Thursday, June 9, 2011

kakashi sensei

kakashi sensei. Kakashi Hatake
  • Kakashi Hatake



  • NikNikon
    July 27th, 2005, 05:25 PM
    Ajp, your too hard on yourself, I think your version turned out great. Gary, how about a psd version for the nikon users, although I may be wasting my time since you've several nice results from those who have posted.





    kakashi sensei. Kakashi+sensei+sharingan
  • Kakashi+sensei+sharingan



  • milind70
    10-09 10:48 AM
    I think something same along the lines in VA is in place.





    kakashi sensei. Pics Of Kakashi Hatake.
  • Pics Of Kakashi Hatake.



  • zofa30
    09-13 02:40 PM
    Hi pd052009,
    Thank you for your help. I am just confused about one issue. I thought by porting my PD from and old EB2+ perm case to a new EB2+perm will save me time in waiting for the PD. Now you mentioned that if I port my PD from an old EB2 to a new EB2 (same category), I will not save any time. Please clarify.
    Thanks.





    kakashi sensei. Todo Sobre Kakashi Hatake
  • Todo Sobre Kakashi Hatake



  • go_getter007
    08-13 12:20 PM
    If what you've heard is true, it's quite funny - illegal American "aliens" in India. :D

    GG_007



    Have heard of US citizens in India who are having problems getting work visa. And are getting paid in cash! Seems like the number of illegal US citizen aliens in India may be going up over the next ten years....



    more...


    kakashi sensei. the great Kakashi-sensei
  • the great Kakashi-sensei



  • xela
    10-10 12:46 PM
    If you have a lawyer please ask them, because in my case only the lawyer got the receipt notice.

    Now here is what happened to me: filed on July 2nd in Nebraska, receipt notice came from California on Sept 5th, then they forwarded it back to Nebraska and I go the notice of action in the mail (this time I did get it and my lawyer did not), but now my receipt date is Sept. 5th instead of July 2nd.....so don't be surprised if they pull the same thing on you!!!

    check online at uscis and make sure your date has already been receipted, then call and call and call....who knows what is getting lost when they move everything around and around!

    Good luck!





    kakashi sensei. Kakashi sensei by ~kage-chan
  • Kakashi sensei by ~kage-chan



  • nomorelogins
    01-28 08:52 PM
    @nozerd,
    could you please explain the logic/rules.
    The logic is that if both parents are Indians even if kid is born in US and travels on US passport as kid they have until the age of 18 to choose.



    more...


    kakashi sensei. Kakashi Sensei
  • Kakashi Sensei



  • go_guy123
    03-30 02:06 PM
    A former colleague of mine from B'Desh got his GC in 14 weeks.

    ROW EB2 are talking in terms of weeks, not even months. We, on the other hand are talking in terms of decades, not even years.

    That is exactly the reason why per country quota removal is a difficult task. ROW has lots at stake in ensuring that per country quota is not removed. Fighting for a bigger pie is easier than fighting for a greater slice of the pie.





    kakashi sensei. Kakashi Sensei Cake by
  • Kakashi Sensei Cake by



  • vsrinir
    09-16 02:43 PM
    I DONT SEE ANY PROBLEMS, AS LONG AS YOU KEEP YOUR AP, LETTER FROM YOUR EMPLOYER AND LAST 3 PAY STUBS AND COPY OF I485,EAD,AC21 COPY IF YOU HAVE ONE




    Hello Gurus,

    I am July 2nd filer like so many others. I have changed employer after 9 month of filing I-485. I-140 was approved in Jun 2007. I have AP approved.

    My question : Is it advisable to travel to India and come back on AP? the reason I am asking is I have changed the employer? Will that affect my entry back to USA in any way at immigration check? Please advise.

    Thanks in advance.

    --Srinivas



    more...


    kakashi sensei. Kakashi Hatake
  • Kakashi Hatake



  • GCanyMinute
    08-23 12:23 PM
    My PD is 01/2002, so you can imagine what I felt when the September bulletin was out (I am EB3 world with 485 already filed 08/2004)!
    Now, I just called USCIS and they confirmed to me that indeed the Priority Date shows only on I-140, not I-485, so eveything is OK! Don't worry and be happy!

    Wow!!! You must be very happpy!!!! Your GC is coming out hot of the oven huh?! That's great! Let us know when you get it 'cause things like that serve to pump up people in line!! :D
    As for me 2 more months...please October Visa bulletin be nice to me! :rolleyes:
    Hey thanks a lot for the info, good to know USCIS just confirmed that.





    kakashi sensei. Kakashi-sensei: Sharingan
  • Kakashi-sensei: Sharingan



  • gimme Green!!
    06-14 04:54 PM
    On what basis does I-485 get processed?
    Is it based on Labor application (Priority Date) or by date of receipt of I-485 application? :confused:

    Or by luck of the draw?:cool:



    more...


    kakashi sensei. Kakashi Hatake (はたけ カカシ,
  • Kakashi Hatake (はたけ カカシ,



  • Sakthisagar
    12-07 09:16 AM
    Indian SCAM is becoming higher 2G & 4G SCam etc etc... 4G scam, burkhas, rajdeep,pronnoys and sagarikas making the money not salaries. Always the other side is green





    kakashi sensei. think that Kakashi-sensei
  • think that Kakashi-sensei



  • gapala
    07-09 12:26 PM
    I am working on EAD which expires on 10th Septempber 2008. I filed for my EAD on 25th June, 2008 and with the current processing dates at Nebraska, my guess is that I wont recieve my EAD until later September/early October.

    Will I have to stop working for the period when I dont have my EAD? My employer is very co-operative and will bear with me. But what are my options?

    My husband is the primary applicant of our 485 petition, so we wont have any issues of going out of status.

    I would really appreciate your advice on this.

    I am sure your employer knows about the rules around eligibility to work and will not allow any unauthorized to work even for a day past expiry date.

    Hope you will get the Renewed EAD soon before expiry of old one.



    more...


    kakashi sensei. of Kakashi Sensei
  • of Kakashi Sensei



  • akred
    02-23 10:51 AM
    Here is e.g. for 2002 again this excludes schedule A here is the breakdown for india

    EB1 - 3K
    EB2 - 21K
    EB3 - 17.5K
    EB4 - 0.3K
    EB5 - 0
    EB Total - 41K

    Am I missing something?

    One other factor is in play:

    100,000 visas were recaptured in 2000 under the AC21 act and made available to oversubscribed countries over the years until they ran out in 2005.





    kakashi sensei. BananaGosip~pureawesomeness~
  • BananaGosip~pureawesomeness~



  • cpolisetti
    03-31 03:56 PM
    She was also available for Q&A earlier today on Washington Post. I am quoting one question and answer in particular. Probably she can help in more visibilty of our voice?

    Here is the link for todays Q&A:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html



    Question from Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your informative article on a topic that needs more attention.

    I'm trying to get an sense of the scope of the problem from the perspective of an H-1B visa holder. Just how long does it typically take professionals from India and China/Taiwan to get a green card through their employer these days? What disinsentives are there for employers, other than the risk that the green card may not be approved and their employee will have to return to their home country?

    Answer from S. Mitra Kalita: Absent from much of this debate are the voices of H-1B holders themselves and I thank you for your question. I talked to someone who wouldn't allow himself to be quoted by name (so I did not use him in today's story) but this particular individual's story is one I hear often: He has been here for nine years, first on a student visa, then an H-1B. His employer applied for his green card in 2002 and he has been waiting four years because it is tied up in the backlog for labor certification. He said he is giving it six more months and if it doesn't come through, he's heading back to India. This stage is the one that a lot of observers agree where a worker risks being exploited. They are beholden to the employer because of the green card sponsorship (an H-1B visa can travel with a worker from one company to another, however) and cannot get promoted because that is technically a change in job classification -- and would require a new application. On the other hand, a lot of companies say that they know once someone gets a green card, they are out the door because suddenly they can start a company, go work for someone else, get promoted... Anyway, I could go on and on with background on this but instead I will post a story I did last summer on the green card backlog. Hang on.



    Todays article:

    Most See Visa Program as Severely Flawed

    By S. Mitra Kalita
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, March 31, 2006; D01



    Somewhere in the debate over immigration and the future of illegal workers, another, less-publicized fight is being waged over those who toil in air-conditioned offices, earn up to six-figure salaries and spend their days programming and punching code.

    They are foreign workers who arrive on H-1B visas, mostly young men from India and China tapped for skilled jobs such as software engineers and systems analysts. Unlike seasonal guest workers who stay for about 10 months, H-1B workers stay as long as six years. By then, they must obtain a green card or go back home.

    Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony for and against expanding the H-1B program. This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation that would increase the H-1B cap to 115,000 from 65,000 and allow some foreign students to bypass the program altogether and immediately get sponsored for green cards, which allow immigrants to be permanent residents, free to live and work in the United States.

    But underlying the arguments is a belief, even among the workers themselves, that the current H-1B program is severely flawed.

    Opponents say the highly skilled foreign workers compete with and depress the wages of native-born Americans.

    Supporters say foreign workers stimulate the economy, create more opportunities for their U.S. counterparts and prevent jobs from being outsourced overseas. The problem, they say, is the cumbersome process: Immigrants often spend six years as guest workers and then wait for green card sponsorship and approval.

    At the House committee hearing yesterday, Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National Foundation for American Policy, a nonprofit research group, spoke in favor of raising the cap. Still, he said in an interview, the H-1B visa is far from ideal. "What you want to have is a system where people can get hired directly on green cards in 30 to 60 days," he said.

    Economists seem divided on whether highly skilled immigrants depress wages for U.S. workers. In 2003, a study for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta found no effect on salaries, with an average income for both H-1B and American computer programmers of $55,000.

    Still, the study by Madeline Zavodny, now an economics professor at Agnes Scott College in Decatur, Ga., concluded "that unemployment was higher as a result of these H-1B workers."

    In a working paper released this week, Harvard University economist George J. Borjas studied the wages of foreigners and native-born Americans with doctorates, concluding that the foreigners lowered the wages of competing workers by 3 to 4 percent. He said he suspected that his conclusion also measured the effects of H-1B visas.

    "If there is a demand for engineers and no foreigners to take those jobs, salaries would shoot through the roof and make that very attractive for Americans," Borjas said.

    The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA says H-1B salaries are lower. "Those who are here on H-1B visas are being worked as indentured servants. They are being paid $13,000 less in the engineering and science worlds," said Ralph W. Wyndrum Jr., president of the advocacy group for technical professionals, which favors green-card-based immigration, but only for exceptional candidates.

    Wyndrum said the current system allows foreign skilled workers to "take jobs away from equally good American engineers and scientists." He based his statements about salary disparities on a December report by John Miano, a software engineer, who favors tighter immigration controls. Miano spoke at the House hearing and cited figures from the Occupational Employment Statistics program that show U.S. computer programmers earn an average $65,000 a year, compared with $52,000 for H-1B programmers.

    "Is it really a guest-worker program since most people want to stay here? Miano said in an interview. "There is direct displacement of American workers."

    Those who recruit and hire retort that a global economy mandates finding the best employees in the world, not just the United States. And because green-card caps are allocated equally among countries (India and China are backlogged, for example), the H-1B becomes the easiest way to hire foreigners.

    It is not always easy. Last year, Razorsight Corp., a technology company with offices in Fairfax and Bangalore, India, tried to sponsor more H-1B visas -- but they already were exhausted for the year. Currently, the company has 12 H-1B workers on a U.S. staff of 100, earning $80,000 to $120,000 a year.

    Charlie Thomas, Razorsight's chief executive, said the cap should be based on market demand. "It's absolutely essential for us to have access to a global talent," he said. "If your product isn't the best it can be with the best cost structure and development, then someone else will do it. And that someone else may not be a U.S.-based company."

    Because H-1B holders can switch employers to sponsor their visas, some workers said they demand salary increases along the way. But once a company sponsors their green cards, workers say they don't expect to be promoted or given a raise.

    Now some H-1B holders are watching to see how Congress treats the millions of immigrants who crossed the borders through stealthier means.

    Sameer Chandra, 30, who lives in Fairfax and works as a systems analyst on an H-1B visa, said he is concerned that Congress might make it easier for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally to get a green card than people like him. "What is the point of staying here legally?" he said.

    His Houston-based company has sponsored his green card, and Chandra said he hopes it is processed quickly. If it is not, he said, he will return to India. "There's a lot of opportunities there in my country."



    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html



    more...


    kakashi sensei. Viewing ll Kakashi Sensei ll#39;s
  • Viewing ll Kakashi Sensei ll#39;s



  • mnq1979
    05-21 03:02 PM
    I know answer for his RFE and i don't know answer for my RFE? Is that a problem?

    Well i dont think thats true that it is must that i have to send the AC21. Like i can always get the employment letter from my employer who sponsered me for my green card. All i was asking was that IF I DO GET THE EVL RFE (I HOPE NOT) then in that instance what i am suppose to do? Get a letter from my current employer or the employer who sponsored me for green card?





    kakashi sensei. Kakashi-sensei
  • Kakashi-sensei



  • dextro_a
    02-05 02:29 PM
    There is a hospital in Brooklyn New York where one of my friend was given H1-B and he is doing his residency from there. I will let you know.

    I just thought its better reply then just assuming that university will do H1B for you.



    more...


    kakashi sensei. hatake kakashi sensei
  • hatake kakashi sensei



  • LostInGCProcess
    01-21 06:11 PM
    Sorry.. might be a dumb question.. Do we get I-94 when we enter using AP - If so what would be the expiry date on it and do we need to renew I94 every time then...
    Yes, you get I-94 with 1 year and states AOS Pending...Basically, means, you are allowed to stay till the outcome of your I-485.

    Also I have H1B extended till 2011 but stamping on passport expired already.. If I come back using AP, can I still be on H1B status ?
    Yes, as long as you are working for the same employer. I did the same, I am on H1 right now, but used my AP last year to travel to India.





    kakashi sensei. Kakashi Sensei, He is Cool
  • Kakashi Sensei, He is Cool



  • pappu
    10-30 01:37 PM
    See this link, give your comments ( I suggest to be brief & to the point).

    http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/10/immigration_is_.html
    pls. try to also post IV link in your reply on usatoday.com





    kakashi sensei. 4 : Kakashi Hatake amp; Iruka
  • 4 : Kakashi Hatake amp; Iruka



  • GCard_Dream
    09-03 08:14 PM
    I think I know which memo you are talking about but I can't access it when I click on it because it is password protected. Is there a way you could just post the content of the memo here for those of us who can't access? It would be helpful.

    AILA is collecting information in an effort to work with USCIS to identify adjustment of status applications that may be approvable as of October 1, 2008, when new visa numbers become available. The focus of this effort is those adjustment of status cases, which are approvable under the February 4, 2008, security check memo by Michael Aytes. (See http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=24522)

    This information is being gathered for liaison purposes only in an attempt to identify and improve processing of cases covered by the February Aytes memo, and though the information will be provided to the USCIS for analysis, neither the AILA-USCIS Liaison Committee nor the USCIS will be contacting the attorney of record or the parties in direct response to information provided.

    If your client has an adjustment of status pending over one year and is currently subject to a backlog but was current under the June 2008 Visa Bulletin, we would like to hear from you. Please fill out the following survey.
    ------------------------------------------

    http://aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx





    go_guy123
    08-24 04:52 PM
    ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability (http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0825-mehta.shtm)

    Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. USCIS Rules That Revocation Of I-140 Petition Trumps Portability
    by Cyrus D. Mehta

    As the Employment-based categories remain hopeless backlogged,1 especially for those born in India and China in the Employment-based Second Preference (EB-2) and for the entire world in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3),2 the only silver lining is the ability of the applicant to exercise portability under INA � 204(j).

    Under INA � 204(j), an I-140 petition3 remains valid even if the alien has changed employers or jobs so long as an application for adjustment of status has been filed and remains unadjudicated for 180 days or more and that the applicant has changed jobs or employers in the same or similar occupational classification as the job for which the petition was filed.

    Stated simply, an applicant for adjustment of status (Form I-485) can move to a new employer or change positions with the same employer who filed the I-140 petition as long as the new position is in a same or similar occupation as the original position.4 This individual who has changed jobs can still continue to enjoy the benefits of the I-485 application and the ability to obtain permanent residency. � 204(j), thus, allows one not to be imprisoned with an employer or in one position if an adjustment application is pending for more than 180 days. A delay of more than 180 days may be caused either due to inefficiency with United States Immigration and Citizenship Services (�USCIS�), or more recently, due the retrogression in visa numbers in the EB-2 and EB-3 categories.

    A recent decision from the Ninth Circuit, Herrera v. USCIS, No. 08-55493, 2009 WL 1911596 (C.A. 9 (Cal.)), 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14592,5 unfortunately, may render adjustment applicants who have exercised portability under INA � 204(j) more vulnerable.

    In Herrera v. USCIS, the petitioner in this case, Herrera, was the beneficiary of an approved I-140 petition, which was filed under INA � 203(b)(1)(C) as an alien who seeks to work for a company �in the capacity that is managerial or executive.�6 At Herrera�s adjustment of status interview, the examining officer discovered that she was not truly employed in a managerial or executive capacity for the petitioning employer. The employer who filed the I-140 petition, Jugendstil, did not manufacture furniture, as it stated in the I-140 petition, but rather, engaged in interior designing services. Following the adjustment interview, and long after the adjustment application was pending for more than 180 days, Herrera exercised portability to a new employer. Unfortunately, a few months after she had exercised portability, the California Service Center (�CSC�) issued a notice of intent to revoke Herrera�s previously approved I-140 petition. This notice, which was sent to the prior employer that filed the I-140 petition, alleged that Herrera did not work in a managerial or executive capacity due to the size of the petitioning entity ( which had only 7 employees) and also because of her lack of managerial or executive job duties, which included visits to client sites. The CSC ultimately revoked the I-140 petition after giving Jugendstil an opportunity to respond. This indeed is anomalous, since the original I-140 petitioner, after the alien has exercised portability, may not have an incentive to respond. However, in this case, Jugendstil did appear to have an incentive to respond (and litigate the matter) as Herrera had �ported� to Bay Area Bumpers, an affiliate of Jugendstil. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) affirmed the denial, and so did the federal district court.

    At issue in Herrera v. USCIS was whether the government�s authority to revoke an I-140 petition under INA � 205 survived portability under INA � 204(j). INA � 205 states, �The Secretary of Homeland Security may, at any time, for what he deems to be good and sufficient cause, revoke the approval of any petition approved by him under section 204. Such revocation shall be effective as of the date of approval of any such petition.�

    The Ninth Circuit agreed with the government that it continued to have the power to revoke a petition under INA � 205 even though the alien may have successfully exercised portability under INA � 204(j). The Ninth Circuit reasoned that in order to �remain valid� under INA � 204(j), the I-140 petition must have been valid from the start. If a petition should never have been approved, the petitioner was not and had never been valid. The Ninth Circuit also cited with approval an AAO decision, which previously held in 2005 that a petition that is deniable, or not approvable, will not be considered valid for purposes under INA � 204(j).7 Finally, the Ninth Circuit reasoned that if Herrera�s argument prevailed, it would have unintended practical consequences, which Congress never intended. For instance, an alien who exercised portability, such as Herrera, would be immune to revocation, but an alien who remained with the petitioning employer would not be able to be so immune. If the opposite were true, according to the Ninth Circuit, an applicant would have a huge incentive to change jobs in order to escape the revocation of an I-140 petition. Finally, the Ninth Circuit also examined the merits of the revocation, and held that the AAO�s decision was supported by substantial evidence.8

    Based on the holding in Herrera v. USCIS, adjustment applicants who have exercised portability better beware in the event that the USCIS later decides to revoke your I-140 petition. 8 CFR � 205.2 (a), which implements INA � 205, gives authority to any Service officer to revoke a petition �when the necessity of revocation comes to the attention of the Service.� Also, under 8 CFR � 205.2(b), the Service needs to only give notice to the petitioner of the revocation and an opportunity to rebut. An adjustment applicant who has exercised portability may not be so fortunate to have a petitioner who may be interested in responding to the notice of revocation, leave alone informing this individual who may no longer be within his or her prior employer�s orbit.

    Finally, of most concern, is whether every revocation dooms the adjustment applicant who has �ported� under INA � 204(j). Not all revocations are caused by the fact that the petition may have not been valid from the very outset. For instance, under the automatic revocation provisions in 8 CFR � 205.1(a)(3)(iii), an I-140 petition may be automatically revoked �[u]pon written notice of withdrawal filed by the petitioner, in employment-based preference cases, with any officer of the Service who is authorized to grant or deny petitions.� An employer may routinely, out of abundant caution, decide to inform the USCIS if its employee leaves, even though he or she may legitimately assert portability as a pending adjustment applicant. Such a revocation of the I-140 ought to be distinguished from Herrera v. USCIS as the I-140 was valid from its inception but for the fact that the employer initiated the withdrawal. Similarly, another ground for automatic termination is upon the termination of the employer�s business.9 It would not make sense to deny someone portability if the petitioning entity, which previously sponsored him or her, went out of business, but was viable at the time it had sponsored the alien. Indeed, one Q&A in the Aytes Memo, supra, at least addresses the issue of an employer�s withdrawal:10

    �Question 11. When is an I-140 no longer valid for porting purposes?�

    Answer: An I-140 petition is no longer valid for porting purposes when:

    1. an I-140 is withdrawn before the alien�s I-485 has been pending 180 days, or
    2. an I-140 is denied or revoked at any time except when it is revoked based on a withdrawal that was submitted after an I-485 has been pending for 180 days.�

    It is hoped that Herrera v. USCIS, a classic instance of bad facts making bad law, does not affect those whose petitions have been revoked after the original employer submitted a withdrawal after an I-485 application was pending for more than 180 days. The Aytes Memo makes clear that this should not be the case. Less clear is whether a revocation caused by the termination of the employer�s business should have an impact on an adjustment applicant�s ability to exercise portability.11 The Aytes Memo seems to suggest that such a person who has exercised portability may be jeopardized if the I-140 petition is revoked. It is one thing to deny portability to someone whose I-140 petition was never valid, although hopefully the individual who has ported ought to be given the ability to challenge the revocation in addition to the original petitioner.12 On the other hand, there is absolutely no justification to deny portability when revocation of an I-140 petition occurs upon the business terminating, after it had been viable when the I-140 was filed and approved, or when the employer submits a notice of withdrawal of the I-140 petition after the I-485 has been pending for more than 180 days.





    pranju
    05-29 09:04 PM
    Donot forget to send the webfax :)



    No comments:

    Post a Comment