jasmin45
07-23 08:11 PM
I am working for company A under H1-B visa and my PERM was approved early this year and my I-140 (EB2) is pending. I summitted I-485 last week since the PD is current again. Almost the same time, I moved to another department in the same company because of company reconstruction. The job seems to be having different requirements(>50% difference). I have a couple of questions:
1. Within how long I need to inform my company lawyer and then USCIS that my job changed within the same company?
2. What are the concequences if I do not inform my company laywer about my job change? Will USCIS know this in the future and deny my I-140 and I-485?
3. Will my pending I-140 get denied since my job requirement changed (if my company lawyer inform USICS)?
4. What are the possible outcomes for my I-485 under this job change situation?
5. Is that possible that I just stay there as nothing happened and wait for USCIS response to my I-140 and I-485?
6. What can be done in order to avoid a new PERM and new I-140? I really don't want to start all over again since who knows what the PD will be after Oct. this year...
Job requirement change may have negative effect on I-140. Because the 140 is based on approved labor and for labor certification, your company must have advertised the job requirements. Please consult a good lawyer for advise and he will come up with options if possible at all.
1. Within how long I need to inform my company lawyer and then USCIS that my job changed within the same company?
2. What are the concequences if I do not inform my company laywer about my job change? Will USCIS know this in the future and deny my I-140 and I-485?
3. Will my pending I-140 get denied since my job requirement changed (if my company lawyer inform USICS)?
4. What are the possible outcomes for my I-485 under this job change situation?
5. Is that possible that I just stay there as nothing happened and wait for USCIS response to my I-140 and I-485?
6. What can be done in order to avoid a new PERM and new I-140? I really don't want to start all over again since who knows what the PD will be after Oct. this year...
Job requirement change may have negative effect on I-140. Because the 140 is based on approved labor and for labor certification, your company must have advertised the job requirements. Please consult a good lawyer for advise and he will come up with options if possible at all.
wallpaper Nicki Minaj Cover Art. A shot
Templarian
08-19 10:04 AM
^Good Idea
First Attempt (hopefully someone with better detail can make it look nice):
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/8536/orlysr5.gif
First Attempt (hopefully someone with better detail can make it look nice):
http://img393.imageshack.us/img393/8536/orlysr5.gif
bijualex29
07-31 08:57 PM
>>>>
2011 quot;NICKI MINAJquot;
Kitiara
08-16 04:59 AM
Another handy use of Break Apart is to break apart a .jpg or gif file. This does a kinda conversion on it, to make it seem as if it had been drawn with fills in Flash.
Sometimes the quality is reduced, sometimes isn't. Really it depends on the complexity of the photo. But it can also help to reduce your file size. :)
Sometimes the quality is reduced, sometimes isn't. Really it depends on the complexity of the photo. But it can also help to reduce your file size. :)
more...
danu2007
07-13 04:21 PM
So far only 1327 members signed the petition. This needs around 5000 signatures.
This will show the number of filed I-485 applications to Chertoff..Please sign..
--------------------------------------------------
Please sign your petition and give support to Congresswoman Lofgren's requests from her letter dated July 9th, 2007. Doing so is the only way we can begin to restore fairness to this process.
http://www.immigrantslist.org/page/petition/Chertoff
-----------------------------------------------------
This will show the number of filed I-485 applications to Chertoff..Please sign..
--------------------------------------------------
Please sign your petition and give support to Congresswoman Lofgren's requests from her letter dated July 9th, 2007. Doing so is the only way we can begin to restore fairness to this process.
http://www.immigrantslist.org/page/petition/Chertoff
-----------------------------------------------------
jsb
12-17 09:41 AM
A million dollar question is : What order are they following ? I am having PD of April 14th , 2004. Still waiting.
They definitely are not working in PD order. PD is only used to skip a case if not due. They seem to work in order of paper filed cases, which are perhaps stacked in order they physically receive them (which is generally a date a few days prior to ND). That's what they mean when they claim "we process cased in order we receive them".
With above logic, your case was "received" in CSC in July08. Therefore, they are unlikely to look at it until they look those received prior to July'08. This is bad management, but that's how they seem to work. That also proves as to why they ask/get wider PD openings as year end nears (so that they don't have to skip too many cases when they pick cases one after another in order they physically received them).
They definitely are not working in PD order. PD is only used to skip a case if not due. They seem to work in order of paper filed cases, which are perhaps stacked in order they physically receive them (which is generally a date a few days prior to ND). That's what they mean when they claim "we process cased in order we receive them".
With above logic, your case was "received" in CSC in July08. Therefore, they are unlikely to look at it until they look those received prior to July'08. This is bad management, but that's how they seem to work. That also proves as to why they ask/get wider PD openings as year end nears (so that they don't have to skip too many cases when they pick cases one after another in order they physically received them).
more...
ilwaiting
04-28 02:26 PM
Gave my contribution
2010 Nicki Minaj V Magazine Cover
sodh
01-22 07:25 PM
I wish IV core members the best in whatever they do, any tiny relief will be a huge acheivement and that is what the IV core members are fightining for against all odds to get us some relief so please do not let them down.
more...
new_horizon
12-03 01:27 PM
hope you are not talking about quixtar/amway or reliv business?
hair Nicki Minaj takes us behind
raysaikat
06-14 11:50 AM
Thank you! raysaikat
So it is just like applying a new H1 visa, but include a copy of my current approved H1 visa and maybe some pay checks from my current employer?
There is nothing called "H1-B transfer". It is always a new petition by the new employer. The key is that since you have been counted once, you should not be counted again. For that you give your new employer your current H1-B approval notice (I-797) which is the proof that you have been counted. The new employer (or his/her lawyer) will use that information appropriately. The new H1-B must also start on or after Oct 1, 2008.
So it is just like applying a new H1 visa, but include a copy of my current approved H1 visa and maybe some pay checks from my current employer?
There is nothing called "H1-B transfer". It is always a new petition by the new employer. The key is that since you have been counted once, you should not be counted again. For that you give your new employer your current H1-B approval notice (I-797) which is the proof that you have been counted. The new employer (or his/her lawyer) will use that information appropriately. The new H1-B must also start on or after Oct 1, 2008.
more...
tdasara
02-08 10:02 AM
Dude
No US educated foreign student qualifies for L1 visa. Microsoft/Intel/Sun are more interested in recruiting foreign students with PhD/MS from US Universities.
Ever checked out a career fair in a big US School?
No US educated foreign student qualifies for L1 visa. Microsoft/Intel/Sun are more interested in recruiting foreign students with PhD/MS from US Universities.
Ever checked out a career fair in a big US School?
hot cover shoot that Nicki
sk.aggarwal
04-07 09:37 AM
I depends on you, how much risk you want to take ... I can tell what happened with me ....
Initially, I was working of a small consulting company and left them after few months. Although, there was nothing in the contract prohibiting me from doing this. But they filled a lawsuit against me for all fake things. I had to hire an attorney to defend myself, who was quite expensive. In end, I was forced to settle after paying like 10K, cost of lawsuit would have been huge. BTW, I did consult an attorney before leaving and there was nothing I did, which was not legal. But ultimately it just didn't make a sense to continue fighting it and spending 15-20K in attorney fees.
I do not intend to scare you or suggest if you should go ahead or not. Just that make sure you cover yourself
Initially, I was working of a small consulting company and left them after few months. Although, there was nothing in the contract prohibiting me from doing this. But they filled a lawsuit against me for all fake things. I had to hire an attorney to defend myself, who was quite expensive. In end, I was forced to settle after paying like 10K, cost of lawsuit would have been huge. BTW, I did consult an attorney before leaving and there was nothing I did, which was not legal. But ultimately it just didn't make a sense to continue fighting it and spending 15-20K in attorney fees.
I do not intend to scare you or suggest if you should go ahead or not. Just that make sure you cover yourself
more...
house mention nicki minaj covers
wenkatesh
04-20 09:45 PM
Hi,
Application sent on 7-Apr-10
Receipt date- 8-Apr-10
Status as of yesterday- Initial Review
When I checked status today, it had changed to Acceptance and the receipt date changed to 16-Apr
I am terribly confused and anxious. What is happening?
Application sent on 7-Apr-10
Receipt date- 8-Apr-10
Status as of yesterday- Initial Review
When I checked status today, it had changed to Acceptance and the receipt date changed to 16-Apr
I am terribly confused and anxious. What is happening?
tattoo Nicki Minaj x Vibe Magazine
tabaching
10-22 09:34 AM
Hey kumarc123,
Thank you.
Actually, there is a stamp in the passport at the time of entry to US (Dec 2007). And they can verify that. That's why we entered Dec 2007 as the last entry date in I-485 form. It's just that I-94 has the old date (Feb 2005). We're hoping this won't cause any trouble during the interview.
Hope I didn't confuse you.
Thank you.
Actually, there is a stamp in the passport at the time of entry to US (Dec 2007). And they can verify that. That's why we entered Dec 2007 as the last entry date in I-485 form. It's just that I-94 has the old date (Feb 2005). We're hoping this won't cause any trouble during the interview.
Hope I didn't confuse you.
more...
pictures Nicki Minaj recently did a
GCard_Dream
07-28 04:37 PM
--
Make sure that everyone in the family who has a pendng 485 has the travel document (AP); otherwise 485 will be considered abandoned.
-- Is this really true? I have heard different opinions on this. I have also heard that once you use your travel doc, you become a parole and the H4/H1 status is no longer valid. I have the luxury to use both H4 or travel doc but I would rather use H4 to avoid entering as a parole.
If you are traveling by road and the trip is < 30 days, just use Automatic visa revalidation and do not surrender I 94 and come back on the old I 94.
-- This doesn't apply to me because I already have a valid visa stamp in the passport so visa revalidation shouldn't be necessary. All I am trying to figure out is whether to show the H4 or the travel doc at POE.
If you are travelling by air or if trip is > 30 days, surrender I 94 and you can enter any way (on H1/H4 or AP does not matter as long as everyone HAS an AP).
Good Luck with your trip.
Make sure that everyone in the family who has a pendng 485 has the travel document (AP); otherwise 485 will be considered abandoned.
-- Is this really true? I have heard different opinions on this. I have also heard that once you use your travel doc, you become a parole and the H4/H1 status is no longer valid. I have the luxury to use both H4 or travel doc but I would rather use H4 to avoid entering as a parole.
If you are traveling by road and the trip is < 30 days, just use Automatic visa revalidation and do not surrender I 94 and come back on the old I 94.
-- This doesn't apply to me because I already have a valid visa stamp in the passport so visa revalidation shouldn't be necessary. All I am trying to figure out is whether to show the H4 or the travel doc at POE.
If you are travelling by air or if trip is > 30 days, surrender I 94 and you can enter any way (on H1/H4 or AP does not matter as long as everyone HAS an AP).
Good Luck with your trip.
dresses quot;Nicki Minaj Cover Shoot For
netsavvy
03-28 08:12 PM
This is a very good point.
Given that the 5/6 year timeframe is being already mentioned for illegal immigrants, it should be easy to have this extended for all immigrants who qualify as of the date of implementation of this bill.
Given that the 5/6 year timeframe is being already mentioned for illegal immigrants, it should be easy to have this extended for all immigrants who qualify as of the date of implementation of this bill.
more...
makeup Her bestie Nicki Minaj is on
iv_only_hope
09-30 03:13 PM
There is some potential good news on the horizon. DHS just published a notice (http://www.regulations.gov/fdmspubli...0000648072c5eb) that they intend to consolidate three of ancient CIS electronic record systems into a new database. Hopefully, this new database will yield the data the Visa Office needs.
Right now, the CIS does not have any comprehensive database that shows how many AOS cases are pending by preference classification, priority date, and country of chargeability. The new database that is supposed to become operational within the next ten days contains information gathered from the many independent CIS databases. Supposedly, this new database will show all of this information.
Once the CIS is able to provide the State Department with this information, the Visa Office will then (for the first time) have accurate information as to the actual demand for immigrant visas. They will then be able to make more accurate adjustments to the cutoff dates in the Visa Bulletin. For some time now, they have been flying blind without accurate information.
CREDIT:RON GOTCHER
Right now, the CIS does not have any comprehensive database that shows how many AOS cases are pending by preference classification, priority date, and country of chargeability. The new database that is supposed to become operational within the next ten days contains information gathered from the many independent CIS databases. Supposedly, this new database will show all of this information.
Once the CIS is able to provide the State Department with this information, the Visa Office will then (for the first time) have accurate information as to the actual demand for immigrant visas. They will then be able to make more accurate adjustments to the cutoff dates in the Visa Bulletin. For some time now, they have been flying blind without accurate information.
CREDIT:RON GOTCHER
girlfriend Nicki Minaj King Magazine
gc28262
07-16 07:30 AM
Murthy Bulletin
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
VOL. XVI, no. 29; Jul 2010, week 3
Posted : 16.Jul.2010
MurthyDotCom : MurthyBulletin (http://murthy.com/bulletin.html)
Many MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers have inquired about whatever happened to those H1B workers who encountered problems at the Newark, New Jersey port of entry (POE) in January 2010. The incidents in Newark struck fear in the hearts of many H1B foreign nationals who needed or wanted to travel abroad or return to the United States from abroad. This is the success story of one such traveler, who was denied entry at the Newark POE, and was banned at the POE from returning to the United States for five years under an order of expedited removal. He came to the Murthy Law Firm for help after he had returned to his home country under the order of expedited removal. This client of our firm has generously allowed us to share his success story with MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers. Information about a client or a case is never reported to our readers without consent of the client.
Background of Denial of Entry to the U.S. in January 2010
The problems of this individual were similar to those described in our January 14, 2010 NewsFlash entitled, Note to H1Bs Traveling to the U.S. and Working for Consulting Companies. The airport at issue was Newark International Airport in New Jersey. The traveler was returning to the U.S. and, rather than the routine verification of documents and basic information, he was questioned in detail about his employment. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers questioned him regarding the validity of his H1B employment, the identity of his employer's customers, and whether or not his employer had sufficient work for him. As explained below, the CBP was not satisfied with the information it gathered and, ultimately, exercised its authority to issue an expedited removal order against the foreign national, who became a client of the Murthy Law Firm after he was sent back to India.
Travel Outside of the United States
The foreign national had traveled outside of the United States and returned to his home country to get married. He carried with him a letter from his H1B employer, verifying that he would resume his H1B employment upon his return to the U.S. After his wedding celebration, his wife applied for an H-4 dependent visa through a U.S. consulate in the couple's home country. They presented the employer's letter to the consular office in support of the H-4 visa application. The consulate was satisfied with the evidence presented, and issued the H-4 visa. The gentleman who later became our client then attempted to return to the United States alone, with plans for his wife to follow soon after.
CBP Checks on Returning H1B Workers
When the individual attempted to reenter the United States, his experience at the POE was far from ordinary. The CBP officers placed him into what is known as secondary inspection. This is the procedure for foreign nationals who cannot be quickly and routinely processed through the standard primary inspection. The traveler was questioned about his employer, his work, and the end-client where he was performing his work. He was asked whether or not his employer had enough work to keep him employed throughout the duration of his H1B petition. One CBP officer contacted his employer, using the contact information on the employer's letter. The H1B employer was surprised by the call from CBP and did not firmly state that he had sufficient work to keep this particular H1B worker fully employed for the rest of the duration of the H1B petition.
The CBP officer took this information and determined that the foreign national was not returning to resume valid nonimmigrant work on his H1B visa. The officer instead considered the foreign national to be an intending immigrant seeking admission to the United States without a proper immigrant visa. This is one of the grounds under the law that permits an expedited removal. The officer cancelled the individual's H1B visa stamp in his passport and entered an expedited removal order against him, which carries the penalty of a five-year bar to reentering the U.S. The gentleman was then ordered to depart the U.S. on the next flight back to his home country.
Removed H1B Worker Contacts Murthy to Take Action
The foreign national contacted Murthy Law Firm after this unfortunate incident, and requested our assistance. The case was assigned to our Special Projects department, and we quickly made contact with the CBP officers at the port of entry involved. Our attorneys analyzed the case and found several legal mistakes that were made in the process of cancelling the H1B visa as well as in issuing the expedited removal order. A detailed legal argument was drafted and sent to the lead CBP official for the POE.
New H1B Petition Approval
While the Murthy Law Firm team was working on this case, our client obtained a new job offer from his H1B employer's end-client. The job involved duties identical to his previous position, but as a direct employee of the prior end-client company. The new employer obtained an approval of its H1B petition for consular processing. The only thing standing between our client and a great job was the five-year ban on his return to the United States that was created by the expedited removal order. The attorney assigned to this case contacted a U.S. senator representing the state where the new employer is located and began a series of actions that led to a review of the expedited removal.
Murthy Takes Action to Reverse Earlier CBP Decision
The review and reconsideration of expedited removal orders is not explicitly provided for in the regulations that control the day-to-day operations of the CBP. The Murthy Law Firm team succeeded in showing that the events that transpired for our client were extremely unusual and required review by leaders at CBP. Due to the new employer's need for this individual's skills, the attorney contacted several officers at CBP, filed a second official request with CBP, and worked with the U.S. senator's office to show that there was a serious and urgent need for a decision.
Determined Follow-up Leads to Relief
The persistence of our excellent legal team paid off. After almost ten weeks of communications with the CBP and other government offices, the CBP issued a letter stating that, while there is no appeal of expedited removal orders under the law, CBP was exercising its discretion and overturning its prior expedited removal order. The letter was quickly forwarded to our client, who scheduled his H1B visa interview at the appropriate U.S. consulate in India. He was issued his H1B visa at the conclusion of his consular interview and he then made the arrangements necessary for his wife and himself to return to the United States so that he could commence his new H1B employment.
Conclusion
We at the Murthy Law Firm are proud to share another of our many successful stories with our readers. We would like to extend our deep appreciation for the hard work and cooperation of the CBP officers in reconsidering their prior decision and taking the bold step, even though there was no law or regulation for an appeal or reconsideration of an earlier CBP decision. We also send our thanks the U.S. senator's staff, who worked to resolve the incorrect expedited removal order, which would have resulted in the five-year bar to our client's ability to return to the United States. Finally, our gratitude is offered once again to our client for his permission, allowing us to share his story, thereby providing hope to others.
hairstyles The photo shoot is (as she
vvrmurthy
11-21 05:08 PM
Hello tdasara,
I have undergone the pain of UK transit visa in Sep 2010. I booked my tickets thru AA-BA (RDU-LHR-HYD). I was told UK DATV is very easy to get. Applied on Sep 10th. Got FP done on Sep 27th. Sent original EAD, passport, AP documents, 485 receipt, FP processing sheet and a covering letter explaining why I wanted the UK DATV on Sep 28th by Fedex. Packet reached UK consulate in NY next day. Got a mail on Oct 8th that a decision was made. Received a letter along with passport/EAD/AP which said "Your request for DATV has been rejected since I am not convinced you need the DATV. There is no appeal for this decision". The process itself took 12 to 13 days. I researched later why they could have rejected my application. It seems I had to literally put in my whole life history - original employment verification letter, original bank statements proving my ability to travel, letter from my manager which states I have a job in US and I am going on vacation and I will come back and report to work, address proof, driving license proof, old passport copies, and any other thing u think could bolster your case. All this for what ?? To pee in London Airport in the 3 or 4 hours u stay there in transit...
I rerouted my tickets RDU-ORD-DEL-HYD (paid extra 470 dollars per head), went to Chennai Consulate and got stamping and while coming back, came thru LHR without hassles.. I confirmed in (on my way back) LHR that if I had proceeded without transit visa while going, UK would not have allowed me into LHR.
So if U plan to apply for DATV, please arrange for all the above documents and anything in excess u can muster to prove that u will just pee in LHR and move on. and that u will not land in LHR, tear your passport and get into UK and ask for asylum (This is what immigration offier in UK said most people would do if they were lackadaisical in giving transit visas).
All the best!
I have undergone the pain of UK transit visa in Sep 2010. I booked my tickets thru AA-BA (RDU-LHR-HYD). I was told UK DATV is very easy to get. Applied on Sep 10th. Got FP done on Sep 27th. Sent original EAD, passport, AP documents, 485 receipt, FP processing sheet and a covering letter explaining why I wanted the UK DATV on Sep 28th by Fedex. Packet reached UK consulate in NY next day. Got a mail on Oct 8th that a decision was made. Received a letter along with passport/EAD/AP which said "Your request for DATV has been rejected since I am not convinced you need the DATV. There is no appeal for this decision". The process itself took 12 to 13 days. I researched later why they could have rejected my application. It seems I had to literally put in my whole life history - original employment verification letter, original bank statements proving my ability to travel, letter from my manager which states I have a job in US and I am going on vacation and I will come back and report to work, address proof, driving license proof, old passport copies, and any other thing u think could bolster your case. All this for what ?? To pee in London Airport in the 3 or 4 hours u stay there in transit...
I rerouted my tickets RDU-ORD-DEL-HYD (paid extra 470 dollars per head), went to Chennai Consulate and got stamping and while coming back, came thru LHR without hassles.. I confirmed in (on my way back) LHR that if I had proceeded without transit visa while going, UK would not have allowed me into LHR.
So if U plan to apply for DATV, please arrange for all the above documents and anything in excess u can muster to prove that u will just pee in LHR and move on. and that u will not land in LHR, tear your passport and get into UK and ask for asylum (This is what immigration offier in UK said most people would do if they were lackadaisical in giving transit visas).
All the best!
ashkam
04-15 08:07 AM
I was in the same situation (got my MS degree after I had already started working) and I was told that I could not use my master's degree to apply in EB2. This is because if the company hired you when you didn't have a master's degree, obviously your job position does not require a master's degree. You still can use the degree if your green card job position is drastically different from your current position job-duties wise and if you can prove that it does, in fact, require a masters degree.
abhay
01-20 11:51 AM
Thanks So Much Ann, That gives me direction and what to request my employer when I talk to them later this afternoon.
I have one more question? When I spoke with USCIS and opened the inquiry in dec 2010. why did they come up with " RFE resposne not received till todate?" Do you think thye just checked the online status and responded back. My lawyer says that they spoke with someone at Texas service center and they told them that they have received the response. Thanks
I have one more question? When I spoke with USCIS and opened the inquiry in dec 2010. why did they come up with " RFE resposne not received till todate?" Do you think thye just checked the online status and responded back. My lawyer says that they spoke with someone at Texas service center and they told them that they have received the response. Thanks
