immm
08-10 02:04 PM
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/10/ap4009032.html
Associated Press
U.S. Seeks to Curb Illegal ImmigrationBy SUZANNE GAMBOA 08.10.07, 1:34 PM ET
WASHINGTON - A crackdown on illegal immigration will have to go forward without help from Congress, the Bush administration said Friday, asserting that an executive-branch-only approach is better than doing nothing.
Two Cabinet secretaries - Homeland Security's Michael Chertoff and Commerce's Carlos Gutierrez - said they had hoped to have new tools to combat illegal immigration before moving further to cope with the problem. But Congress could not agree on comprehensive legislation.
The officials said they'll rely instead on tools already in their arsenal, some of which are already under way, including a plan to administratively sanction employers who hire illegal immigrants.
At a joint news conference, Chertoff and Gutierrez put the onus on Congress for any consequences that may be suffered by employers as a result of the stepped-up enforcement effort.
"Our hope is that key elements of the Senate bill will see the light of day someday, but until Congress chooses to act we are going to be taking some energetic steps of our own," Chertoff said. The steps will "significantly strengthen our hand with respect to immigration enforcement."
The White House emphasized that its package of enforcement changes was all it could do under existing law - the same law that President Bush has repeatedly called unacceptable.
"Although the Congress has not addressed our broken immigration system by passing comprehensive reform legislation, my administration will continue to take every possible step to build upon the progress already made," Bush said as the changes were announced.
Presidential spokeswoman Dana Perino said Bush has used his executive authority in the past to improve immigration enforcement, such as by strengthening border enforcement. She was pressed on why - if the new changes were such a good idea - Bush hadn't made them already.
Perino, talking to reporters at the Kennebunkport, Maine, seaside home of Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, said the president held off on sweeping administrative action while pushing Congress to pass better legislation to address the matter. With that effort now sidelined, she said "We're going as far as we possibly can without Congress acting."
The administration rolled out a proposed rule that will require employers to fire employees unable to clear up problems with their Social Security numbers 90 days after they've been notified of such discrepancies in so-called "no match letters." Employers who fail to comply will face possible criminal fines and sanctions.
"This regulation lays out a clear pattern for doing the right thing which will afford protection for employers," Chertoff said. The new rule will be effective in 30 days.
Recognizing that the crackdown could hurt some industries - particularly agriculture, where more than half of workers are believed to be undocumented - Gutierrez said the Labor Department will try to make existing temporary seasonal agriculture worker and non-agriculture worker programs easier to use and more efficient.
In addition, Chertoff said he will try to use the department's regulatory authority to raise fines on employers by about 25 percent. Current fines are so modest that some companies consider them a cost of doing business, the agency said in a summary of the new enforcement effort.
The administration also wants to expand the list of international gangs whose members are automatically denied admission to the U.S., reduce processing times for immigrant background checks, and install by the end of the year an exit system so the departure of foreigners from the country can be recorded at airports and seaports.
The Homeland Security Department will ask states to voluntarily share their driver's license photos and records with the agency for use in an employment verification system. The sharing is meant to help employers detect fraudulent licenses.
Some of the initiatives are similar to proposals contained in the recent immigration measure which failed to pass in the Senate, though they are not nearly as sweeping.
....
....
....
He said the billions of dollars that Congress added for immigration enforcement and the administration's "enhanced commitment" on immigration enforcement will secure borders.
But Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said the administration "can talk until they're blue in the face" but "I won't be happy until I see action that's more than just a press conference and words on a piece of paper."
The Senate legislation was opposed by many conservatives who complained that people don't trust their government to start new immigration programs since existing immigration laws are not enforced.
....
....
....
Some lawmakers have kept up efforts to tighten the border. Last month, the Senate added $3 billion to a homeland security bill and devoted the money to U.S.-Mexico border security.
Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed
Associated Press
U.S. Seeks to Curb Illegal ImmigrationBy SUZANNE GAMBOA 08.10.07, 1:34 PM ET
WASHINGTON - A crackdown on illegal immigration will have to go forward without help from Congress, the Bush administration said Friday, asserting that an executive-branch-only approach is better than doing nothing.
Two Cabinet secretaries - Homeland Security's Michael Chertoff and Commerce's Carlos Gutierrez - said they had hoped to have new tools to combat illegal immigration before moving further to cope with the problem. But Congress could not agree on comprehensive legislation.
The officials said they'll rely instead on tools already in their arsenal, some of which are already under way, including a plan to administratively sanction employers who hire illegal immigrants.
At a joint news conference, Chertoff and Gutierrez put the onus on Congress for any consequences that may be suffered by employers as a result of the stepped-up enforcement effort.
"Our hope is that key elements of the Senate bill will see the light of day someday, but until Congress chooses to act we are going to be taking some energetic steps of our own," Chertoff said. The steps will "significantly strengthen our hand with respect to immigration enforcement."
The White House emphasized that its package of enforcement changes was all it could do under existing law - the same law that President Bush has repeatedly called unacceptable.
"Although the Congress has not addressed our broken immigration system by passing comprehensive reform legislation, my administration will continue to take every possible step to build upon the progress already made," Bush said as the changes were announced.
Presidential spokeswoman Dana Perino said Bush has used his executive authority in the past to improve immigration enforcement, such as by strengthening border enforcement. She was pressed on why - if the new changes were such a good idea - Bush hadn't made them already.
Perino, talking to reporters at the Kennebunkport, Maine, seaside home of Bush's father, George H.W. Bush, said the president held off on sweeping administrative action while pushing Congress to pass better legislation to address the matter. With that effort now sidelined, she said "We're going as far as we possibly can without Congress acting."
The administration rolled out a proposed rule that will require employers to fire employees unable to clear up problems with their Social Security numbers 90 days after they've been notified of such discrepancies in so-called "no match letters." Employers who fail to comply will face possible criminal fines and sanctions.
"This regulation lays out a clear pattern for doing the right thing which will afford protection for employers," Chertoff said. The new rule will be effective in 30 days.
Recognizing that the crackdown could hurt some industries - particularly agriculture, where more than half of workers are believed to be undocumented - Gutierrez said the Labor Department will try to make existing temporary seasonal agriculture worker and non-agriculture worker programs easier to use and more efficient.
In addition, Chertoff said he will try to use the department's regulatory authority to raise fines on employers by about 25 percent. Current fines are so modest that some companies consider them a cost of doing business, the agency said in a summary of the new enforcement effort.
The administration also wants to expand the list of international gangs whose members are automatically denied admission to the U.S., reduce processing times for immigrant background checks, and install by the end of the year an exit system so the departure of foreigners from the country can be recorded at airports and seaports.
The Homeland Security Department will ask states to voluntarily share their driver's license photos and records with the agency for use in an employment verification system. The sharing is meant to help employers detect fraudulent licenses.
Some of the initiatives are similar to proposals contained in the recent immigration measure which failed to pass in the Senate, though they are not nearly as sweeping.
....
....
....
He said the billions of dollars that Congress added for immigration enforcement and the administration's "enhanced commitment" on immigration enforcement will secure borders.
But Sen. Chuck Grassley, ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, said the administration "can talk until they're blue in the face" but "I won't be happy until I see action that's more than just a press conference and words on a piece of paper."
The Senate legislation was opposed by many conservatives who complained that people don't trust their government to start new immigration programs since existing immigration laws are not enforced.
....
....
....
Some lawmakers have kept up efforts to tighten the border. Last month, the Senate added $3 billion to a homeland security bill and devoted the money to U.S.-Mexico border security.
Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed
franklin
02-12 05:52 PM
No, experience from current company does not count.
If you have a masters, and the job requires one, it doesn't matter how much experience you have.
From Department of State (http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1323.html)
There are two subgroups within this category:
Professionals holding an advanced degree (beyond a baccalaureate degree), or a baccalaureate degree and at least five years progressive experience in the profession; and
Persons with exceptional ability in the arts, sciences, or business. Exceptional ability means having a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered within the field.
If you have a masters, and the job requires one, it doesn't matter how much experience you have.
From Department of State (http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1323.html)
There are two subgroups within this category:
Professionals holding an advanced degree (beyond a baccalaureate degree), or a baccalaureate degree and at least five years progressive experience in the profession; and
Persons with exceptional ability in the arts, sciences, or business. Exceptional ability means having a degree of expertise significantly above that ordinarily encountered within the field.
GCBy3000
04-28 03:58 PM
Where is the link to this article?
a_to_z_gc
09-12 03:17 PM
Does anyone know what time it may take for FP notices to arrive for guys whose cases were Xfered to CSC?
i got mine in 1 week after the ckecks were cashed and RN mailed.
i got mine in 1 week after the ckecks were cashed and RN mailed.
more...
SertTurk
07-19 08:36 AM
Yes, I checked and we are approved all the way.Just waiting for the consular processing date to get our Green Card.
So can my wife quit her job? I dont understand why she couldnt if our case is already approved...
So can my wife quit her job? I dont understand why she couldnt if our case is already approved...
StuckInTheMuck
03-09 09:50 AM
For those of you waiting on your pending I485 following a successful EB2->EB1 upgrade, it took me a little over a month after my I140(EB1) was approved late Jan, and only 3 weeks after the upgrade request was mailed to USCIS (relevant timeline is in my signature below). I received the "Welcome to USA" notice (for me and my wife) yesterday in my mailbox. Also, there was no prior LUD change or email notification (maybe they want to hit us with the good news, after causing so much heartburn). We had one (medical) RFE last year, because we skipped medicals while rushing our I485 petition to beat July 2 ('07) deadline.
A big THANK YOU shoutout to IV leaders who do the heavy lifting day-in and day-out for others like us, and hearty wishes to those of you waiting for a looooong time to get through this stage (this is my 10th year in US, but I sort of lazed around on my H1 until the fag end, when my friends forced me to shake a butt and initiate my "GC journey" early '06).
[ps. while I hesitate to say it here, I am committing $200 to IV just so others, who like me have benefited from IV's actions (both directly, such as "July-2 reversal", "2-yr EAD", "quick answers to urgent questions" etc, as well as in other intangible ways), make a similar gesture of appreciation after getting their GC]
Cheerio,
Stuck(no longer)InTheMuck
A big THANK YOU shoutout to IV leaders who do the heavy lifting day-in and day-out for others like us, and hearty wishes to those of you waiting for a looooong time to get through this stage (this is my 10th year in US, but I sort of lazed around on my H1 until the fag end, when my friends forced me to shake a butt and initiate my "GC journey" early '06).
[ps. while I hesitate to say it here, I am committing $200 to IV just so others, who like me have benefited from IV's actions (both directly, such as "July-2 reversal", "2-yr EAD", "quick answers to urgent questions" etc, as well as in other intangible ways), make a similar gesture of appreciation after getting their GC]
Cheerio,
Stuck(no longer)InTheMuck
more...
ysnraju
12-05 11:01 PM
In my case I have only one LUD after fingerprinting and then on 30 Nov 2007
again LUD I485 Card production ordered.
same with my spouse also.
_______________________
LUDs on Current Status of I485:
30 Nov 2007 : Card production ordered .
02 Dec.2007 : Card production ordered .
04 Dec 2007 : Approval notice sent.
For Both Self and Spouse.
Labor Filing Date: 27 Feb 2004
Service Center: Nebraska
Category: EB2
Application Mailed: 04 Jun 2007
USCIS Received Date: 05 Jun 2007
USCIS Notice Date: 14 Jun 2007
Filing Type: non-concurrent
I-140 Processing: regular
I-140 Approval Date: March 02, 2007
Fingerprinting Date : 15 Aug 2007
RFE: no
EAD Approval Date: 08 Sep 2007
AP Approval Date: 13 Sep 2007
Nationality: India
again LUD I485 Card production ordered.
same with my spouse also.
_______________________
LUDs on Current Status of I485:
30 Nov 2007 : Card production ordered .
02 Dec.2007 : Card production ordered .
04 Dec 2007 : Approval notice sent.
For Both Self and Spouse.
Labor Filing Date: 27 Feb 2004
Service Center: Nebraska
Category: EB2
Application Mailed: 04 Jun 2007
USCIS Received Date: 05 Jun 2007
USCIS Notice Date: 14 Jun 2007
Filing Type: non-concurrent
I-140 Processing: regular
I-140 Approval Date: March 02, 2007
Fingerprinting Date : 15 Aug 2007
RFE: no
EAD Approval Date: 08 Sep 2007
AP Approval Date: 13 Sep 2007
Nationality: India
chanduv23
09-03 09:51 PM
If it is in one of the three locations listed(Jersey City or Edison or Bridgewater ), I will be able to make it, as I expect to be in the Philadelphia region during that time. Anyone interested in carpooling can mail me at sertasheep AT immigration voice. org
Point of Departure: Malvern, PA
Other points of pickups possible: Exton/Frazer, PA; King of Prussia, PA;
Can accomodate upto 4 more people in my vehicle
Great - thanks for offering car pool options. Venue will be finalised soon.
Point of Departure: Malvern, PA
Other points of pickups possible: Exton/Frazer, PA; King of Prussia, PA;
Can accomodate upto 4 more people in my vehicle
Great - thanks for offering car pool options. Venue will be finalised soon.
more...
krish_krish
01-05 12:27 PM
Folks
Is anyone has done adjustment of status from B2 to H1.
My friend is in US with 10 yrs multiple entry visa, and he likes to do adjustment of status. Any advice.
Thanks
Is anyone has done adjustment of status from B2 to H1.
My friend is in US with 10 yrs multiple entry visa, and he likes to do adjustment of status. Any advice.
Thanks
highskies26
08-15 12:07 AM
+2003 11
2004 37
2005 49
2006 35
Total 132
draw your own conclusions
Seems right to me... I think a lot of 2004-2005 applicants are also getting approved.
BTW, I am also a 2006 applicant and July 2nd filer but still waiting... :(
2004 37
2005 49
2006 35
Total 132
draw your own conclusions
Seems right to me... I think a lot of 2004-2005 applicants are also getting approved.
BTW, I am also a 2006 applicant and July 2nd filer but still waiting... :(
more...
jonty_11
07-31 03:50 PM
Last week, I submitted my documents to my lawyer but until now I haven't received any confirmation from my employer yet if my application has been filed already. We are not allowed to contact our lawyer directly so I'm just relying on my employer about this. I'm quite concerned coz there's no way for me to find out if they have filed it or not.
Is there a way? Please help me please. Thank you
This is a subjective ques....depends on ur relations with ur employer...
Try cajoling them..if its pop-shop consulting firm , he wont budge...
Try asking other employees...if their's was filed and if they got an yhconfirmation?
Is there a way? Please help me please. Thank you
This is a subjective ques....depends on ur relations with ur employer...
Try cajoling them..if its pop-shop consulting firm , he wont budge...
Try asking other employees...if their's was filed and if they got an yhconfirmation?
skynet2500
11-19 02:45 PM
Gurus, can you please let me know your opinion on the below item? thanks a lot.
I am thinking about having our parents visit us next year. I am planning to have them here for about 185 days - more than the usual 180 days. Do you think there would be any kind of problem with getting the I-94 at the port of entry if we have the tickets booked? Did any do this?
I am thinking about having our parents visit us next year. I am planning to have them here for about 185 days - more than the usual 180 days. Do you think there would be any kind of problem with getting the I-94 at the port of entry if we have the tickets booked? Did any do this?
more...
franklin
07-21 08:33 PM
I did a very similar thing.
My h1b expires in sept 07, and an extension was applied in april 07. My PD became current in June, and I applied for AOS with AP and EAD.
Approval for my H1B extension came through mid June (after AOS application) and only for 1 year (as opposed to 3 if my PD was not current).
I now have AP approval and EAD is still pending, but I'm planning on using these to travel with when fully realized.
My h1b expires in sept 07, and an extension was applied in april 07. My PD became current in June, and I applied for AOS with AP and EAD.
Approval for my H1B extension came through mid June (after AOS application) and only for 1 year (as opposed to 3 if my PD was not current).
I now have AP approval and EAD is still pending, but I'm planning on using these to travel with when fully realized.
Ann Ruben
07-22 09:55 PM
I have also had success using just the online printout, but to be safe, you should make a Freedom of Information Act request for a copy of the I-140 approval notice. This is relatively easy to do-just follow the instructions on the USCiS website USCIS - Freedom of Information and Privacy Act (FOIA) (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a 1RCRD&vgnextoid=34139c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD ).
I do not think that the denial of a petition for extension of H-1B status, in and of itself, would effect your pending I-485.
I do not think that the denial of a petition for extension of H-1B status, in and of itself, would effect your pending I-485.
more...
msp1976
12-22 12:59 PM
It is required of all irrespective of citizenship status to respond to a Jury summons. Not responding is considered contempt of court. The court can issue an arrest warrant for you..Always respond to the Jury summons....
Joey Foley
November 21st, 2005, 08:03 PM
Heck no I don't mind! By the way Steve these were taken at The Patio.
I still wish I would of got that a little bit better in focus.
Anyway, I'm not very good with Photoshop (I own Photoshop CS2), but I usually use Corel Paint Shop Pro X. But lately I've been using Picasa2.
(http://picasa.google.com/index.html)
It just seems a lot faster the way the program is set up.
I need to learn Photoshop (badly). I just hadn't had time.
Thanks for the help guys, it is VERY much appreciated.
I still wish I would of got that a little bit better in focus.
Anyway, I'm not very good with Photoshop (I own Photoshop CS2), but I usually use Corel Paint Shop Pro X. But lately I've been using Picasa2.
(http://picasa.google.com/index.html)
It just seems a lot faster the way the program is set up.
I need to learn Photoshop (badly). I just hadn't had time.
Thanks for the help guys, it is VERY much appreciated.
more...
gc28262
07-30 07:07 AM
Success Story: Showing a Valid Employer-Employee Relationship (http://shusterman.com/newsletterusimmigrationaugust2010.html#5)
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
As reported in a previous newsletter, a January 8, 2010 USCIS memo entitled "Determining Employer-Employee Relationship for Adjudication of H-1B Petitions, Including Third-Party Site Placements" has made it more difficult, and sometimes impossible, for IT consulting firms who hire professionals to work at third-party worksites to obtain H-1B status on their behalf.
The stated purpose of the memo by Donald Neufeld, Associate Director of Service Center Operations, is "to provide guidance, in the context of H-1B petitions, on the requirement that the petitioner establish that an employer- employee relationship exists and will continue to exist with the beneficiary throughout the duration of the requested H-1B validity period."
The memo puts particular focus on determining if the employer has demonstrated that it has a "sufficient level of control over the employee." See our H-1B Visa Guide for additional information.
We represent many IT consulting companies, some of which place temporary H-1B workers at client-sites as is common in the industry. In March 2010, we helped one of our corporate clients prepare and file an H-1B extension on behalf of a Senior Systems Administrator who had been working for the same employer since June 2009 in H-1B status authorized by USCIS.
Approximately 3 weeks after the H-1B extension was filed, the USCIS issued a 4-page Request for Evidence (RFE) essentially asking for a laundry list of documents, including Tax Returns of both the petitioner and beneficiary, quarterly wage statements, contracts, photographs of the worksite, etc. to demonstrate that a valid employer-employee relationship existed and would continue to exist for the full duration of the requested H-1B extension of stay. The RFE actually asked for evidence that the employer-employee relationship had existed since the original H-1B approval had been issued (some 9 months before the H-1B extension).
Fortunately, we had forewarned our client of the issues raised by the January 2010 memo and the company was able to provide us with much, if not all, of the requested evidence, including copies of contracts it had in place with the company where the employee was assigned. The contract included language that we brought to the Service's attention stating:
"Contractor shall have sole responsibility to recruit, interview, test, select, hire, manage, train, counsel, discipline, review, evaluate, set pay rates(including the classification of Contractor Personnel as exempt or non-exempt), and terminate the persons who provide the Services hereunder."
and
"On-site Contractor Personnel will be required to acknowledge that they are not employees of CLIENT COMPANY to agree to dispute resolution procedures regarding any dispute they may have concerning their employment by Contractor or concerning their employment status."
We were able to further demonstrate the petitioner's supervision of the employee by showing the hierarchal structure of the organization and evidence that the company had control over the day-to-day activities of the employee through regular service and progress reports.
This case shows the importance of preparing in advance for any possible issues as most RFEs issued by USCIS only allow the petitioner 30 days in which to respond. Because we had anticipated the issues raised in the Neufeld memo, we were able to provide sufficient evidence of the employer-employee relationship to satisfy the USCIS's concerns. This resulted in an H-1B approval notice being issued for our client a short time after our response to the RFE was filed.
In this era of increased scrutiny by the USCIS of most types of petitions, we would not suggest any consulting or staffing agency even consider filing an H- 1B petition if it does not have sufficient evidence of the existence of the employer-employee relationship, including signed contracts between the petitioner and the end-client. It is important to note that in many cases similar to this, the USCIS will only approve the H-1B petition for the duration of the contract between the employer and the end-client. Read more of our Immigration Success Stories.
sk.aggarwal
03-16 06:01 AM
When you get insurance from employer, you pay with pretax money. With online policy you will have to pay with taxed money. Unless it is atleast 30% cheaper than one offerd by employer, I will not go with it. You may be able to get tax deduction later, but it has limits
checklaw
07-19 11:31 AM
Enjoy! :) Only 5 files max allowed. Please follow up the next post.
Thanks. Very informative too.
Thanks. Very informative too.
pady
06-18 03:38 PM
someone please explain me how complete agreement works. I am working for the client through the main vendor who has a noncompete agreement with my employer (This is signed by my employer, not me). Now I am planning to leave my employer but the client is interested keeping me in the project through another vendor. Can someone explain me if it is possible?
Since the Noncompete is between my employer and the vendor, how am I responsible since I didn't sign anything? Don't laugh, may be I am ignorant
Since the Noncompete is between my employer and the vendor, how am I responsible since I didn't sign anything? Don't laugh, may be I am ignorant
gc28262
11-05 11:25 AM
All,
I am starting this thread to track I-485 applications that did not receive receipt notices yet after filing in July-August
I filed on August 15th
No receipt notice yet as of Nov, 5, 2007
Anybody else in similar situation ?
I am starting this thread to track I-485 applications that did not receive receipt notices yet after filing in July-August
I filed on August 15th
No receipt notice yet as of Nov, 5, 2007
Anybody else in similar situation ?
No comments:
Post a Comment