frostrated
08-10 08:45 AM
Friends
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
It is very easy and do not need a lawyer.
First get admission into a school and then provide your H4 documents and a letter stating that you do not intend to reside in the US post-completion of your education and that you want to return to your country.
The school will then send your documents to the USCIS for a COS from H4 to F1.
How do I know this? Coz I went thru this.
But remember, do not file your 485 as long as your wife is in school. Coz if you go on to an EAD status, it will be very difficult to convert your F1 spouse to EAD. Since you are EB3 wait until your wife completes her education, and either gets a H1 or H4 prior to submitting 485.
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
It is very easy and do not need a lawyer.
First get admission into a school and then provide your H4 documents and a letter stating that you do not intend to reside in the US post-completion of your education and that you want to return to your country.
The school will then send your documents to the USCIS for a COS from H4 to F1.
How do I know this? Coz I went thru this.
But remember, do not file your 485 as long as your wife is in school. Coz if you go on to an EAD status, it will be very difficult to convert your F1 spouse to EAD. Since you are EB3 wait until your wife completes her education, and either gets a H1 or H4 prior to submitting 485.
wallpaper Mythbusters Kari Byron In Playboy - Page 2 | Mythbusters Kari Byron In
kaisersose
06-02 12:10 PM
It is not illegal per se if your actual salary is less than that mentioned in LC. It is however detrimental to your GC case.
Only at the 140 stage and for small companies. The OP has clarified that his 140 is approved and he works for a big company.
So ability to pay issues are no longer applicable.
Only at the 140 stage and for small companies. The OP has clarified that his 140 is approved and he works for a big company.
So ability to pay issues are no longer applicable.
legal_la
07-12 12:11 PM
I think it is true that once you are counted in the cap you will not be counted again. so you can switch back and forth H4 and H1 without being counted in the quota.
2011 Mythbusters Kari Byron
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
more...
singhsa3
01-29 07:38 PM
Just today, I spoke to one of my freind, he is also from Bangladesh and his PD is sometime in 2006. He got his GC. So it could very well be true. If you want PM me and I can give you his phone number, you are his compatriot after all.
I'm from Bangladesh and my PD is May 2006....EB3
I applied for my I485, I765 and I131 in July 2, 2007. Then me and my wife received the I765 approval in couple of months then the real drama began.
In October i received the letter about our i131 denial. The reason for the denial was approval of I485 (I485 approval news was mentioned in my i131 denial letter). My lawyer then told me to wait couple of months to receive my cards. I waited but didn't receive anything. The I called the USCIS and they told me that there is no update in the system and they requested me to go to the local immigration office to notify the matter. After visiting the local immigration office they asked me to write a status request letter to USCIS.
Me and lawyer already wrote 4 letters to USCIS requesting the status of my i485 as my i131 got denied. Finally one of the cases status for i131 showing online that you’re RFE has been received and case has been resumed; and the other one is still case denied. On the other hand the i485 for both mine and my wife's case still showing like it was showing six months ago..."received and pending"........
I’m totally confused in this present situation. USCIS never requested for any RFE against my i131, so why they put in the online status that the RFE has been received. All I did was requested for the I485 applications as they mentioned in my i131 denial letter that my i485 got approved……
Some help here will be highly appreciated…….thanks in advance
I'm from Bangladesh and my PD is May 2006....EB3
I applied for my I485, I765 and I131 in July 2, 2007. Then me and my wife received the I765 approval in couple of months then the real drama began.
In October i received the letter about our i131 denial. The reason for the denial was approval of I485 (I485 approval news was mentioned in my i131 denial letter). My lawyer then told me to wait couple of months to receive my cards. I waited but didn't receive anything. The I called the USCIS and they told me that there is no update in the system and they requested me to go to the local immigration office to notify the matter. After visiting the local immigration office they asked me to write a status request letter to USCIS.
Me and lawyer already wrote 4 letters to USCIS requesting the status of my i485 as my i131 got denied. Finally one of the cases status for i131 showing online that you’re RFE has been received and case has been resumed; and the other one is still case denied. On the other hand the i485 for both mine and my wife's case still showing like it was showing six months ago..."received and pending"........
I’m totally confused in this present situation. USCIS never requested for any RFE against my i131, so why they put in the online status that the RFE has been received. All I did was requested for the I485 applications as they mentioned in my i131 denial letter that my i485 got approved……
Some help here will be highly appreciated…….thanks in advance
TomPlate
01-09 03:30 PM
why i got red?????? I am saying it is going to be current.
more...
chanduv23
09-14 12:23 PM
All the more reason to come, by now, alomst every employer knows about IV and what we do.
Everyone knows that you browse IV anonymously with the fear of getting noticed by employer.
There is nothing to hide. Be proud of whatever you are doing.
IV comprises of people like you and me.
Yes, follow your heart, nothing wrong will happen, only good will happen.
Shed off all your ill thoughts and negative feelings, come join us to the hsitoric event
Everyone knows that you browse IV anonymously with the fear of getting noticed by employer.
There is nothing to hide. Be proud of whatever you are doing.
IV comprises of people like you and me.
Yes, follow your heart, nothing wrong will happen, only good will happen.
Shed off all your ill thoughts and negative feelings, come join us to the hsitoric event
2010 Off-Topic, Kari Byron Pics
franklin
07-05 10:39 PM
If people want to send flowers, let them send flowers. I really don't see the point, but whatever
But please - do we need multiple polls and threads about this? How many of the 200 that are apparently ready (although this number differs on the 3 or so other polls, and countless other threads on this subject) have done actual IV action items?
Admins - please close this.
But please - do we need multiple polls and threads about this? How many of the 200 that are apparently ready (although this number differs on the 3 or so other polls, and countless other threads on this subject) have done actual IV action items?
Admins - please close this.
more...
pom
09-04 08:52 AM
What's pixel stretching ?
hair mythbusters kari byron. cdforecheck - Kari Byron from
hebbar77
11-23 04:06 PM
I found ICICI money2india better than CITIBANK (rate wise). I have been using ICICI money transfer for last 4 years!
I would like to know anything better too!
I would like to know anything better too!
more...
bsbawa10
08-15 12:11 PM
USCIS does not seem to be corrupt. It seems to be running by proxy with no accountability, no follow ups on what they do, and they always make excuses to show that they follow rules ...(which are breakable).
hot Kari Byron is on maternity
vaishnavilakshmi
09-28 07:37 PM
Hi,
Call in the following sequence for typo rectification on any of ur notices.
1-800-375-5283
Press 1 (for english)
Press 2(to skip introduction and go to main menu)
Press2(For case status)
Press 5(if there is any typo in any of the notices/reciepts)
Hope this helps u,
Vaishu
Call in the following sequence for typo rectification on any of ur notices.
1-800-375-5283
Press 1 (for english)
Press 2(to skip introduction and go to main menu)
Press2(For case status)
Press 5(if there is any typo in any of the notices/reciepts)
Hope this helps u,
Vaishu
more...
house MythBusters: Kari Byron on
Munna Bhai
07-12 09:48 AM
Yes, you can. You can switch to H4 and back to H1 without worrying about the Cap limitation. The only point that is little hazy is how long can you stay on a H4 before you can get back to H1 without the cap limitation kicking in. As the H1 is given in 3 year installments, would you have to get back to your H1 before that 3 year period ends, if in the middle of that period you had switched to H4?
Say, you had obtained your H1 in Jan 2007 and is good until Jan 2010 (3 years allotment), and you switched to H4 in Dec 2007 using up 1 year of your H1. I think that you can switch back to H1 without the cap limitation ONLY until Jan 2010 and your new papers will give you another 3 years of the remaining 5 years of your H1.
Let me know what you find. Good luck.
One person just told me that, I can switch to H4 but I will be subjected to Cap since my spouse is in H1b non-profit.
Currently my H1b extension is based on i-140 approval(3 years), will same rule apply to my case.
Say, you had obtained your H1 in Jan 2007 and is good until Jan 2010 (3 years allotment), and you switched to H4 in Dec 2007 using up 1 year of your H1. I think that you can switch back to H1 without the cap limitation ONLY until Jan 2010 and your new papers will give you another 3 years of the remaining 5 years of your H1.
Let me know what you find. Good luck.
One person just told me that, I can switch to H4 but I will be subjected to Cap since my spouse is in H1b non-profit.
Currently my H1b extension is based on i-140 approval(3 years), will same rule apply to my case.
tattoo mythbusters kari byron. Kari Byron shows us the inside of her mouth
bbenhill
11-13 08:51 PM
I believe whenever you apply H1 or H4 in US, you will get new I-94 so you don't need to go outside US.
#3 : no, only show H1B approval from ur spouse.
#4 : I don't know about 60 days rule but this is like chicken and egg situation. to get paid (using H1), you will need to have SSN. if you don't get paid then you are violating ur H1 condition. so I believe the reasonable answer is you have to get SSN and a project so you can get paid and stay using H1B status (if not revert to H4 asap).
#5 : I believe you are not out of status but you are violating H1 condition.
But again, Please check with ur attorney since I am not an attorney.
Sorry if my answers will scare you a bit.
Regards,
I came to USA in March-2009 on H4 visa, I have H4 visa stamp on my passport valid till 2011 which is my husband�s valid H1 date. Then i applied for H1B through one of consulting companies. I got H1B approval in June-2009. I am searching for the project from June-2009 but, don't have project till date. So now i wanted to change my status again from H1B to H4. I believe my H1B is automatically activated on 1st Oct 2009. I still don�t have any paychecks since I did not get the project and haven�t yet applied for SSN.
So my questions are,
1.Can I apply for visa status change from H1B to H4 in USA or
a. I need to go outside USA and reapply for H4 visa in my home country or
b.just go outside USA and enter back with my current H4 on my passport which is valid until 2011?
2. Is there any alternative that I can apply for status change from H1B to H4 immediately in USA to continue my H4 visa again and can get H4 visa stamp in future when I will go outside USA?
3. Do I need to show paystubs from Oct-2009 while applying for H4 COS in USA while filling the form?
4. Is there a 60 day rule during which I need to apply for my SSN? What would happen if I delay applying for my SSN?
5. Under what scenarios and When would I be considered out of status?
Thank You in advance.
Arpu
#3 : no, only show H1B approval from ur spouse.
#4 : I don't know about 60 days rule but this is like chicken and egg situation. to get paid (using H1), you will need to have SSN. if you don't get paid then you are violating ur H1 condition. so I believe the reasonable answer is you have to get SSN and a project so you can get paid and stay using H1B status (if not revert to H4 asap).
#5 : I believe you are not out of status but you are violating H1 condition.
But again, Please check with ur attorney since I am not an attorney.
Sorry if my answers will scare you a bit.
Regards,
I came to USA in March-2009 on H4 visa, I have H4 visa stamp on my passport valid till 2011 which is my husband�s valid H1 date. Then i applied for H1B through one of consulting companies. I got H1B approval in June-2009. I am searching for the project from June-2009 but, don't have project till date. So now i wanted to change my status again from H1B to H4. I believe my H1B is automatically activated on 1st Oct 2009. I still don�t have any paychecks since I did not get the project and haven�t yet applied for SSN.
So my questions are,
1.Can I apply for visa status change from H1B to H4 in USA or
a. I need to go outside USA and reapply for H4 visa in my home country or
b.just go outside USA and enter back with my current H4 on my passport which is valid until 2011?
2. Is there any alternative that I can apply for status change from H1B to H4 immediately in USA to continue my H4 visa again and can get H4 visa stamp in future when I will go outside USA?
3. Do I need to show paystubs from Oct-2009 while applying for H4 COS in USA while filling the form?
4. Is there a 60 day rule during which I need to apply for my SSN? What would happen if I delay applying for my SSN?
5. Under what scenarios and When would I be considered out of status?
Thank You in advance.
Arpu
more...
pictures mythbusters kari byronfull
mihird
07-20 05:43 PM
But my question is can you have BOTH of them. Some say you can have 2 H1s at the same time for different companies, so hence my question was, can you have an H1 and an L1 at the same time.
Biju, whom did you ask, an immigration attorney or just on forums?
A concurrent H1 and L1 should be doable too...much like two concurrent H1s...
As long as you meet the requirements of the two visa categories, you should be able to hold both concurrently...
My knowledge on L1 is limited, but I thought, unlike H1, L1 was not as much a dual intent visa...it required evidence of some times to the foreign domicile..although, I could be wrong...I faintly remember the laws governing L1 were signficantly changed a couple of years back...
In short, if L1 is not much of a dual intent as H1, you might have trouble getting the two approved concurrently, but if they are equally dual intent, getting them concurrently shouldn't be a problem...
Biju, whom did you ask, an immigration attorney or just on forums?
A concurrent H1 and L1 should be doable too...much like two concurrent H1s...
As long as you meet the requirements of the two visa categories, you should be able to hold both concurrently...
My knowledge on L1 is limited, but I thought, unlike H1, L1 was not as much a dual intent visa...it required evidence of some times to the foreign domicile..although, I could be wrong...I faintly remember the laws governing L1 were signficantly changed a couple of years back...
In short, if L1 is not much of a dual intent as H1, you might have trouble getting the two approved concurrently, but if they are equally dual intent, getting them concurrently shouldn't be a problem...
dresses Kari Byron of Mythbusters at
imv116
06-06 05:36 PM
Hi S.Hoosier,
Subject to the AC21 restrictions, like what? Could you please elaborate?
Yes, you should be able to use AC21 to change employment (subject to the AC21 restrictions).
Subject to the AC21 restrictions, like what? Could you please elaborate?
Yes, you should be able to use AC21 to change employment (subject to the AC21 restrictions).
more...
makeup Grant Imahara, Kari Byron and
uniqueuser
04-03 07:47 PM
Today at Boeing interview event I got very good offer. The HR lady congratulated me, kept offer letter in my hand. Then I told her that I'm an EAD holder. All my fear came true, and she said a big sorry and said EAD is not acceptable at any cost. Also she said, she can keep the offer in hold for me for 5 months. How can I expect green card in hand in 5 months. GOD don't give this situation to any one. just trying to reduce my pain here...
girlfriend Kari Byron from Mythbusters
brb2
08-06 01:22 PM
Honorable Senator Specter
Did you know that during the immigration debates, the most shrill voices against �immigration reform� (legitimizing illegal immigrants) was by legal immigrants who are living here in the US, and waiting for green cards, while their spouses are not allowed to work (half a million at the most recent count). Others who were against the reforms were immigrants who came here legally after waiting years, and are now green card holders. Democrats and liberal Republican senators have shown no empathy for legal immigrants and US citizens in their zeal for legalizing illegal immigrants through "immigration reform". I was not surprised to see just a single statement in your article, at the far end (probably as an afterthought) about green cards for legal skilled immigrants. Over 350,000 legal immigrants (99%) of who have nothing to do with crime are stuck in FBI name checks, and are unable to naturalize. Another 500,000 highly skilled legal immigrants (Doctors, Engineers etc) most of whom studied in the US, are stuck in retrogression (from countries such as India, China, Philippines etc). These legal immigrants are not even on your radar, even as Senators such as yourself, Ms. Diane Feinstein and others loose no opportunity to try to provide amnesty for the 12 million people who crossed over the border with scant regard for US law. You want to reward these people ahead of any �reform� for legal skilled workers. So much for President Bush�s statement about �putting these undocumented workers at the back of the line�. I don't think the American citizens will ever buy this lopsided reform. Genuine Border control is being held up as bait, for legalizing 12 million people. Please attend to border control and solve legacy problems of legal skilled immigrants already in the US, before doing anything on legalizing �undocumented workers�. Why is this so hard for our honorable congressmen and women to understand?
Lastly neither USCIS nor the FBI is able to timely service the legal immigrants already here, how do you propose to process the illegal immigrants without causing huge delays for those who played by the rules?
Did you know that during the immigration debates, the most shrill voices against �immigration reform� (legitimizing illegal immigrants) was by legal immigrants who are living here in the US, and waiting for green cards, while their spouses are not allowed to work (half a million at the most recent count). Others who were against the reforms were immigrants who came here legally after waiting years, and are now green card holders. Democrats and liberal Republican senators have shown no empathy for legal immigrants and US citizens in their zeal for legalizing illegal immigrants through "immigration reform". I was not surprised to see just a single statement in your article, at the far end (probably as an afterthought) about green cards for legal skilled immigrants. Over 350,000 legal immigrants (99%) of who have nothing to do with crime are stuck in FBI name checks, and are unable to naturalize. Another 500,000 highly skilled legal immigrants (Doctors, Engineers etc) most of whom studied in the US, are stuck in retrogression (from countries such as India, China, Philippines etc). These legal immigrants are not even on your radar, even as Senators such as yourself, Ms. Diane Feinstein and others loose no opportunity to try to provide amnesty for the 12 million people who crossed over the border with scant regard for US law. You want to reward these people ahead of any �reform� for legal skilled workers. So much for President Bush�s statement about �putting these undocumented workers at the back of the line�. I don't think the American citizens will ever buy this lopsided reform. Genuine Border control is being held up as bait, for legalizing 12 million people. Please attend to border control and solve legacy problems of legal skilled immigrants already in the US, before doing anything on legalizing �undocumented workers�. Why is this so hard for our honorable congressmen and women to understand?
Lastly neither USCIS nor the FBI is able to timely service the legal immigrants already here, how do you propose to process the illegal immigrants without causing huge delays for those who played by the rules?
hairstyles Kari Byron of Mythbusters by
neha_garg123
01-08 07:20 PM
You will only be counted against the cap once unless your 6 year limit of H-1 is over and you are out of US for another year. So no problems you can file for your new H-1. Just make sure you send a copy of the old H-1 approval copy as well to prove you are already counted towards cap.
Thanks a lot!!
Thanks a lot!!
summitpointe
04-16 02:53 PM
Open an MTR ASAP. It sometimes takes lot of time(may be one year) for final decision.
As your H1B is valid for another one year, just to have a support talk with your attorney about filing a PERM labor ASAP.
As your H1B is valid for another one year, just to have a support talk with your attorney about filing a PERM labor ASAP.
GKBest
11-04 12:25 PM
A little over a months time, I received a letter saying that the typo on my last name has been corrected. I could confirm that since the mailing address had all the correct details.
Hence, I guess, their typo correction system is a bit slow but it works!
ISSUE RESOLVED!
When did you or lawyer notify USCIS about the typo error? My lawyer also gave me a confirmation receipt # to correct the error but I still haven't received any letter saying that it has been corrected.
Hence, I guess, their typo correction system is a bit slow but it works!
ISSUE RESOLVED!
When did you or lawyer notify USCIS about the typo error? My lawyer also gave me a confirmation receipt # to correct the error but I still haven't received any letter saying that it has been corrected.
No comments:
Post a Comment