usirit
01-28 01:33 PM
It's amazing the time and energy spent (wasted?) with Sen. Mike Delph illegal-worker bill. Would it be the same for an improved Legal Immigrants system? :rolleyes: I guess not because we are already paying taxes, but unfortunately for us we are stuck in this overkill and non-sense process. My LC (EB3) for instance is waiting to be certified by Chicago DOL since 08/06/07, it got audited in 12/05/07, DENIED on 12/21/07, appealed, and then moved back to "In Process" in 01/10/08. My wife and 3 kids are stuck with their H-4 status while I am an H1-B. Meanwhile, around $20K has been paid between immigration and legal/attorney's fees.
Isn't funny when lawmakers or lack of knowledge people says why you didn't just went Legal? :mad: Regardless the money required to invested in this process, there is so much to know to submit applications that only thru an attorney it's possible; and even having one of the "Best Ones" in your side is not a guarantee.
I'll need to say that I agree and support a fine to employers using illegal workers but this won't stop the immigration to this country; a re-design immigration system with reasonable time and fees as well as clear goals and incentives will definitely improve and solve immigration issues. :)
Isn't funny when lawmakers or lack of knowledge people says why you didn't just went Legal? :mad: Regardless the money required to invested in this process, there is so much to know to submit applications that only thru an attorney it's possible; and even having one of the "Best Ones" in your side is not a guarantee.
I'll need to say that I agree and support a fine to employers using illegal workers but this won't stop the immigration to this country; a re-design immigration system with reasonable time and fees as well as clear goals and incentives will definitely improve and solve immigration issues. :)
wallpaper Elegant White 2011 Citroen DS4
alien2006
08-07 03:05 PM
Prevailing wage for EB2 as of latest information i have is $83,200
Hope this helps.
Okay that is so vague. Wages depend on the location of job, type of job, etc.
Hope this helps.
Okay that is so vague. Wages depend on the location of job, type of job, etc.
angelina
07-03 05:23 PM
http://s202395528.onlinehome.us/2007/07/03/the-cis-has-really-outdone-itself-this-time/
CIS has really outdone itself this time
The CIS has a long and dishonorable history. They have done many unconscionable things in their past, as individuals and as an institution. They are rife with corruption and incompetence. They willfully refuse to follow the law. Their latest stunt, however, tops anything they have done before.
According to the CIS Ombudsman, the CIS has wasted more than half a million employment based immigrant visas in the last decade. A few years ago, they reserved a huge block of EB immigrant visa numbers with the excuse that they were going to use them to close out a large number of backlogged adjustment of status applications. The result was that the Visa Office had to suddenly retrogress Visa Bulletin cutoff dates. The CIS, of course, didn�t close out even a small fraction of the cases they said they were going to close and tens of thousands of visa numbers were irretrievably lost. Cynical minds believe that they did this deliberately to force a retrogression and stop the filing of additional applications.
This year, determined to prevent the further waste of visa numbers, the Visa Office advanced cutoff dates so that as many EB immigrant visas as possible could be issued before the end of the fiscal year. A few months earlier, the CIS Ombudsman warned that CIS incompetence and inability to reduce adjustment of status backlogs would likely result in the irrevocable loss of at least 40,000 EB immigrant visa numbers.
The CIS was said to be very upset by the Visa Office action. They fumed and stomped and finally came up with a plan. This past weekend, they brought in the entire staff of the NSC and TSC and had them pull files. They pulled more than 60,000 pending adjustment of status files and then ordered visa numbers for all of them. Understand, many (most) of these files were missing background security check results and can not be closed. It didn�t matter, the CIS has no intention of closing them, they just wanted to find enough files to order all of the remaining visa numbers and force a retrogression of cutoff dates. This is why the Visa Office had to issue the update yesterday, announcing that there were no more EB visa numbers available for the remainder of the fiscal year.
By law, the CIS must return all visa numbers they have not used within seven days. Don�t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
Consider the effort the CIS put into their scheme to frustrate the plans of thousands of intending applicants. How much overtime pay will the taxpayers have to fork over for this? Worse, I very seriously doubt that we will see more than a few cases actually closed. They will have gone through this entire expensive effort for no reason other than to show that they are capable of throwing an institutional tempter tantrum. At the end of the day, they will again have irrevocably wasted tens of thousands of EB immigrant visa numbers and pushed visa cutoff days back even further.
And people wonder why we have an immigration problem.
This entry was posted on July 3, 2007 at 10:22 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.
CIS has really outdone itself this time
The CIS has a long and dishonorable history. They have done many unconscionable things in their past, as individuals and as an institution. They are rife with corruption and incompetence. They willfully refuse to follow the law. Their latest stunt, however, tops anything they have done before.
According to the CIS Ombudsman, the CIS has wasted more than half a million employment based immigrant visas in the last decade. A few years ago, they reserved a huge block of EB immigrant visa numbers with the excuse that they were going to use them to close out a large number of backlogged adjustment of status applications. The result was that the Visa Office had to suddenly retrogress Visa Bulletin cutoff dates. The CIS, of course, didn�t close out even a small fraction of the cases they said they were going to close and tens of thousands of visa numbers were irretrievably lost. Cynical minds believe that they did this deliberately to force a retrogression and stop the filing of additional applications.
This year, determined to prevent the further waste of visa numbers, the Visa Office advanced cutoff dates so that as many EB immigrant visas as possible could be issued before the end of the fiscal year. A few months earlier, the CIS Ombudsman warned that CIS incompetence and inability to reduce adjustment of status backlogs would likely result in the irrevocable loss of at least 40,000 EB immigrant visa numbers.
The CIS was said to be very upset by the Visa Office action. They fumed and stomped and finally came up with a plan. This past weekend, they brought in the entire staff of the NSC and TSC and had them pull files. They pulled more than 60,000 pending adjustment of status files and then ordered visa numbers for all of them. Understand, many (most) of these files were missing background security check results and can not be closed. It didn�t matter, the CIS has no intention of closing them, they just wanted to find enough files to order all of the remaining visa numbers and force a retrogression of cutoff dates. This is why the Visa Office had to issue the update yesterday, announcing that there were no more EB visa numbers available for the remainder of the fiscal year.
By law, the CIS must return all visa numbers they have not used within seven days. Don�t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.
Consider the effort the CIS put into their scheme to frustrate the plans of thousands of intending applicants. How much overtime pay will the taxpayers have to fork over for this? Worse, I very seriously doubt that we will see more than a few cases actually closed. They will have gone through this entire expensive effort for no reason other than to show that they are capable of throwing an institutional tempter tantrum. At the end of the day, they will again have irrevocably wasted tens of thousands of EB immigrant visa numbers and pushed visa cutoff days back even further.
And people wonder why we have an immigration problem.
This entry was posted on July 3, 2007 at 10:22 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.
2011 2012 White Citroen DS4
sam_hoosier
07-19 02:11 PM
Try this -
http://www.uscts.com/?gclid=CNnlr5GitI0CFQGPWAodl2zo0Q
http://www.uscts.com/?gclid=CNnlr5GitI0CFQGPWAodl2zo0Q
more...
anantken
05-27 01:22 PM
If the PO boxes are different then you have to send it seperately.
.jpg "DS4 white")
nogc_noproblem
02-15 12:09 PM
Any suggestions...
more...
bekugc
06-20 05:57 PM
sure, pls verify with lawyer to be safe
common consensus seems to be -->
if u have a valid/unexpired h1 petition, then even after using AP, u can continue to use the H1 for 'work authorization' ( u dont need to use EAD at the same employer).
But after using AP, officially ur status is 'parolee' and not H1-B. (official status of entry as put on i94 doc)
After using AP, u can further extend ur H1 if u want to -> in this case your status officially changes to H1b from parolee.
After using AP, if u desperately need to get back on H1 (for whatever reason) -> u can either extend ur H1 or amend ur H1, both these will put u back on H1.
Some people also say if u have used AP , but still have a valid h1 petition and desperately want to get back to H1, then u cud go to a consulate abroad, get ur h1 visa stamped and reenter and once again ur officially back on H1 ( seems valid, but i dont know anyone who tried this)
hope this helps...
common consensus seems to be -->
if u have a valid/unexpired h1 petition, then even after using AP, u can continue to use the H1 for 'work authorization' ( u dont need to use EAD at the same employer).
But after using AP, officially ur status is 'parolee' and not H1-B. (official status of entry as put on i94 doc)
After using AP, u can further extend ur H1 if u want to -> in this case your status officially changes to H1b from parolee.
After using AP, if u desperately need to get back on H1 (for whatever reason) -> u can either extend ur H1 or amend ur H1, both these will put u back on H1.
Some people also say if u have used AP , but still have a valid h1 petition and desperately want to get back to H1, then u cud go to a consulate abroad, get ur h1 visa stamped and reenter and once again ur officially back on H1 ( seems valid, but i dont know anyone who tried this)
hope this helps...
2010 Citroen+ds4+white
.jpg "Citroen DS4 white")
lostinbeta
09-10 12:01 PM
Sounds pretty "nifty":nerd:
more...
dexter
12-16 05:26 PM
Hi Charles ,
Thank you for the reply. really appreciate your feedback.
Thanks.
Thank you for the reply. really appreciate your feedback.
Thanks.
hair Citroen Ds4 2010.
shana04
11-05 02:34 PM
What if USCIS had not screwed up by using all "C"s in July bulletin? You would not have even filed AOS !! Think positively. And don't show even a sign that you are waiting for 180 days; just count them inside. Until then your sponsor can pull the plug anytime by revolking your I-140, and if that happens, you are back to square one.
It all depends on the rollercoster where you have been in your life.
May be one day I would be on the other side talking more optimistic.
But I would never critic others opinion based on the fact that what they are going through (in life).
But I would say good luck to you my friend.
It all depends on the rollercoster where you have been in your life.
May be one day I would be on the other side talking more optimistic.
But I would never critic others opinion based on the fact that what they are going through (in life).
But I would say good luck to you my friend.
more...
lskreddy
03-12 04:34 PM
the only way to extend the H1 is to:
- have an LC >365 days old
- her I-140 approved
Without either of those she does not qualify for H1 extensions. Best bet if EAD takes longer than 4 more months (should not, most people have got it within 90 days) and she cannot stop working for a while might be to try and recapture time spent abroad (to fully utilize the 6 years). If you were on vacation or travelling on business, hten all those days spent abroad can be used as additional H1 time. if thats been 4-5 months in ht elast 6 years, it might be worth recapturing...
Would anyone know if there is a third valid case for H1 extension i.e.
LC approved, I140 pending (just a month) but LC is less than 365 days old?
My LC has been approved but will be only pending for 360 days on the day my H1 expires, I140 is pending and sixth year is going to be up this June. Can I extend or would i be forced to recapture some of my time outside US?
- have an LC >365 days old
- her I-140 approved
Without either of those she does not qualify for H1 extensions. Best bet if EAD takes longer than 4 more months (should not, most people have got it within 90 days) and she cannot stop working for a while might be to try and recapture time spent abroad (to fully utilize the 6 years). If you were on vacation or travelling on business, hten all those days spent abroad can be used as additional H1 time. if thats been 4-5 months in ht elast 6 years, it might be worth recapturing...
Would anyone know if there is a third valid case for H1 extension i.e.
LC approved, I140 pending (just a month) but LC is less than 365 days old?
My LC has been approved but will be only pending for 360 days on the day my H1 expires, I140 is pending and sixth year is going to be up this June. Can I extend or would i be forced to recapture some of my time outside US?
hot Citroen will bring two special
garamchai2go
06-26 02:12 PM
I recently applied for EAD renewal and after three weeks of that I saw LUD changed on my 485 apllication for consequetive two days. Any Idea why ?
By the way my case is ACT 21 ( 485 filed on 2007 july) and my priority day is not even close to be current.
Any suggestions will be appreciated ?
Thanks
Did you happen to do address change(AR-11)??
By the way my case is ACT 21 ( 485 filed on 2007 july) and my priority day is not even close to be current.
Any suggestions will be appreciated ?
Thanks
Did you happen to do address change(AR-11)??
more...
house 2012 Citroen DS4 as an
karthiknv143
07-09 04:03 PM
^^^
tattoo DS4 white
rsdang1
10-13 04:51 PM
no dude..it does not..there is not much it will give us..
we need visa recapture, elimination of country quota and simplification of ac21 rules
(i feel like i am asking for free beer :p)
Dude I agree that we need Visa recapture but and additional 50K visas a year for EB will go a long way as well....
In current situation any increase in EB visas will help...
:)
we need visa recapture, elimination of country quota and simplification of ac21 rules
(i feel like i am asking for free beer :p)
Dude I agree that we need Visa recapture but and additional 50K visas a year for EB will go a long way as well....
In current situation any increase in EB visas will help...
:)
more...
pictures 2011 White Citroen DS4 Model
ysnraju
12-07 12:02 AM
for my 8th Year extension I applied on 16th Nov.2007
and got approval notice on 28th Nov.2007 with 1 Yr extension.
Actually based on December bulletin my attorney asked for 3 yrs. but got 1 yr. as in Nov my PD is current.
Off-course on 30th my I485 is approved.
So there is no doubt your attorney is so wrong.......
and got approval notice on 28th Nov.2007 with 1 Yr extension.
Actually based on December bulletin my attorney asked for 3 yrs. but got 1 yr. as in Nov my PD is current.
Off-course on 30th my I485 is approved.
So there is no doubt your attorney is so wrong.......
dresses 2012 Citroen DS4
bach007
08-21 10:15 PM
It's not cheating. The August 16 date is the Processing Up-date, not the posting date.
Check this out on header:
Service Center Processing Dates for Nebraska Service Center Posted August 16, 2007 ;)
Check this out on header:
Service Center Processing Dates for Nebraska Service Center Posted August 16, 2007 ;)
more...
makeup 2011 White Citroen DS4 Model
saisravan
07-23 07:45 AM
Hi
Am in the same situation with my employer
He is doing a direct deposit on to my account and not sharing the paystubs and everytime when i follow up him with paystubs he is saying all cock&bull stories saying that HR is busy with other stuff and cannot do it at this point.
Its been 3 months he is delaying this.
Previoulsy I was receiving my paystbs regularly and all it started is after my H1 renewal and am need to change my employer now and other company is asking for the latest 3 months paystubs for the H1 transfer.
and my employr is thretening for the original H1 B doc and he says that he needs it for companys reference.
Please let me know whome to contact and how to contact and how to get this things done in gettign my paystubs.
Am in the same situation with my employer
He is doing a direct deposit on to my account and not sharing the paystubs and everytime when i follow up him with paystubs he is saying all cock&bull stories saying that HR is busy with other stuff and cannot do it at this point.
Its been 3 months he is delaying this.
Previoulsy I was receiving my paystbs regularly and all it started is after my H1 renewal and am need to change my employer now and other company is asking for the latest 3 months paystubs for the H1 transfer.
and my employr is thretening for the original H1 B doc and he says that he needs it for companys reference.
Please let me know whome to contact and how to contact and how to get this things done in gettign my paystubs.
girlfriend Citroën DS4 Interior Image
sathyaraj
10-26 11:29 AM
USCIS is not updating the online status. Mine got approved and I received it in mail. But still the online status remains as pending.
hairstyles Starring: Citroën DS4
gcman2005
10-08 11:04 AM
Hello,
I have following situation and need some help on making my travel decision:
1. Me and my wife booked ticket to travel to India on October 27th and coming back on November 29th. Our advance parole will expire in NOV 18th. We have H1B approval till 2010 from a company A. I am working on H1B and my wife working on EAD.
2. Me and my wife filed EAD/AP July 29th 2008. My AP got approved on Aug 31. But my wifes AP/EAD is not yet approved.
3. Two months back my H1B sponsoring company( company A) was acquired by company B. Company B is a Canadian company. Company B has taken all obligations and liabilities of LCA's of company A.
4. Since the aquiring comany is candian company my offer letter and the employment verifaication letters are with address and telephone numbers of canada/ottawa.
5. My pay stubs are still issued with name of Campany A.
6. Since My wifes AP is not approved we are planning stamp out H1B/h4 visa at us consulate in chennai. I am wondering with above situation is there any risk in visa approval at chennai consulate ?
7. Is there any way from now and OCtober 27 I can expidate the AP approval for my wifes application?
8. How long it takes these days for H1B visa approvals at chennai with the new PIMS process ? Will I get visa approved on Nov 10th if my interview is on NOV 3rd?
9. What are the risks in this travel ?
I have following situation and need some help on making my travel decision:
1. Me and my wife booked ticket to travel to India on October 27th and coming back on November 29th. Our advance parole will expire in NOV 18th. We have H1B approval till 2010 from a company A. I am working on H1B and my wife working on EAD.
2. Me and my wife filed EAD/AP July 29th 2008. My AP got approved on Aug 31. But my wifes AP/EAD is not yet approved.
3. Two months back my H1B sponsoring company( company A) was acquired by company B. Company B is a Canadian company. Company B has taken all obligations and liabilities of LCA's of company A.
4. Since the aquiring comany is candian company my offer letter and the employment verifaication letters are with address and telephone numbers of canada/ottawa.
5. My pay stubs are still issued with name of Campany A.
6. Since My wifes AP is not approved we are planning stamp out H1B/h4 visa at us consulate in chennai. I am wondering with above situation is there any risk in visa approval at chennai consulate ?
7. Is there any way from now and OCtober 27 I can expidate the AP approval for my wifes application?
8. How long it takes these days for H1B visa approvals at chennai with the new PIMS process ? Will I get visa approved on Nov 10th if my interview is on NOV 3rd?
9. What are the risks in this travel ?
Blog Feeds
01-14 08:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPHaMYr3sOptDr6TwJBG9-OUxAYAa0zEmeGxaoKC_lyMDujR2Ju0KgxhYRlW1kbiuTK5u4TD_BCCakIvrqcedCFR3J0vN9qbCX45612-Sx7xrfUPGETh9_-kbbkCOEeU8yPMBDEucqROIr/s200/uscisLogo.gif (https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiPHaMYr3sOptDr6TwJBG9-OUxAYAa0zEmeGxaoKC_lyMDujR2Ju0KgxhYRlW1kbiuTK5u4TD_BCCakIvrqcedCFR3J0vN9qbCX45612-Sx7xrfUPGETh9_-kbbkCOEeU8yPMBDEucqROIr/s1600-h/uscisLogo.gif)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
The US Citizenship and Immigration Service has issued a long memorandum (http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/2010/H1B%20Employer-Employee%20Memo010810.pdf) on what constitutes an "employer-employee" relationship for H-1B purposes. This should be especially interesting to H-1B workers and employers with consulting or contracting arrangements.
US immigration regulations (8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(4)(ii)) require, among other things, that a H-1B petitioner "Has an employer-employee relationship with respect to employees under this part, as indicated by the fact that it may hire, pay, fire, supervise, or otherwise control the work of any such employee"
CIS acknowledges that the lack of guidance defining what constitutes a valid employer-employee relationship has caused problems, especially when employees such as consultants or contractors are placed at 3rd-party sites. In these situations, the petitioner might not be able to show the required control over the employee's work. CIS considers that the "right to control" the employee's work is critical. The memo stresses that the right to control is different to actual control. To analyze the control, CIS looks at:
Does the petitioner supervise the beneficiary and is such supervision off-site or on-site?
If the supervision is off-site, how does the petitioner maintain such supervision, i. e. weekly calls, reporting back to main office routinely, or site visits by the petitioner?
Does the petitioner have the right to control the work of the beneficiary on a day-to-day basis if such control is required?
Does the petitioner provide the tools or instrumentalities needed for the beneficiary to perform the duties of employment?
Does the petitioner hire, pay, and have the ability to fire the beneficiary?
Does the petitioner evaluate the work-product of the beneficiary, i.e. progress/performance reviews?
Does the petitioner claim the beneficiary for tax purposes?
Does the petitioner provide the beneficiary with any type of employee benefits?
Does the beneficiary use proprietary information of the petitioner in order to perform the duties of employment?
Does the beneficiary produce an end-product that is directly linked to the petitioner's line of business?
Can the petitioner control the manner and means in which the work product of the beneficiary is accomplished?
The CIS Memo describes various different employment relationships, and states whether they meet the regulatory requirements. Those which CIS considers do not comply with regulations include:
Self employment;
Independent contractors;
"Job shops".
The memo describes, in detail, the evidence that can be submitted to prove an employer-employee relationship, especially where the employee will be working off-site.
The memo also notes that petitions must show compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) which states:
Service or training in more than one location. A petition that requires services to be performed or training to be received in more than one location must include an itinerary with the dates and locations of the services or training and must be filed with USCIS as provided in the form instructions. The address that the petitioner specifies as its location on the Form I-129 shall be where the petitioner is located for purposes of this paragraph.
The memo notes that to satisfy the requirements of 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B), the petitioner must "submit a complete itinerary of services or engagements that specifies the dates of each service or engagement, the names and addresses of the actual employers, and the names and addresses of the establishment, venues, or locations where the services will be performed for the period of time requested. Compliance with 8 C.F.R. 214.2(h)(2)(i)(B) assists USCIS in determining that the petitioner has concrete plans in place for a particular beneficiary, that the beneficiary is performing duties in a specialty occupation, and that the beneficiary is not being "benched" without pay between assignments." Submitting a detailed itinerary for the next 3 years will be very difficult for many employers who place employees out on contracts.
This memo has just been published today, and there will undoubtedly be many more rticles published that analyze the provisions.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/2893395975825897727-2453679137512034994?l=martinvisalaw.blogspot.com
More... (http://martinvisalaw.blogspot.com/2010/01/cis-issues-memo-on-employer-employee.html)
sledge_hammer
06-17 10:22 AM
For USPS deliveries:
USCIS
Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
For private courier (non-USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
Texas Service Center
4141 North St. Augustine Road
Dallas, TX 75227
I sent it using United States Postal Service (usps). I did use full zip code (75185-2401). I also used usps return receipt, which means somebody from USCIS has to sign this form.
USCIS
Texas Service Center
P.O. Box 851041
Mesquite, TX 75185-1041
For private courier (non-USPS) deliveries:
USCIS
Texas Service Center
4141 North St. Augustine Road
Dallas, TX 75227
I sent it using United States Postal Service (usps). I did use full zip code (75185-2401). I also used usps return receipt, which means somebody from USCIS has to sign this form.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий