think it is because her effort all these things are happening. I hate murthy or your murfhy.
GCBy3000,
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
GCBy3000,
Your criticism of Murthy is noted as you are entitled to speak your mind. But let me ask you a simple question:
Did you exhort your lawyer to send a letter to Secretary Chertoff or the USCIS Director? OR
Did your lawyer send a letter on his own, exhorting the Secretary and the USCIS Director to correct this wrong?
I know the Mahatma would have asked himself the same questions before hurling allegations.
Whatever maybe the intentions of Murthy, this letter is certainly going to help not harm our case.
AND YES - For full disclosure, I am a client of Murthy and have been so for more than five years.
more...
payur
01-16 09:12 PM
Contributing $20/month
Scheduled $20
Good luck and best wishes.
Success!!!
Scheduled $20
Good luck and best wishes.
Success!!!
2010 makeup de amor chidas. de amor
gconmymind
04-23 07:19 PM
All,
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
Congrats! Please continue to provide valuable info on the forum. You have been great. Thanks!
Opened my email this morning to see the card production ordered email (time stamp in my inbox reads 2:15 am PST 4/23/08); the approval date was 4/23/08.
Been in meetings all day so not even a chance to call anyone about it.
Yay!
Good luck to all my fellow sufferers!
Googler
Congrats! Please continue to provide valuable info on the forum. You have been great. Thanks!
more...
sameer2730
03-12 10:41 AM
To all those who are screaming and shouting about "IV collecting Donations and doing nothing", I am not a donor myself, but we have to understand that IV IS THE ONLY platform we (EB community) have. However shaky or small the platform is. It takes a different kind of person to doggedly keep at something as insipid and difficult and immigration relief for EB and to put up with all the brickbats that armchair immigration proponents and to be beneficiaries like us throw at the IV core.
Pappu, I have put forth this idea many times, and will do so again, let IV be a members only forum, with a REASONABLE annual subscrition amount (say equal to themonthly cost of a decent cable/satellite subscription:-)..
This will achieve the following:
(1) Assured, stable fund collection for IV activities
(2) Only genuine IV supporters will sign up.
(3) To some extent, may be, will keep antis away (this is not assured, but may happen)
...Its Friday, so pickup a 6-pack, 12 pack or whatever pack on your way home, and relax...
$25 a month is reasonable. What people want it GC in $25 in less than 6 months. Somehow these same guys do not mind paying lawyers $700 for EAD filing which they could do themselves. In other words they trust lawyers who are clearly have a self interest in you not getting a GC but will not trust one of your kind because these guys think their crummy $25 is being flinched.
Pappu, I have put forth this idea many times, and will do so again, let IV be a members only forum, with a REASONABLE annual subscrition amount (say equal to themonthly cost of a decent cable/satellite subscription:-)..
This will achieve the following:
(1) Assured, stable fund collection for IV activities
(2) Only genuine IV supporters will sign up.
(3) To some extent, may be, will keep antis away (this is not assured, but may happen)
...Its Friday, so pickup a 6-pack, 12 pack or whatever pack on your way home, and relax...
$25 a month is reasonable. What people want it GC in $25 in less than 6 months. Somehow these same guys do not mind paying lawyers $700 for EAD filing which they could do themselves. In other words they trust lawyers who are clearly have a self interest in you not getting a GC but will not trust one of your kind because these guys think their crummy $25 is being flinched.
hair frases de amor. de amor chidas
IAF
11-11 01:28 PM
I agree!
The three prone system is in place to keep check and balances. I think it will be good idea to take it to judiciary. Judiciary can advice legislative and executive branch to resolve the problem. I think just going to that level will trigger lot of momentum.
The three prone system is in place to keep check and balances. I think it will be good idea to take it to judiciary. Judiciary can advice legislative and executive branch to resolve the problem. I think just going to that level will trigger lot of momentum.
more...
uma001
10-01 10:04 AM
Although they promise a lot of things on paper, we generally skip reading the fine print. Fine print generally would include this clause (language will be a bit different)...
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
It is the age of cost cutting. If you don't like it, just quit it & start a company on your own and show them how to run it by sponsoring GCs left & right.
f your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
Green card processing costs only $12000 max..Its not a big deal for such big companies.They just dont want to do the favor.
getting green card itself takes min 10 years. so you r going to stick on to this company until that time. is that not a gaurantee. working for 10 years with same company.
you know y consulting companies file green card immediately. they do that becos the employee will stay with the company for a while.American companies do not realize this.
one of my friend came back to compny as a consultant. now they are paying two times more than what they were oaying him as full time employee. is that not an expense to the company...why they r paying him that much now , instead they should have filed his green card.
Same thing in company's point of view, if they invest in endless lawyer fees, filing fees, humongous paperwork and easily these days GC process take 5-35 years and during/after this time, What is the guarantee that you will still stick with the company - after all this investment of time & money? Companies need visible & predictable ROIs.
It is the age of cost cutting. If you don't like it, just quit it & start a company on your own and show them how to run it by sponsoring GCs left & right.
f your skills are in high demand, they will make you the king. If supply is high for your skills, they will go for someone cheaper..
Green card processing costs only $12000 max..Its not a big deal for such big companies.They just dont want to do the favor.
getting green card itself takes min 10 years. so you r going to stick on to this company until that time. is that not a gaurantee. working for 10 years with same company.
you know y consulting companies file green card immediately. they do that becos the employee will stay with the company for a while.American companies do not realize this.
one of my friend came back to compny as a consultant. now they are paying two times more than what they were oaying him as full time employee. is that not an expense to the company...why they r paying him that much now , instead they should have filed his green card.
hot de amor chidas. dia del amor y
newbie2020
02-10 06:48 AM
I have some Delta Skymiles (3729miles), Not sure how to donate. If anyone needs them let me know.
more...
house de amor chidas. Jesus.
coolmanasip
03-07 09:41 AM
see the responses......
What if my employer is definitely going to revoke my approved I-140 upon my resignation (past 180 days)? Do I need to file "Notice of I-140 Portability"?
---------->>COLOR="Blue"]In this case, you should definitely send the AC21 letter to USCIS. If you send the letter, you employer revoking your I-140 has no effect and the USCIS will keep the AC21 stuff in your file and process/examine it when your date becomes current. If you do not send the AC21 letter and your employer revokes I140, then USCIS will send you a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and you will have to respond to that in stipulated time of one month. If you are absolutely sure that employer is going to revoke I140, please go ahead and send the AC21 letter rightaway.....[/COLOR][/I][/I][/I]
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
-------->>does not matter either ways for AC21.....H1 transfer or EAD....
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
----->>> If you fear of being out of job immediately after leaving job...DO NOT Do This........because as per your say, if your employer revokes 140, then you will get a NOID and you have to respond within a month with another job offer and AC21
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
What if my employer is definitely going to revoke my approved I-140 upon my resignation (past 180 days)? Do I need to file "Notice of I-140 Portability"?
---------->>COLOR="Blue"]In this case, you should definitely send the AC21 letter to USCIS. If you send the letter, you employer revoking your I-140 has no effect and the USCIS will keep the AC21 stuff in your file and process/examine it when your date becomes current. If you do not send the AC21 letter and your employer revokes I140, then USCIS will send you a Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) and you will have to respond to that in stipulated time of one month. If you are absolutely sure that employer is going to revoke I140, please go ahead and send the AC21 letter rightaway.....[/COLOR][/I][/I][/I]
Also, in the above posts when people are saying that almost no support is needed from the new employer to keep 485 process going smoothly, is it safe to assume they are changing jobs using EAD and not doing H1B transfer?
-------->>does not matter either ways for AC21.....H1 transfer or EAD....
One more question, my employer will revoke my I-140 and my H1B. How long can I be without a job after they do that? Are the above actions of my employer very likely to result in a RFE from USCIS? If so, what will USCIS ask for in RFE?
----->>> If you fear of being out of job immediately after leaving job...DO NOT Do This........because as per your say, if your employer revokes 140, then you will get a NOID and you have to respond within a month with another job offer and AC21
Thank for all the advise.
---------------------------------
Contributed $100.
tattoo de amor chidas. de amor
h1techSlave
02-03 11:00 AM
I agree with you completely. Removing the country quota is one thing the lawmakers should be able to push through.
But some how IV is opposed to piece meal immigration reform approach. From the beginning they IV has this grandiose dream of fixing all immigration issues. Is it time to rethink about that approach? Sure IV might antagonize ROW applicants. But aren't they already out of IV in all practical sense?
In the current economic environment, removing country quota seems like the only argument that can fly, since it does not increase actual visas.
But some how IV is opposed to piece meal immigration reform approach. From the beginning they IV has this grandiose dream of fixing all immigration issues. Is it time to rethink about that approach? Sure IV might antagonize ROW applicants. But aren't they already out of IV in all practical sense?
In the current economic environment, removing country quota seems like the only argument that can fly, since it does not increase actual visas.
more...
pictures de amor chidas.
crystal
07-28 02:02 PM
Yawn ...
Adding to the rant ....
This country's once celebrated Individual Freedom has gone to the dogs after 9/11 with many screwed up bills like Patriot Act , FISA. First Amendment will cover our ass only to an extent...
my 2 cents .. if there is anything we all have to fight/wake up for then it is about individual freedom, not about religions/images/symbols/cartoons.
Adding to the rant ....
This country's once celebrated Individual Freedom has gone to the dogs after 9/11 with many screwed up bills like Patriot Act , FISA. First Amendment will cover our ass only to an extent...
my 2 cents .. if there is anything we all have to fight/wake up for then it is about individual freedom, not about religions/images/symbols/cartoons.
dresses de amor chidas.
delhiguy
07-09 04:08 PM
If the class is certified, we may want to join that class rather than have separate lawsuits.
Yes , we are in that class.
Yes , we are in that class.
more...
makeup de amor chidas. de amor chidas
pd052009
03-22 06:29 AM
^^^^
girlfriend de amor chidas.
va_labor2002
07-24 08:47 AM
To the core group/Senior Members,
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
I totally agree with you. USCIS can take a decision without any BILL from the congress. I already sent a letter to USCIS director. I think IV should contact USCIS director and ask help regarding retrogression. We ,5000 members, can send letters to USCIS director and WHitehouse. They will listen to us.
Good luck..
If I understand it right, the ability to concurrently file I40/I485 was introduced by the legacy INS through a memo in July of 2002 and it went effective almost immediately on July 31st 2002. I've tried to search for news archives on different law websites and to best of my knowledge it was purely an executive decision taken by INS governing body and no congressional or judicial intervention was needed to allow concurrent filing. In a very similar fashion, the new USCIS has indicated that it wants to discontinue concurrent filing in near future...an executive decision again.
Is it a possibility to get an audience with the USCIS director/start a letter campaign with the goal of getting them issue a memo allowing filing of I485/EAD even if the visa number is not available? The adjucation of the case would obviously happen only after visa number becomes available but as we all know this will be a big relief for all those who want to use AC21 provisions.
Passage of CIR/SKIL is very important in the longer run to reduce the overall greencard processing time and alleviate heavy backlogs but if we get this small relief right now it would help a lot of individuals from retrogressed countries waiting to file I485...and the good thing is, it looks like USCIS might have the ability to effect this change without a lengthy legislative process.
Any thoughts ??
I totally agree with you. USCIS can take a decision without any BILL from the congress. I already sent a letter to USCIS director. I think IV should contact USCIS director and ask help regarding retrogression. We ,5000 members, can send letters to USCIS director and WHitehouse. They will listen to us.
Good luck..
hairstyles de amor chidas. de amor
ItalySeAaTapki
07-11 02:05 PM
It is same as July07 VB Fiasco. An Error.
Either they will retract or will allow all the people to file I 485 and will issue GC after taking own sweet time.
Unless those 3 bills pass, not much hope.
Either they will retract or will allow all the people to file I 485 and will issue GC after taking own sweet time.
Unless those 3 bills pass, not much hope.
pappu
06-10 12:28 PM
WAKE UP CALL FOR THOSE STILL SITTING ON THE SIDELINES
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
On Tuesday, when we were on the Hill doing meetings during Advocacy days, we were informed by the senior Senate office that an amendment to prevent H1 and work authorizations is in the works in the Tax bill. We immediately requested this office to oppose this amendment. Senator office expressed full support for us and shared with us that the Senator's office has already expressed opposition to such an amendment.
We would like everyone to know that just because someone has EAD, it does not mean we are in safe haven. There is no safe haven till we have approved green cards. And for those who think that they don't need to participate actively, this is a wake up call.
We have also learned that this is degree 1 amendment. This means it will be voted on on the Senate floor even when it is non-germane to the bill. We have also learned that if such an amendment comes up for vote during this difficult political climate, it appears that such an amendment will have 70 votes in the senate which makes each one of us extremely vulnerable to be forced out. Everyone on H1, L1, J1 or EAD will risk the renewal of their current application status.
IV is working on defeating this amendment. Please stay tuned for further updates.
On Tuesday, Mr. Sanders sponsored an amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213
AMENDMENT PURPOSE: Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.
TEXT OF AMENDMENT AS SUBMITTED: CR S4754
COSPONSORS(2):
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 6/9/2010
Sen Harkin, Tom [IA] - 6/9/2010
Source: Congressional Record - 111th Congress (2009-2010) - THOMAS (Library of Congress) (http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r111:1:./temp/~r1119eE0Na:e98:)
SA 4319. Mr. SANDERS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Harkin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 4213, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring provisions, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. __. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Employ America Act''.
(b) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland Security may not approve a petition by an employer for any visa authorizing employment in the United States unless the employer has provided written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that--
(1) the employer has not provided a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101 et seq.) during the 12-month period immediately preceding the date on which the alien is scheduled to be hired; and
(2) the employer does not intend to provide a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to such Act.
(c) Effect of Mass Layoff.--If an employer provides a notice of a mass layoff pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act after the approval of a visa described in subsection (b), any visas approved during the most recent 12-month period for such employer shall expire on the date that is 60 days after the date on which such notice is provided. The expiration of a visa under this subsection shall not be subject to judicial review.
(d) Notice Requirement.--Upon receiving notification of a mass layoff from an employer, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall inform each employee whose visa is scheduled to expire under subsection (c)--
(1) the date on which such individual will no longer be authorized to work in the United States; and
(2) the date on which such individual will be required to leave the United States unless the individual is otherwise authorized to remain in the United States.
(e) Exemption.--An employer shall be exempt from the requirements under this section if the employer provides written certification, under penalty of perjury, to the Secretary of Labor that the total number of the employer's workers who are United States citizens and are working in the United States have not been, and will not be, reduced as a result of a mass layoff described in subsection (c).
(f) Rulemaking.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Labor shall promulgate regulations to carry out this section, including a requirement that employers provide notice to the Secretary of Homeland Security of a mass layoff (as defined in section 2 of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (29 U.S.C. 2101)).
vamseedhard
06-03 12:17 AM
I stayed in US for full 5 years on L1-B visa and left US on 6-Jan-07
This year I applied for H1-B and my application got selected in lottery
Need your help in clearing my below doubts..
1) I need to maintain 1 year gap between the day I left US ( 6-Jan-07 ) and the day I'm going to enter US so that I can stay in US for another 6 years on H1-B. Is my understanding correct?
2) Is it OK to go for VISA staming before 6-Jan-08?
3) Do I need to consider any other facts than 1 year gap so that I can stay in US for another 6 years?
This year I applied for H1-B and my application got selected in lottery
Need your help in clearing my below doubts..
1) I need to maintain 1 year gap between the day I left US ( 6-Jan-07 ) and the day I'm going to enter US so that I can stay in US for another 6 years on H1-B. Is my understanding correct?
2) Is it OK to go for VISA staming before 6-Jan-08?
3) Do I need to consider any other facts than 1 year gap so that I can stay in US for another 6 years?
0 comments:
Post a Comment