mbartosik
02-20 11:01 AM
MRSR:
there have been rumors of EB2 India moving out of U.
Any notes with VB may be more important than the actual movement. So whether it is worth depends on the PDs.
I interfiled (ROW) in December, I'm not sure if they applied it.
When I spoke with an IO they seemed clueless about interfiling, thinking that new I485 had to be filed -- plain wrong. So be prepared to check up on them a month after filing. They should be able to tell you if the I140 is assigned to a I485. For me it is academic now because as of March I'll be within PD for EB3 or EB2.
there have been rumors of EB2 India moving out of U.
Any notes with VB may be more important than the actual movement. So whether it is worth depends on the PDs.
I interfiled (ROW) in December, I'm not sure if they applied it.
When I spoke with an IO they seemed clueless about interfiling, thinking that new I485 had to be filed -- plain wrong. So be prepared to check up on them a month after filing. They should be able to tell you if the I140 is assigned to a I485. For me it is academic now because as of March I'll be within PD for EB3 or EB2.
wallpaper quotes on pictures tumblr
mnq1979
09-21 07:38 AM
Hi Guys,
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Thanks.
I am sorry i cannot answer ur question because i m not an expert in this broken immigration process but i have a question.
Can you tell if this is ur 1st RFE on I485 or did u receive any prior RFE's also?
Did ur wife also applied for the I485 with you or u applied alone?
thanks
I am in tough spot. I was laid off from my GC sponsoring employer (A) in 2008 and joined another employer B . I did not do a AC21 notification. My dates are current and now I received an RFE to provide employment letter from current employer. The exact words of RFE are as follows:
"Submit a letter of employment attesting to applicant's current employment. This letter should be written on the company's official letterhead, citing the date the applicant began working, if a permanent full time position, the position offered, the position the applicant is currently working and the salary offered. Include corroborating evidence such as recent pay stubs, income tax returns, with all W2s or other evidence as appropriate. "
Now I am not working for original GC employer. I don't have a problem providing above from my current employer B. But whether the EVL should also mention that I am not working for GC sponsoring employer and that my current employers job profile is in same classification as previous based on AC21. Do I mention about the AC21 also in the letter? My current employer's attorneys are not that great but my current employer only wants me to use their own attorney.
Now here is the situation:
I have a job offer from another employer (Employer C) and they are in the middle of doing a H-1 transfer. In fact by tomorrow they will file the H1 paperwork. Now I don't know whether I should provide the letter from my potential new employer C . In that case, I won't be able to provide W2 or pay stubs until I join them. I have an opportunity to use my own attorney here (like murthy, Ron Gothcer..)
OR
should I provide a letter from my current employer using their attorneys and whether or not I should mention about AC21 in the employment letter.
Thanks.
I am sorry i cannot answer ur question because i m not an expert in this broken immigration process but i have a question.
Can you tell if this is ur 1st RFE on I485 or did u receive any prior RFE's also?
Did ur wife also applied for the I485 with you or u applied alone?
thanks
GoneSouth
03-14 05:48 PM
You can only file a second LC for the same employee at the same company, if the new position is "substantially different" from the old position. [ I am happy to report, that I just received my PERM approval for doing exactly this :) ]
If your LC was filed via PERM and approved, you do not need to refile just because you lost the receipt. If you're filing an H1-B renewal, a screen shot / printout of the PERM app, showing the case #, is sufficient. If you're filing an I-140, there's a check box on the I-140 to indicate that USCIS should request a PERM approval receipt directly from DoL.
- gs
If your LC was filed via PERM and approved, you do not need to refile just because you lost the receipt. If you're filing an H1-B renewal, a screen shot / printout of the PERM app, showing the case #, is sufficient. If you're filing an I-140, there's a check box on the I-140 to indicate that USCIS should request a PERM approval receipt directly from DoL.
- gs
2011 Quotes on Tumblr about:
gc_mania_03
10-01 11:14 AM
Add me in..
more...
desi3933
03-27 04:07 PM
.....
New employer says that i can't work for him till I94 accepts. So he is suggesting me togo India and get Visa stamped.
Your employer is right. You will new H-1B visa stamp and re-entry into USA to get back H-1B status.
As i can work only 240 days from my I94 expiry date, i can't work after July 2010 so am planning to go to India to attend the embassy as soon as possible.
....
Incorrect!
Read this
www.uscis.gov/files/article/C1eng.pdf
Look for "What if I file on time but USCIS doesn�t make a decision before my I-94 expires?"
_________________
Not a legal advice.
New employer says that i can't work for him till I94 accepts. So he is suggesting me togo India and get Visa stamped.
Your employer is right. You will new H-1B visa stamp and re-entry into USA to get back H-1B status.
As i can work only 240 days from my I94 expiry date, i can't work after July 2010 so am planning to go to India to attend the embassy as soon as possible.
....
Incorrect!
Read this
www.uscis.gov/files/article/C1eng.pdf
Look for "What if I file on time but USCIS doesn�t make a decision before my I-94 expires?"
_________________
Not a legal advice.
Gravitation
03-27 10:33 PM
... "Its the Journey that matters, not the destination"
Every tried to catch the last bus home on a rainy evening?
Every tried to catch the last bus home on a rainy evening?
more...
rustum
10-10 12:35 AM
Application reached Nebraska on 27th July. Collected by R williams.
Got receipts for 485, 765 adn 131 from California service center(WAC XXXX).
Received Date: 27th July.
Notice date: 28th Sep.
140 is pending at Nebraska. Applied on 25th May 2007.
Got receipts for 485, 765 adn 131 from California service center(WAC XXXX).
Received Date: 27th July.
Notice date: 28th Sep.
140 is pending at Nebraska. Applied on 25th May 2007.
2010 quotes on tumblr.
Munna Bhai
07-12 10:21 AM
any more help??
more...
Ψ
06-11 06:12 PM
lol wait till u see what i come up wit.
hope it would be better than urs VD.
hope it would be better than urs VD.
hair i love you quotes tumblr.
gc_bulgaria
10-09 06:26 PM
This is very useful information. So it is the Job Classification code that is important right??
Thats my understanding as well. The information on salary is a little confusing though...
Thats my understanding as well. The information on salary is a little confusing though...
more...
Euclid
02-11 06:24 PM
Hi Prashanthi,
Thank you for your reply.
The receipt is not for an "initial or renewal" (OPT) EAD. It is for the "replacement for a lost (OPT) EAD".
I do have the approval notice in hand. It the actual OPT EAD that is lost.
Note: A receipt for an application for an initial or renewal USCIS
Employment Authorization Document (EAD) filed on a Form I-765,
Application for Employment Authorization, is not acceptable for Form
I-9 verification purposes.
Also for immigration purposes you cannot start working until you have the approval in-hand.
Thank you for your reply.
The receipt is not for an "initial or renewal" (OPT) EAD. It is for the "replacement for a lost (OPT) EAD".
I do have the approval notice in hand. It the actual OPT EAD that is lost.
Note: A receipt for an application for an initial or renewal USCIS
Employment Authorization Document (EAD) filed on a Form I-765,
Application for Employment Authorization, is not acceptable for Form
I-9 verification purposes.
Also for immigration purposes you cannot start working until you have the approval in-hand.
hot 2011 quotes on pictures tumblr
leoindiano
06-29 09:28 AM
Lawyer said they filed on 21st and waiting on the decision. Hope my application is not effected.
more...
house quotes on pictures tumblr.
i99
09-19 12:39 PM
... this means nothing. it might mean "none of the above" in a multiple choice situation and might be put by mistake. might be good to have it corrected though. :rolleyes:
--a person who does not know what happened to own application at all. :)
--a person who does not know what happened to own application at all. :)
tattoo Tumblr love quotes
GCwaitforever
04-11 03:13 PM
Edit your profile. Then info appears in the tracker automatically.
more...
pictures quotes i love lt;3 follow me on
LostInGCProcess
03-07 04:32 PM
Hello all,
I filed for EAD renewal at TSC in early Jan 11. My current EAD expires end of April. I am just wondering how long TSC is currently taking to renew EADs.
Any experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
It took me about 95 days, from start to finish.
I filed for EAD renewal at TSC in early Jan 11. My current EAD expires end of April. I am just wondering how long TSC is currently taking to renew EADs.
Any experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
It took me about 95 days, from start to finish.
dresses sad love quotes tumblr. cute love quotes or sayings
FinalGC
09-15 11:50 AM
How about sending a letter to the President, using the above suggested structure....asking him to pressurize the congressmen to pass 5822 from the House.......so that he can sign that into law before Nov 4 elections....
more...
makeup love quotes on tumblr
bugmenot
07-21 08:02 PM
Damn I am going to be pissed off if he gets a green card before I do.
beckham wud have got the o-1 visa for extraordinary aliens and would apply for a eb1 GC whc needs no LC or anything of that sort, all and above he would get his GC done in about a year or less time
beckham wud have got the o-1 visa for extraordinary aliens and would apply for a eb1 GC whc needs no LC or anything of that sort, all and above he would get his GC done in about a year or less time
girlfriend quotes on pictures tumblr.
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
hairstyles love quotes on tumblr. tagged
BornConfused
07-03 10:21 AM
u talk like a kid in class II.
In the second grade you mean? And yet you're the one using "u" and in lower case letter. Chill and use your sense of humor if you have one.
In the second grade you mean? And yet you're the one using "u" and in lower case letter. Chill and use your sense of humor if you have one.
amitjoey
06-18 11:43 AM
can you guys suggest how to proceed with my cases... where i am totally screwed up.
When I started to work in usa I was working for an employer in NJ after an year I got a better job offer and started to work for another employer(for whom I have been working for last 2 years).
Last Month I applied for my I140 with current employer work experience letter and co-worker letter (of my ex-employer in NJ). Now that I have an RFE for my I140 requesting me to send employer experience letter of my ex-employer. When I called up my ex-employer he was rude to me and firmly denied to provide any letter and hanged up the phone. Due to this RFE I am not able to proceed with my I485. Please let me know how to proceed...Thanking you all in advance.
Yes, Please work on getting the letter and replying to the RFE, But that should not stop you from filing I-485. Pending I-140 is okay for I-485.
When I started to work in usa I was working for an employer in NJ after an year I got a better job offer and started to work for another employer(for whom I have been working for last 2 years).
Last Month I applied for my I140 with current employer work experience letter and co-worker letter (of my ex-employer in NJ). Now that I have an RFE for my I140 requesting me to send employer experience letter of my ex-employer. When I called up my ex-employer he was rude to me and firmly denied to provide any letter and hanged up the phone. Due to this RFE I am not able to proceed with my I485. Please let me know how to proceed...Thanking you all in advance.
Yes, Please work on getting the letter and replying to the RFE, But that should not stop you from filing I-485. Pending I-140 is okay for I-485.
RiaonH4
01-18 10:30 AM
There is a add on Sulekha which says u can apply Canadian Citizenship if u are on H1/F1/L1 and u need not move to Canada and stay and work in US. Has someone tried this or have any comments on this idea ?
Add says -->
Attention H1B, F1s, L1s
To difficult to get USA green Card?
Canadian Green Card helps you stay in USA Legally
You do not need to move to Canada
Get a Canadian Green card as a Back-up
Linky --> http://www.maple-immigration.com/ad_index_en.htm
:confused:
Ria
Add says -->
Attention H1B, F1s, L1s
To difficult to get USA green Card?
Canadian Green Card helps you stay in USA Legally
You do not need to move to Canada
Get a Canadian Green card as a Back-up
Linky --> http://www.maple-immigration.com/ad_index_en.htm
:confused:
Ria