a_yaja
09-19 10:51 AM
I am planning to book tickets for my parents travelling from India to US and returning back to India after 2 months. I have some questions:
1) Is it necessary to book tickets in India?
2) If not, Can I book tickets through orbitz or expedia in the US and send them the e-tickets?
Please reply with your experiences.
Thanks in advance!
I have booked tickets on orbitz.com for my parents and cheaptickets.com for my in-laws. Both were eTickets and there were no problems. I preferred to pay in USD over INR due to the fact that visa/ mastercard charge a 1% transaction fee for international currency and my bank would have screwed me on the exchange rate.
1) Is it necessary to book tickets in India?
2) If not, Can I book tickets through orbitz or expedia in the US and send them the e-tickets?
Please reply with your experiences.
Thanks in advance!
I have booked tickets on orbitz.com for my parents and cheaptickets.com for my in-laws. Both were eTickets and there were no problems. I preferred to pay in USD over INR due to the fact that visa/ mastercard charge a 1% transaction fee for international currency and my bank would have screwed me on the exchange rate.
wallpaper Hrithik Roshan at the launch
.jpg "jr ntr wedding engagement")
helpful_leo
02-03 06:42 PM
spgtopper:
I am trying to draft a letter that specifically addresses the above 2 concerns in the PACE bill. Not including current PhD graduates in it will delay any potential benefits from this part of the bill on retrogression by 5-8 years, which is when new PhD graduates joining on F4 will graduate (the current PhD candidates will otherwise use up EB1 and EB2 numbers through their employers.)
Excluding life sciences again would reduce the benefit on retrogression by ~60% than otherwise, bcos > 60% international PhD students (may be closer to 80%) are in the biological sciences (most students in other fields try to do a Masters and then look for a job.)
I would welcome if IV could publicize this aspect of the PACE bill and the need to amend it.
I am trying to draft a letter that specifically addresses the above 2 concerns in the PACE bill. Not including current PhD graduates in it will delay any potential benefits from this part of the bill on retrogression by 5-8 years, which is when new PhD graduates joining on F4 will graduate (the current PhD candidates will otherwise use up EB1 and EB2 numbers through their employers.)
Excluding life sciences again would reduce the benefit on retrogression by ~60% than otherwise, bcos > 60% international PhD students (may be closer to 80%) are in the biological sciences (most students in other fields try to do a Masters and then look for a job.)
I would welcome if IV could publicize this aspect of the PACE bill and the need to amend it.
venky321
07-19 02:08 PM
It might have been okay if you had tried to transfer from H1 to H4 after a few months of being on the bench; but 3 years out of status lol.
Talk to an attorney, file a DOL complaint against your employer; but if it comes out that you were out of status for 3 years, I think your chances are pretty bleak.
Talk to an attorney, file a DOL complaint against your employer; but if it comes out that you were out of status for 3 years, I think your chances are pretty bleak.
2011 jr ntr wedding engagement
nvsreddy
10-07 01:26 PM
My case is also in the same boat, My case transferred from TSC to VSC on July 20th 2009, after that I applied for AP to VSC on 7th of Aug 2009 and I haven't got any update on AP yet (did expedite the process on Sept 28th 09 through SR) ....after so many calls to TSC and VSC came to know that my case is transferred from TSC to VSC for security check and reached VSC on Sept 28th 09 (so it took more than 2 months to reach from TSC to VSC.....I think ppl will walk from TSC to VSC to transfer a case :) )
more...
gk_2000
08-05 01:51 PM
Doesn't it say: "for certain long-term conditional residents"
I think he is talking about TPS etc status. Nothing for us :(
Edit: Just found this in USCIS
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=36c5136d2035f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=b328194d3e88d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
I think he is talking about TPS etc status. Nothing for us :(
Edit: Just found this in USCIS
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=36c5136d2035f010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=b328194d3e88d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1 RCRD
sandeepk_c
06-12 12:13 PM
thanks.
more...
nonimmi
10-19 03:46 PM
If you applied for labor through PERM and have a copy of you PERM application, the DOL o*net code is listed in section F. Box 2. of the ETA 9089 form. This code can then be looked up at the o*net web site: http://online.onetcenter.org/find/
Do you know how to find this DOL o*net code for non-PERM cases?
Do you know how to find this DOL o*net code for non-PERM cases?
2010 Hrithik will be losing
sku
02-25 01:53 PM
This is the News Letter That I got from my attorney.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TARP Restricts H-1B Hiring for Funds Recipients
The Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) recently signed into law by President Obama places strict limits on recipients of funds or certain Federal Reserve loans that want to hire high-skilled workers under the H-1B visa program for a period of two years. TARP fund recipients include certain financial institutions as well as infrastructure, energy, and automobile companies. The bill subjects recipients of TARP funds to the same rules that an "H-1B dependent" employer must follow when it sponsors a new H-1B worker. (An H-1B dependent employer is one that has 15% or more H-1B workers in the employer's total full-time workforce.) These rules include:
� The employer cannot displace any similarly-employed U.S. worker with an H-1B worker within 90 days before or after applying for H-1B status for a new employee.
� The employer cannot place any H-1B worker at an outside worksite unless that employer first makes a "bona fide" inquiry as to whether the other employer has displaced or will displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before or after the placement of the H-1B worker.
� The employer has to take good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers for the job opening, at wages at least equal to those offered to the H-1B worker. The employer must offer the job to any U.S. worker who applies and is equally or better qualified than the H-1B worker.
TARP contains provisions that may effectively limit recipients of TARP funds and Federal Reserve loans from sponsoring new H-1B workers. While H-1B dependency rules do not normally apply to H-1B workers earning at least $60,000 annually or possessing a Master's degree, these exemptions are not available to the TARP/Federal Reserve loan recipients.
The exact language of the bill states that the above requirements apply to "new employees" sponsored for H-1B status. While additional guidance may be issued from the Department of Labor, the plain language of the bill suggests that a company filing an H-1B petition on behalf of a current employee who is working with the company under F-1 Optional Practical Training, TN status, or some other work visa, should not be subject to the "H-1B dependent" rules. Similarly, the additional restrictions should not apply to petitions for extension of H-1B status for a current employee. However, an employer filing an H-1B change of employer petition for a new employee likely would be subject to these requirements.
The House-Senate Conference Committee removed a provision from the stimulus proposal that would have required recipients of TARP funds to enroll and participate in the E-Verify online employment eligibility verification program, as well as a provision that would have renewed the currently voluntary E-Verify program for an additional five years. E-Verify is currently set to expire in March 2009.
Effective Date of New Form I-9 Delayed Until April 3, 2009
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is extending the effective date of its new Form I-9 from February 2, 2009 to April 3, 2009. The new Form I-9 updates the list of documents acceptable for employment eligibility verification. The temporary extension will provide DHS with an opportunity for further consideration of this rule. DHS also is extending the comment period for this rule for 30 days.
Rising Unemployment May Affect PERM Processing
In a recent meeting between the Department of Labor (DOL) and representatives of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, DOL stated that rising unemployment may affect the processing of certain PERM labor certification applications. DOL is trying to integrate labor market information from various sources, such as WARN Act notices, to determine the availability of U.S. workers in areas affected by significant layoffs. DOL cited the position of Financial Analyst located in New York City as an example of a particular occupation and location where there might be qualified U.S. workers available due to recent financial industry layoffs. DOL may require employers sponsoring PERM applications for such positions to undergo "supervised recruitment" in cases where the available data indicates that there may be available U.S. workers.
Supervised recruitment is a variation of the standard PERM procedure by which applicants for a position that is the subject of a PERM application submit their resumes directly to the DOL for initial review by DOL staff. The DOL forwards to employers the resumes of applicants that it deems qualified for the position. Employers are required to interview the applicants forwarded by DOL to determine whether the applicants are in fact qualified. To date, when DOL has issued supervised recruitment notices, more than half the cases have been withdrawn by the employer.
E-Verify Start Date for Federal Contractors Extended
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that Federal contractors and subcontractors can delay implementation of the use of the Department of Homeland Security's ("DHS") E-Verify system. E-Verify is a government run on-line system that combines DHS data with records from the Social Security Administration to determine whether a new hire is eligible to work in the U.S. The final rule was to have become effective on January 15, 2009, but now will not take effect until May 21, 2009. Once effective, E-Verify will become mandatory for federal contractors with projects exceeding $100,000 and for sub-contractors with projects exceeding $3,000. Contracts for less than $100,000 or for commercially available off-the-shelf items are exempt from this rule. Once E-Verify becomes effective on May 21, 2009, companies awarded a contract with the federal government will be required to enroll in E-Verify within 30 days of the contract award date. They will also need to begin using the E-Verify system to confirm that all of their new hires and their employees directly working on federal contracts are authorized to legally work in the United States
US VISIT Expanded to Include Lawful Permanent Residents
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently published a rule expanding the population of foreign nationals subject to the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program ("US-VISIT") to include U.S. permanent residents. US-VISIT will apply to all permanent residents entering or exiting from an air or seaport. Permanent residents entering through land ports of entry, however, will be required to provide fingerprints only if they are referred to secondary inspection.
Under US-VISIT, foreign nationals entering the United States provide "biometrics" (fingerprints scan and digital photograph) when passing through U.S. immigration. The biometric information collected upon entry is compared to the information collected at the time that the foreign national was originally issued a visa or Permanent Resident Card ("Green Card"). The biometric information is also compared to a criminal records database to confirm that a person is admissible to the United States. Permanent residents with criminal convictions traveling outside of the U.S. should be reminded that they are likely to be detected at entry and they should be prepared to present evidence regarding their admissibility.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TARP Restricts H-1B Hiring for Funds Recipients
The Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP) recently signed into law by President Obama places strict limits on recipients of funds or certain Federal Reserve loans that want to hire high-skilled workers under the H-1B visa program for a period of two years. TARP fund recipients include certain financial institutions as well as infrastructure, energy, and automobile companies. The bill subjects recipients of TARP funds to the same rules that an "H-1B dependent" employer must follow when it sponsors a new H-1B worker. (An H-1B dependent employer is one that has 15% or more H-1B workers in the employer's total full-time workforce.) These rules include:
� The employer cannot displace any similarly-employed U.S. worker with an H-1B worker within 90 days before or after applying for H-1B status for a new employee.
� The employer cannot place any H-1B worker at an outside worksite unless that employer first makes a "bona fide" inquiry as to whether the other employer has displaced or will displace a U.S. worker within 90 days before or after the placement of the H-1B worker.
� The employer has to take good faith steps to recruit U.S. workers for the job opening, at wages at least equal to those offered to the H-1B worker. The employer must offer the job to any U.S. worker who applies and is equally or better qualified than the H-1B worker.
TARP contains provisions that may effectively limit recipients of TARP funds and Federal Reserve loans from sponsoring new H-1B workers. While H-1B dependency rules do not normally apply to H-1B workers earning at least $60,000 annually or possessing a Master's degree, these exemptions are not available to the TARP/Federal Reserve loan recipients.
The exact language of the bill states that the above requirements apply to "new employees" sponsored for H-1B status. While additional guidance may be issued from the Department of Labor, the plain language of the bill suggests that a company filing an H-1B petition on behalf of a current employee who is working with the company under F-1 Optional Practical Training, TN status, or some other work visa, should not be subject to the "H-1B dependent" rules. Similarly, the additional restrictions should not apply to petitions for extension of H-1B status for a current employee. However, an employer filing an H-1B change of employer petition for a new employee likely would be subject to these requirements.
The House-Senate Conference Committee removed a provision from the stimulus proposal that would have required recipients of TARP funds to enroll and participate in the E-Verify online employment eligibility verification program, as well as a provision that would have renewed the currently voluntary E-Verify program for an additional five years. E-Verify is currently set to expire in March 2009.
Effective Date of New Form I-9 Delayed Until April 3, 2009
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is extending the effective date of its new Form I-9 from February 2, 2009 to April 3, 2009. The new Form I-9 updates the list of documents acceptable for employment eligibility verification. The temporary extension will provide DHS with an opportunity for further consideration of this rule. DHS also is extending the comment period for this rule for 30 days.
Rising Unemployment May Affect PERM Processing
In a recent meeting between the Department of Labor (DOL) and representatives of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, DOL stated that rising unemployment may affect the processing of certain PERM labor certification applications. DOL is trying to integrate labor market information from various sources, such as WARN Act notices, to determine the availability of U.S. workers in areas affected by significant layoffs. DOL cited the position of Financial Analyst located in New York City as an example of a particular occupation and location where there might be qualified U.S. workers available due to recent financial industry layoffs. DOL may require employers sponsoring PERM applications for such positions to undergo "supervised recruitment" in cases where the available data indicates that there may be available U.S. workers.
Supervised recruitment is a variation of the standard PERM procedure by which applicants for a position that is the subject of a PERM application submit their resumes directly to the DOL for initial review by DOL staff. The DOL forwards to employers the resumes of applicants that it deems qualified for the position. Employers are required to interview the applicants forwarded by DOL to determine whether the applicants are in fact qualified. To date, when DOL has issued supervised recruitment notices, more than half the cases have been withdrawn by the employer.
E-Verify Start Date for Federal Contractors Extended
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that Federal contractors and subcontractors can delay implementation of the use of the Department of Homeland Security's ("DHS") E-Verify system. E-Verify is a government run on-line system that combines DHS data with records from the Social Security Administration to determine whether a new hire is eligible to work in the U.S. The final rule was to have become effective on January 15, 2009, but now will not take effect until May 21, 2009. Once effective, E-Verify will become mandatory for federal contractors with projects exceeding $100,000 and for sub-contractors with projects exceeding $3,000. Contracts for less than $100,000 or for commercially available off-the-shelf items are exempt from this rule. Once E-Verify becomes effective on May 21, 2009, companies awarded a contract with the federal government will be required to enroll in E-Verify within 30 days of the contract award date. They will also need to begin using the E-Verify system to confirm that all of their new hires and their employees directly working on federal contracts are authorized to legally work in the United States
US VISIT Expanded to Include Lawful Permanent Residents
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently published a rule expanding the population of foreign nationals subject to the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program ("US-VISIT") to include U.S. permanent residents. US-VISIT will apply to all permanent residents entering or exiting from an air or seaport. Permanent residents entering through land ports of entry, however, will be required to provide fingerprints only if they are referred to secondary inspection.
Under US-VISIT, foreign nationals entering the United States provide "biometrics" (fingerprints scan and digital photograph) when passing through U.S. immigration. The biometric information collected upon entry is compared to the information collected at the time that the foreign national was originally issued a visa or Permanent Resident Card ("Green Card"). The biometric information is also compared to a criminal records database to confirm that a person is admissible to the United States. Permanent residents with criminal convictions traveling outside of the U.S. should be reminded that they are likely to be detected at entry and they should be prepared to present evidence regarding their admissibility.
more...
devikas81
06-16 10:06 PM
EB2 India..My 140 has been approved in May.07, also got EAD/AP but my employer doesnt want to give me Receipt Notice or Approval Notice of 140... So can i leave this company and join different company...
Pls. advise
Company gave the Receipt Number when they filed 140 but not sure whether that receipt number is belong to my case or not..??
Pls. advise
Company gave the Receipt Number when they filed 140 but not sure whether that receipt number is belong to my case or not..??
hair Hrithik roshan at his sister
patiently_waiting
06-18 07:17 AM
Thanks for your reply.
more...
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 ;)
hot Hrithik Roshan is currently
JazzByTheBay
08-21 11:25 AM
I filed at TSC, transferred to CSC, receipted, transferred to NSC - so not exactly the same situation. Interesting to note your case filed on 7/27/07 is being processed.
Mine was filed on 06/30/2007
RD: 07/02/2007.
USCIS says they're processing by ND ("when it was entered... ").
Signs of life @NSC, nevertheless.... :)
jazz
I got RFE on my case my case is NSC-CSC-NSC Transfer. Got Soft LUD in last 2 days and got RFE mail yesterday night. Waiting to hear back from lawyer about type of RFE. But atleast seems like they had started working on my case and if no RFE it would have been approved.
Mine was filed on 06/30/2007
RD: 07/02/2007.
USCIS says they're processing by ND ("when it was entered... ").
Signs of life @NSC, nevertheless.... :)
jazz
I got RFE on my case my case is NSC-CSC-NSC Transfer. Got Soft LUD in last 2 days and got RFE mail yesterday night. Waiting to hear back from lawyer about type of RFE. But atleast seems like they had started working on my case and if no RFE it would have been approved.
more...
house Hrithik Roshan with his wife
crazyghoda
05-08 10:53 AM
Did they issue your EAD from the time the previous one expired or from the current date. If current date, you'd have lost about 3 months or validity.
Some people I know got EADs from the next day following the expiration of their current EAD. I however got from approval date. Its all so inconsistent.
I got EAD in 2 weeks from filing to receipt of cards in hand.
USCIS has certainly improved a lot.
Some people I know got EADs from the next day following the expiration of their current EAD. I however got from approval date. Its all so inconsistent.
I got EAD in 2 weeks from filing to receipt of cards in hand.
USCIS has certainly improved a lot.
tattoo Hrithik roshan at his sister
neoklaus
11-16 05:19 PM
One friend of mine get his GC in the end of September/07 after filing AOS concurrently with I 140 in a middle of June 2007! His PD was Aug.2004(EB3-ROW)
more...
pictures Khan,Hrithik Roshan
stones
06-30 10:14 PM
RFE means Request For Evidence. For an H-1 to be pending for more than 8 months without an RFE is a bit unusual.
Could you provide a brief chronology of your work history with exact dates so that I can get a clearer idea of whether USCIS is likely to find that you were/are out of legal status?
Here are the details for my case
* � I graduated in Dec. 2007.
* � My OPT has started on December, 2007 (expires on December, 2008).
* � My previous company (A) applied for an H1B for me which starts from October 1st, 2008.
* � I received Notice of H1B approval. (I797A Notice Date June, 2008).
* � H1B is valid from 10/01/2008 to 10/01/2011.
* � I lost my job with Company A on September 18th, 2008.
* � USCIS, Vermont Center received my H1B withdrawal letter from Company A on September 24th, 2008.
* � I requested Company B to transfer my H1B.
* � USCIS received my petition for a transfer on October 28th, 2008.
* � My Transfer petition was pending with company B
Recently I moved to another job with Company C that I mentioned in my earlier post. They sent my H1B transfer application in June 2009.
Thank You, Please let me know if you have any questions.
Could you provide a brief chronology of your work history with exact dates so that I can get a clearer idea of whether USCIS is likely to find that you were/are out of legal status?
Here are the details for my case
* � I graduated in Dec. 2007.
* � My OPT has started on December, 2007 (expires on December, 2008).
* � My previous company (A) applied for an H1B for me which starts from October 1st, 2008.
* � I received Notice of H1B approval. (I797A Notice Date June, 2008).
* � H1B is valid from 10/01/2008 to 10/01/2011.
* � I lost my job with Company A on September 18th, 2008.
* � USCIS, Vermont Center received my H1B withdrawal letter from Company A on September 24th, 2008.
* � I requested Company B to transfer my H1B.
* � USCIS received my petition for a transfer on October 28th, 2008.
* � My Transfer petition was pending with company B
Recently I moved to another job with Company C that I mentioned in my earlier post. They sent my H1B transfer application in June 2009.
Thank You, Please let me know if you have any questions.
dresses hrithik roshan wedding.
coopheal
12-17 03:30 PM
Dates were current till 2005. USCIS and its previous incarnation didn't even finish cases from 2001. Even in 2007 all blow out sale they didnt complete older cases. Also all along they kept on wasting visa as well.
Ideally these would be considered as severe circumstances and USCIS/Congress/Administration would work on getting us some relief because we would make such huge noice for this.
Oh wait.... we are highly skilled GC aspirants.... we won't contribute and won't participate in various IV efforts. We would rather come over here blame core for our situation.
Ideally these would be considered as severe circumstances and USCIS/Congress/Administration would work on getting us some relief because we would make such huge noice for this.
Oh wait.... we are highly skilled GC aspirants.... we won't contribute and won't participate in various IV efforts. We would rather come over here blame core for our situation.
more...
makeup Shetty-Shilpa-Raj wedding
quizzer
11-09 02:37 PM
Recently I have got Denial notice from INS on my I-140 application. All the documents are fine. Just They have mentioned as My Education Qualification is not equivalent to US Education. My Education is B.Sc. Physics and MBA.
Is anybody has got same problem, and if yes Please let me know what to do in this situation.
I am thinking of getting good Education Evaluation from Somebody. But I don't know it�s just happened because of Lawyer. Do I need to go to smart , strong Attorney to do this. OR Apply for new labor again and start the process.
Please suggest me on this.
Thanks
Yogs.
Can you tell me ur dates:
I140 RD
RFE received date?
EB2 or EB3?
Service center?
Thanks
Is anybody has got same problem, and if yes Please let me know what to do in this situation.
I am thinking of getting good Education Evaluation from Somebody. But I don't know it�s just happened because of Lawyer. Do I need to go to smart , strong Attorney to do this. OR Apply for new labor again and start the process.
Please suggest me on this.
Thanks
Yogs.
Can you tell me ur dates:
I140 RD
RFE received date?
EB2 or EB3?
Service center?
Thanks
girlfriend Hrithik Roshan Wedding Photos
skd
07-11 12:16 AM
lets not over do it. There is a thin line between it being tolerated and backfiring
Yeh over doing it can back fire.I don't thing we should this for more than 12th July
Yeh over doing it can back fire.I don't thing we should this for more than 12th July
hairstyles Hrithik roshan at his sister
eager_immi
07-12 10:34 AM
Barking dogs seldom bite. He is just another Lou Dobbs Please ignore him. There is no way he can change the right to cictizenship for children born in the USA. It is next to impossible since it is a part of the constitution. It is very difficult to change something that is linked to the constitution. So, ignore this "BARKING DOG."
Michael chertoff
11-25 12:47 PM
Why should he?
What are you going to give him in return/what is he going to get by helping us?
We need to first learn to help ourselves.
Sorry imh1b,
I take my words back. I did not posted any Indians Pic with President and I Have respect for Indians who reached to this level and can feel the pain of a fellow immigrants. Unfortunatey people like them dont even think they are INdian anymore. thats why I dont see any reason why try to feel happy for them because they just have Indian name.
Now all RED dots are welcome.
MC
What are you going to give him in return/what is he going to get by helping us?
We need to first learn to help ourselves.
Sorry imh1b,
I take my words back. I did not posted any Indians Pic with President and I Have respect for Indians who reached to this level and can feel the pain of a fellow immigrants. Unfortunatey people like them dont even think they are INdian anymore. thats why I dont see any reason why try to feel happy for them because they just have Indian name.
Now all RED dots are welcome.
MC
485Mbe4001
03-20 02:56 PM
instructions from Oh's site
03/20/2009: USCIS to Release Answers to Scope of TARP-Funded Employer Restrictions to H-1B New Hire
AILA has reported the USCIS update on this issue dated 03/20/2009. According to this USCIS release which may be released on its website soon, the people will be either subject to the new law or not subject to the new law:
Those Who Are Subject to the New Law:
Any LCA or petition filed on or after 02/17/2009 by such employer for hire as a new employee regardless of whether he/she is already in H-1B status and regardless of concurrent new employment by such a new employer.
New employment based on a petition approved before Feb. 17, 2009 but the H-1B employee had not actually commenced employment before that date.
Those Who Are Not Subject to the New Law:
H-1B petition to extend the H-1B status (EOS) of a current employee with
the same employer (TARP funded).
H-1B petition seeking to change the status (COS) of a current U.S. work authorized employee to H-1B status with the same employer (TARP funded).
It is a huge relief for those nonimmigrants who are currently working with the TARP employers who need extension of their current H-1B status or change of their nonimmigrant status from other nonimmigrant classification to H-1B, particulay in the FY 2010 H-1B cap filing on or after April 1, 2009. We salute the USCIS leaders for such lenient and liberal interpretation of the new law. For details, people are advised to wait until it is published in the agency's website.
03/20/2009: USCIS to Release Answers to Scope of TARP-Funded Employer Restrictions to H-1B New Hire
AILA has reported the USCIS update on this issue dated 03/20/2009. According to this USCIS release which may be released on its website soon, the people will be either subject to the new law or not subject to the new law:
Those Who Are Subject to the New Law:
Any LCA or petition filed on or after 02/17/2009 by such employer for hire as a new employee regardless of whether he/she is already in H-1B status and regardless of concurrent new employment by such a new employer.
New employment based on a petition approved before Feb. 17, 2009 but the H-1B employee had not actually commenced employment before that date.
Those Who Are Not Subject to the New Law:
H-1B petition to extend the H-1B status (EOS) of a current employee with
the same employer (TARP funded).
H-1B petition seeking to change the status (COS) of a current U.S. work authorized employee to H-1B status with the same employer (TARP funded).
It is a huge relief for those nonimmigrants who are currently working with the TARP employers who need extension of their current H-1B status or change of their nonimmigrant status from other nonimmigrant classification to H-1B, particulay in the FY 2010 H-1B cap filing on or after April 1, 2009. We salute the USCIS leaders for such lenient and liberal interpretation of the new law. For details, people are advised to wait until it is published in the agency's website.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий