h1b_tristate
07-27 09:16 PM
Currently my labor and 1-140 has been approved. But i havent been able to apply for I-485 due to retrogression. Hence if i change my job now and re-apply for labor will i continue to get extentions?
Also can anyone advice me that for a PERM application the pre-application i.e advertisements and stuff takes how long before i can actually apply for the labor. Also in Perm How long does one have to do the pre-application (advertisments etc)?
Can someone please help?
Also can anyone advice me that for a PERM application the pre-application i.e advertisements and stuff takes how long before i can actually apply for the labor. Also in Perm How long does one have to do the pre-application (advertisments etc)?
Can someone please help?
popoye
01-15 01:40 AM
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2117058646892668334: Charlie Rose's Panel
h1bnogc
07-27 07:34 PM
I am in similar situation.wondering though..can somebody apply for I485 while his h1b extension denied and file for MTR and decision pending?
vinabath
07-31 12:54 PM
When you say careful, what do you think needs to be avoided? What are the dos and dont's of a primary applicant who wants to use their EAD?
Dont use.
1. If your 140 is pending.
2. If you are still single. You cannot bring the spouse on H-4.
3. If you think that it may take 3 years to get your GC.
Use. This is a tough one. I do not suggest using it.
1. You got a nice solid employer who does not care what you do after 40 hours. Want to make some extra money.
Dont use.
1. If your 140 is pending.
2. If you are still single. You cannot bring the spouse on H-4.
3. If you think that it may take 3 years to get your GC.
Use. This is a tough one. I do not suggest using it.
1. You got a nice solid employer who does not care what you do after 40 hours. Want to make some extra money.
more...
forgerator
09-05 01:08 AM
I hope EB3 ROW date moves to Nov 2008, this way I can file for my I485 :D
gk_2000
08-10 03:14 PM
If this bill becomes a law, all retrogression will end. All provisions favorable to us, are there in the bill.
1. Increase of Immigrant visa to 290,000.
2. Master's degree from US in STEM field not counted in any quota.
3. Master's degree from a foreign country and three years of US experience not counted in any quota.
4. Family counted as one.
5. Recapture of visas from previous years
I hope I am DEAD WRONG. But this seems too good to be true!
1. Increase of Immigrant visa to 290,000.
2. Master's degree from US in STEM field not counted in any quota.
3. Master's degree from a foreign country and three years of US experience not counted in any quota.
4. Family counted as one.
5. Recapture of visas from previous years
I hope I am DEAD WRONG. But this seems too good to be true!
more...
BharatPremi
04-16 04:34 PM
What is an "MTR"?
lotsofspace
02-14 12:54 AM
Find yourself chocked up with G.C delay ? find your voice here.
- Immigration voice
- Immigration voice
more...
vxb2004
11-26 11:32 AM
This is my personal experience, I filed AC 21 with new G 28 form through a lawyer to update change of attorney on file plus change of employment notification. Later I called customer service several times after 2 months to see if USCIS updated my file, but turned out not updated. Fortunately in August 2008, my I 485 was approved without any RFE and the welcome notice meant for Attorney's was sent to new attorney, the old attorney did not receive it. Bottom line is USCIS is slow in updating your AC 21 request and definitely not update their computer system accessible to USCIS customer service about AC 21 request, however it looks like they add the document to your physical file. Now I am sure in my case USCIS have taken note of AC21 request during approval.
Good Luck
HTH
kris
Kris,
Thank you very much. Appreciate your input.
Good Luck
HTH
kris
Kris,
Thank you very much. Appreciate your input.
waitingnwaiting
11-16 01:35 PM
ABC NEWS: Will Congress Vote on DREAM Act for Illegal Immigrants in 2010?
Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi Weigh Lame-Duck Vote on Immigration
By DEVIN DWYER
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15, 2010�
Senate Vote on DREAM Act, Immigration in Lame-Duck Congress? - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-vote-dream-act-immigration-lame-duck-congress/story?id=12136182)
They came through for him during a tight reelection campaign in Nevada. Now Hispanic voters are looking to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to return the favor.
Reid has promised a Senate vote this year on a small piece of immigration legislation known as the DREAM Act, which would give hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants a conditional path to legal residency.
"The answer is yes," Reid told Univision host Jorge Ramos in October when pressed about whether there will be a vote. "I have the right to bring that up any time I want."
As Congress reconvenes this week for the final session of the year, Reid now has roughly a month to make good on his promise.
Many immigrants and immigrant advocates, particularly Hispanics, have been disappointed by Congress' inaction on legislation to address the situation of millions of the country's undocumented immigrants, particularly those who are young children.
However, Republican opposition to efforts to legalize undocumented immigrants, a packed end-of-year legislative agenda and a bleak track record for controversial bills during lame-duck sessions all cast doubt on chances of the bill's passage this year.
The DREAM Act would grant legal status to immigrants who complete college or at least two years of military service and maintain "good moral character." It would apply to immigrants younger than 36 years old who arrived in the U.S. illegally as children under the supervision of their parents.
"We are very confident this will come up for a vote," said Flavia de la Fuente of the adovacy group DreamActivist.org. "We are confident that the American people and that the moderate GOP will make the right choice when it comes to investing in the future of this country."
Reid attempted to attach the measure as an amendment to the defense authorization bill in September, drawing intense protest from Republicans, who accused the Democrat of playing pre-election politics.
Ultimately, Republicans blocked the effort to bring the defense bill to the floor for debate, precluding a chance of adding the DREAM Act. The bill also included a repeal of the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy.
"We're going to vote on the Dream Act; it's only a question of when," Reid said after the vote. "It's a question of fairness. This is not the end of this."
Many activists on both sides of the issue agree, however, that chances of the bill's passage are only going to grow dimmer with an influx of Republicans set to join the House and Senate in January.
Roy Beck, president of Numbers USA, a group that favors tighter immigration controls and supports Republicans' efforts to block the DREAM Act, said the measure is flawed.
"Some of these [immigrants] are compelling cases, no doubt about it," said Beck. "But you've got to draw some lines a lot narrower than the DREAM Act draws them. This is about giving millions of illegal aliens permanent work permits, and I don't think in this economy that this is a very happy time to be doing that."
President Obama supports the legislation, as does Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who says it would help recruitment, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who says it's "the right thing to do for our country."
But it's unclear whether the administration will push behind the scenes in the weeks ahead to make it a legislative priority. The Congress already faces challenging debates over whether to extend the Bush tax cuts, fund the federal government through 2011, and approve a controversial defense spending bill.
"The president supports the DREAM Act and I support the DREAM Act. The president supports immigration reform, and I support immigration reform. And how Congress takes that up is for the Congress and the leadership to decide," said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in September.
The DREAM Act has received some bipartisan Senate support in the years since it was first introduced in 2001. It was approved as part of immigration reform bill in 2006, but the package later failed in the House. In 2007, the Act was filibustered when it came up for an up-or-down vote.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has decided not to list DREAM Act as a priority for this week, a senior Democratic aide told ABC News. But it could come up after Thanksgiving.
According to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, about 2 million of the nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. could be eligible for legalization under the DREAM Act.
The group also estimates, however, that only 825,000 of those immigrants would ultimately take advantage of the law if it were enacted.
ABC News' John Parkinson contributed to this report.
DESERT NEWS: Sign the Utah Compact
Published: Sunday, Nov. 14, 2010 12:00 a.m. MST
Sign the Utah Compact | Deseret News (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700081235/Sign-the-Utah-Compact.html)
Already recognized by Forbes Magazine as the top state in the nation for business, Utah further burnished its reputation for pro-family and pro-growth policies this week as civic, business and religious leaders signed the Utah Compact, a declaration for principled immigration reform.
Historically, during periods of economic recession, business leaders and policy-makers have reverted to what economists call zero-sum thinking � the belief that one person gains only when another loses. When we only have so much pie, it is entirely rational to worry about how the pieces are divvied out. And when the pie is shrinking, the rules for who gets a slice become even more critical.
Fixed-pied concerns are undoubtedly part of what lies behind the complex debate about immigration. There is understandable fear that immigrants might take increasingly scarce jobs and resources from citizens. And any public expenditure on immigrants, whether through social services or law enforcement, draws down a limited public treasury that deserves scrupulous stewardship.
But people also intuitively understand that the best way to ensure more pie over the long term is not to hoard what is being served right now, but instead figure out how to expand the pie. This is what economists call positive-sum thinking � the belief that through exchange we can expand the pie, not simply fret about how it is divided.
The recent recession, followed by a jobless recovery, has served up a fixed-pie economy. But zero-sum or fixed-pie thinking is never the path toward sustained prosperity. And as many of Utah's prominent civic, business, and religious leaders signed a declaration on immigration reform called the Utah Compact, they sent a powerful signal to the world that Utah embraces positive-sum, pie-expanding thought and policies. Instead of creating a hostile environment for immigrants, they have outlined thoughtful principles that embrace the promise afforded through immigration. They have sided with the consensus view of pro-growth free-market economists who recognize that immigration actually creates jobs and revenue. (www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/business/economy/31view.html)
Even more important than the powerful economic growth message inherent in the Utah Compact is its embrace of those core values that support a free, humane and prosperous society: respect for the rule of law, respect for families, respect for individual liberty and respect for the dignity and humanity of each individual. It emphasizes an orderly approach to the critically important concerns of enforcement and security.
The Utah Compact is not itself a policy � it is a thoughtful declaration of principles that lawmakers should use as they work to craft pragmatic legislation that helps our state deal with the problems and promise afforded by immigration. We are impressed by the array of distinguished civic, business, and ecclesiastical leaders who have signed the Utah Compact or endorsed its principles. We encourage our readers to read the Utah Compact (The Utah Compact - Read the Utah Compact (http://www.utahcompact.com)) and sign it.
Senate Majority Leader Reid, Speaker Pelosi Weigh Lame-Duck Vote on Immigration
By DEVIN DWYER
WASHINGTON, Nov. 15, 2010�
Senate Vote on DREAM Act, Immigration in Lame-Duck Congress? - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senate-vote-dream-act-immigration-lame-duck-congress/story?id=12136182)
They came through for him during a tight reelection campaign in Nevada. Now Hispanic voters are looking to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to return the favor.
Reid has promised a Senate vote this year on a small piece of immigration legislation known as the DREAM Act, which would give hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants a conditional path to legal residency.
"The answer is yes," Reid told Univision host Jorge Ramos in October when pressed about whether there will be a vote. "I have the right to bring that up any time I want."
As Congress reconvenes this week for the final session of the year, Reid now has roughly a month to make good on his promise.
Many immigrants and immigrant advocates, particularly Hispanics, have been disappointed by Congress' inaction on legislation to address the situation of millions of the country's undocumented immigrants, particularly those who are young children.
However, Republican opposition to efforts to legalize undocumented immigrants, a packed end-of-year legislative agenda and a bleak track record for controversial bills during lame-duck sessions all cast doubt on chances of the bill's passage this year.
The DREAM Act would grant legal status to immigrants who complete college or at least two years of military service and maintain "good moral character." It would apply to immigrants younger than 36 years old who arrived in the U.S. illegally as children under the supervision of their parents.
"We are very confident this will come up for a vote," said Flavia de la Fuente of the adovacy group DreamActivist.org. "We are confident that the American people and that the moderate GOP will make the right choice when it comes to investing in the future of this country."
Reid attempted to attach the measure as an amendment to the defense authorization bill in September, drawing intense protest from Republicans, who accused the Democrat of playing pre-election politics.
Ultimately, Republicans blocked the effort to bring the defense bill to the floor for debate, precluding a chance of adding the DREAM Act. The bill also included a repeal of the military's "don't ask don't tell" policy.
"We're going to vote on the Dream Act; it's only a question of when," Reid said after the vote. "It's a question of fairness. This is not the end of this."
Many activists on both sides of the issue agree, however, that chances of the bill's passage are only going to grow dimmer with an influx of Republicans set to join the House and Senate in January.
Roy Beck, president of Numbers USA, a group that favors tighter immigration controls and supports Republicans' efforts to block the DREAM Act, said the measure is flawed.
"Some of these [immigrants] are compelling cases, no doubt about it," said Beck. "But you've got to draw some lines a lot narrower than the DREAM Act draws them. This is about giving millions of illegal aliens permanent work permits, and I don't think in this economy that this is a very happy time to be doing that."
President Obama supports the legislation, as does Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who says it would help recruitment, and Education Secretary Arne Duncan, who says it's "the right thing to do for our country."
But it's unclear whether the administration will push behind the scenes in the weeks ahead to make it a legislative priority. The Congress already faces challenging debates over whether to extend the Bush tax cuts, fund the federal government through 2011, and approve a controversial defense spending bill.
"The president supports the DREAM Act and I support the DREAM Act. The president supports immigration reform, and I support immigration reform. And how Congress takes that up is for the Congress and the leadership to decide," said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in September.
The DREAM Act has received some bipartisan Senate support in the years since it was first introduced in 2001. It was approved as part of immigration reform bill in 2006, but the package later failed in the House. In 2007, the Act was filibustered when it came up for an up-or-down vote.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has decided not to list DREAM Act as a priority for this week, a senior Democratic aide told ABC News. But it could come up after Thanksgiving.
According to the nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute, about 2 million of the nearly 11 million undocumented immigrants currently living in the U.S. could be eligible for legalization under the DREAM Act.
The group also estimates, however, that only 825,000 of those immigrants would ultimately take advantage of the law if it were enacted.
ABC News' John Parkinson contributed to this report.
DESERT NEWS: Sign the Utah Compact
Published: Sunday, Nov. 14, 2010 12:00 a.m. MST
Sign the Utah Compact | Deseret News (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700081235/Sign-the-Utah-Compact.html)
Already recognized by Forbes Magazine as the top state in the nation for business, Utah further burnished its reputation for pro-family and pro-growth policies this week as civic, business and religious leaders signed the Utah Compact, a declaration for principled immigration reform.
Historically, during periods of economic recession, business leaders and policy-makers have reverted to what economists call zero-sum thinking � the belief that one person gains only when another loses. When we only have so much pie, it is entirely rational to worry about how the pieces are divvied out. And when the pie is shrinking, the rules for who gets a slice become even more critical.
Fixed-pied concerns are undoubtedly part of what lies behind the complex debate about immigration. There is understandable fear that immigrants might take increasingly scarce jobs and resources from citizens. And any public expenditure on immigrants, whether through social services or law enforcement, draws down a limited public treasury that deserves scrupulous stewardship.
But people also intuitively understand that the best way to ensure more pie over the long term is not to hoard what is being served right now, but instead figure out how to expand the pie. This is what economists call positive-sum thinking � the belief that through exchange we can expand the pie, not simply fret about how it is divided.
The recent recession, followed by a jobless recovery, has served up a fixed-pie economy. But zero-sum or fixed-pie thinking is never the path toward sustained prosperity. And as many of Utah's prominent civic, business, and religious leaders signed a declaration on immigration reform called the Utah Compact, they sent a powerful signal to the world that Utah embraces positive-sum, pie-expanding thought and policies. Instead of creating a hostile environment for immigrants, they have outlined thoughtful principles that embrace the promise afforded through immigration. They have sided with the consensus view of pro-growth free-market economists who recognize that immigration actually creates jobs and revenue. (www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/business/economy/31view.html)
Even more important than the powerful economic growth message inherent in the Utah Compact is its embrace of those core values that support a free, humane and prosperous society: respect for the rule of law, respect for families, respect for individual liberty and respect for the dignity and humanity of each individual. It emphasizes an orderly approach to the critically important concerns of enforcement and security.
The Utah Compact is not itself a policy � it is a thoughtful declaration of principles that lawmakers should use as they work to craft pragmatic legislation that helps our state deal with the problems and promise afforded by immigration. We are impressed by the array of distinguished civic, business, and ecclesiastical leaders who have signed the Utah Compact or endorsed its principles. We encourage our readers to read the Utah Compact (The Utah Compact - Read the Utah Compact (http://www.utahcompact.com)) and sign it.
more...
saileshdude
09-07 10:49 AM
Yes� It�s me Sreedhar. According to the conversation with my cousin, what ever I posted here is true. I am not sure what IO said is going to be happen or not. My cousin and myself working in the same office. I will keep update what ever happen to his case.
-Sree
Thanks for sharing this. I find it hard to believe what IO said (not you) . I think IO must have meant it will be current for PD 2003/2004 people. And using unused numbers from past is more of legislative thing that I am not sure if USCIS has the power to do it.
-Sree
Thanks for sharing this. I find it hard to believe what IO said (not you) . I think IO must have meant it will be current for PD 2003/2004 people. And using unused numbers from past is more of legislative thing that I am not sure if USCIS has the power to do it.
GoneSouth
07-11 11:14 AM
Congratulations!! Why didn't you do Concurrent filing in June?
I didn't have my I-485 documents compiled and ready for submission in June, so I just went and filed I-140 since that was ready. I figured I-140 would be approved by the time I had I-485 docs ready, and the July visa bulletin issued June 13th showed my PD current through July, so I wasn't worried.
Boy did I (and quite a few other people) get a nasty surprise on July 2!
I didn't have my I-485 documents compiled and ready for submission in June, so I just went and filed I-140 since that was ready. I figured I-140 would be approved by the time I had I-485 docs ready, and the July visa bulletin issued June 13th showed my PD current through July, so I wasn't worried.
Boy did I (and quite a few other people) get a nasty surprise on July 2!
more...
krustycat
03-09 07:33 PM
if you have your I-140 approved then you should be ok, provided your earned more than the prevailing wage for that year.
Even if you have I-140 approved, if the salary at the time you filed I-485 was less than the prevailing wage, they will examine again the company's ability to pay.
My I-140 was approved in 2006 and back then my salary was enough to prove the company's ability to pay. However, I got a NOID in my I-485 and the officer is asking to prove ability to pay again.
Even if you have I-140 approved, if the salary at the time you filed I-485 was less than the prevailing wage, they will examine again the company's ability to pay.
My I-140 was approved in 2006 and back then my salary was enough to prove the company's ability to pay. However, I got a NOID in my I-485 and the officer is asking to prove ability to pay again.
savitri.bhave
07-06 10:30 AM
Jayant,
Thanks. I will have to return to China because my husband is chinese. If he can not stay here, he would like to go back there and so do I.
Once again thanks for the advice. Let me rephrase my question:
(a) At this point can I file for PERM processing (five months left on H1)?
(b) Case I : If labour does not get cleared within next five months,can I apply for H1 B extension?
(c) Case II : If labour gets cleared within next five months, can I apply for H1B extension?
At this point, I am loooking for extension of one year. Is there any way I can do this?
Thanks a lot again,
Savitri Bhave
Thanks. I will have to return to China because my husband is chinese. If he can not stay here, he would like to go back there and so do I.
Once again thanks for the advice. Let me rephrase my question:
(a) At this point can I file for PERM processing (five months left on H1)?
(b) Case I : If labour does not get cleared within next five months,can I apply for H1 B extension?
(c) Case II : If labour gets cleared within next five months, can I apply for H1B extension?
At this point, I am loooking for extension of one year. Is there any way I can do this?
Thanks a lot again,
Savitri Bhave
more...
sonu_Aug_2002
02-12 01:56 PM
So far $50.
div_bell_2003
01-06 01:55 PM
Interesting read since my lawyer had informed me specifically that the CBP officer at POE is not supposed to lift one copy of advanced parole, he's supposed to stamp it and hand it back over to me and make a copy for his own records. They have also told me that if a CBP officer looks to lift a copy, we should politely ask him/her if there is any specific reason he needs an original and can't make a copy.
On the same note, if every time they lift a copy, then how can one make more than say 2 trips on one AP ? I have seen lots of people using AP for business travel and they do make more trips.
You need both copies of the AP. The IO will keep one copy and stamp the other one and return it. When I got back to the USA in December 2008, my POE was Miami. My lawyer had told me to take both copies of the AP with me.
When I was in the Secondary room, there was another person who had only one copy of the AP. The IO asked him for the other copy. The dude told the IO that he had only one copy and the lawyer had told him that one copy is enough (you could see that he was nervous). The IO sarcastically told him to change his lawyer. The dude then said that he was not planning on traveling anytime before the expiry of the AP and said that the IO could keep the copy he had submitted. The IO again wryly told him that things don't work that way. He told the dude to take a seat and he wold see what he could do (the IO was actually polite all the time to this dude - even thought he sounded sarcastic at times - especially when he said "I would not waste any more money on this lawyer"). To make a long story short, I saw him get his stamped AP back and we left the room at around the same time).
My advise to you is - take both the copies - you will not regret it.
On the same note, if every time they lift a copy, then how can one make more than say 2 trips on one AP ? I have seen lots of people using AP for business travel and they do make more trips.
You need both copies of the AP. The IO will keep one copy and stamp the other one and return it. When I got back to the USA in December 2008, my POE was Miami. My lawyer had told me to take both copies of the AP with me.
When I was in the Secondary room, there was another person who had only one copy of the AP. The IO asked him for the other copy. The dude told the IO that he had only one copy and the lawyer had told him that one copy is enough (you could see that he was nervous). The IO sarcastically told him to change his lawyer. The dude then said that he was not planning on traveling anytime before the expiry of the AP and said that the IO could keep the copy he had submitted. The IO again wryly told him that things don't work that way. He told the dude to take a seat and he wold see what he could do (the IO was actually polite all the time to this dude - even thought he sounded sarcastic at times - especially when he said "I would not waste any more money on this lawyer"). To make a long story short, I saw him get his stamped AP back and we left the room at around the same time).
My advise to you is - take both the copies - you will not regret it.
more...
lutherpraveen
09-19 06:42 PM
This is called Pork-Barrel politics. It refers to government spending that is intended to benefit a particular politicians view point in return for their political support on a non-related item.
It is unfortunate that we are put in a situation to support an unethical (not illegal though) practise, but bottom line, this ammendment (if passed) will help us.
My personal view is not to piggy-back our provisions with a bill that is either non-related (like the defense appropriation) or a moral opposite (illegal immigration).
It would be so nice that if we have the clout to influence the law makers to have "our own" bill with just our provisions.
I am sure we will achieve that goal with the progress IV is making in that area.
How come a bill which talks about " ....authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense......" can link an amendment which talks about different thing i.e. "..Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas..."
It is unfortunate that we are put in a situation to support an unethical (not illegal though) practise, but bottom line, this ammendment (if passed) will help us.
My personal view is not to piggy-back our provisions with a bill that is either non-related (like the defense appropriation) or a moral opposite (illegal immigration).
It would be so nice that if we have the clout to influence the law makers to have "our own" bill with just our provisions.
I am sure we will achieve that goal with the progress IV is making in that area.
How come a bill which talks about " ....authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2008 for military activities of the Department of Defense......" can link an amendment which talks about different thing i.e. "..Recapture of Unused Employment-Based Immigrant Visas..."
jvs
09-23 02:27 PM
I applied for my second AP on 08/11/2009, was approved on 09/03/2009, was received at the attorney's office on 09/10/2009. Service center NSC.
No FP was done. FWIW my last FP was in Jan 09.
Did you guys have to go through FP for the APs? Will they take FP again even if they have done that before.
No FP was done. FWIW my last FP was in Jan 09.
Did you guys have to go through FP for the APs? Will they take FP again even if they have done that before.
tabletpc
12-16 10:22 AM
Don't Panic but retaliate.
Appraise your self with form wh4 and AC21 rules and then appreaise your new employer attorney. You and your new employer attorney are in good situation to take your Ex-employer for a ride. Good luck....
After 180 days I-485 is pending and I-140 is approved, your priority date remains valid even if your employer withdraws approved I-140. Basically, your ex-employer cannot stop the case, and as long as you find a new job in similar ocupation and very similar duties, you I-485 can still be approved. Read AC-21 for more information.
Suggestion: keep the employment termination letter/note/email for records for future reference.
Appraise your self with form wh4 and AC21 rules and then appreaise your new employer attorney. You and your new employer attorney are in good situation to take your Ex-employer for a ride. Good luck....
After 180 days I-485 is pending and I-140 is approved, your priority date remains valid even if your employer withdraws approved I-140. Basically, your ex-employer cannot stop the case, and as long as you find a new job in similar ocupation and very similar duties, you I-485 can still be approved. Read AC-21 for more information.
Suggestion: keep the employment termination letter/note/email for records for future reference.
EndlessWait
01-10 02:48 PM
Its been 5 months , I'vent recieved the FP for myself. My case status still shows "The case has been transferred to Nebraska etc etc.."
Anybody in the same shoes?
Anybody in the same shoes?
Jaime
09-14 02:30 PM
bump
No comments:
Post a Comment