abhis0
09-18 07:13 PM
got receipt today . 07/02 10:25am the famous J.Barrett .
Guys, keep up, you will be fine and get it soon.
Congrats Buddy.....Was your I140 approved from TSC?
Guys, keep up, you will be fine and get it soon.
Congrats Buddy.....Was your I140 approved from TSC?
wallpaper Angelina Jolie (Kate amp;quot;
485_se_dukhi
09-22 10:51 AM
Very good article!!
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-inline_21edi.ART.State.Edition1.427fa5a.html
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-inline_21edi.ART.State.Edition1.427fa5a.html
waitnwatch
07-07 11:26 AM
As stated in my previous post my PD is current as I have an I140 approved under EB1-OR.
Is your PD current? Can you post details just wondering in case your PD is not current is USCIS still working on your case and preparing for future.
Is your PD current? Can you post details just wondering in case your PD is not current is USCIS still working on your case and preparing for future.
2011 angelina jolie hackers movie.
meridiani.planum
07-10 09:22 PM
inline...
Hi,
My friend has this scenario and want expert advise from IV members.
- On L1 for 3 1/2 years and H1 for 2 years 3 months. About to complete 6
years in 3 months.
- Filed Labor (approved. PD Aug 2004 EB3), I140 (applied in May 2007) and
I485 (July fiasco)
- I140 still pending
Question:
1. Does L1 period is counted for H1 extention?
-- yes, time in both L1 and H1 counts together towards those 6 years. Its the time in L2/H4 that was decoupled a year or so ago.
2. Can he do H1 transfer using AC21 without I140 approval?
As 6 years are going to be expired?
yes, he will get a one year extension since his LC is atleast one yaer old.
3. What if the old employer revokes his I140 now? His GC process is invalid?
yes, the GC process ends right there. If he has transferred his H1 in the meantime and got an extension, the USCIS position so far has been that the extension remains valid, even though the underlying LC/I-140 are gone. The law itself is somewhat unclear, but till now the USCIS has not come back and revoked anyone's H1 extension (that I know of) because the underlying I\-140/LC are gone.
4. If we leave about GC, Can he do H1 transfer atleast?
yes he can, but he will need to start another labor ASAP from new employer to get any extension past this one year. He will also lose his old PD and will have a 2008/2009 PD.
He will also need a copy of his labor certificate to be able to file a transfer+extension.
At this stage the only thing between him and AC-21 freedom is that I-140 getting approved. So unless you know the I-140 is going to be denied, I would advise him to try his best to stay on with this employer until the I-140 is approved
Hi,
My friend has this scenario and want expert advise from IV members.
- On L1 for 3 1/2 years and H1 for 2 years 3 months. About to complete 6
years in 3 months.
- Filed Labor (approved. PD Aug 2004 EB3), I140 (applied in May 2007) and
I485 (July fiasco)
- I140 still pending
Question:
1. Does L1 period is counted for H1 extention?
-- yes, time in both L1 and H1 counts together towards those 6 years. Its the time in L2/H4 that was decoupled a year or so ago.
2. Can he do H1 transfer using AC21 without I140 approval?
As 6 years are going to be expired?
yes, he will get a one year extension since his LC is atleast one yaer old.
3. What if the old employer revokes his I140 now? His GC process is invalid?
yes, the GC process ends right there. If he has transferred his H1 in the meantime and got an extension, the USCIS position so far has been that the extension remains valid, even though the underlying LC/I-140 are gone. The law itself is somewhat unclear, but till now the USCIS has not come back and revoked anyone's H1 extension (that I know of) because the underlying I\-140/LC are gone.
4. If we leave about GC, Can he do H1 transfer atleast?
yes he can, but he will need to start another labor ASAP from new employer to get any extension past this one year. He will also lose his old PD and will have a 2008/2009 PD.
He will also need a copy of his labor certificate to be able to file a transfer+extension.
At this stage the only thing between him and AC-21 freedom is that I-140 getting approved. So unless you know the I-140 is going to be denied, I would advise him to try his best to stay on with this employer until the I-140 is approved
more...
ita
09-22 04:19 PM
Thank you.
pd_recapturing
10-14 08:59 PM
Please suggest. Bumping up ...
more...
mn1975
09-05 12:55 PM
Are the receipts mailed at home address or they go to the lawyer
thanks
thanks
2010 Chercher hacker Angelina Jolie
mikrupee
08-22 02:47 PM
My questions:
While on H1B can a professional engineer sign a design and plans offcourse for free. Say to a friend design and plan.
While on H1B can a professional engineer sign a design and plans offcourse for free. Say to a friend design and plan.
more...
bk_ravi@yahoo.com
07-01 06:34 PM
By all means , I want to participate in this law suit. I dont want to hide anything from DOS or USCIS as I have not lied. My user id in this forum is real email id.
hair angelina jolie hackers haircut
payur
03-10 07:37 AM
I guess I should agree with Jerrome because I am going to India 2 weeks from now and My friend who recently had been to India mentioned the same. I have asked the same question to my immigration lawyer, I will post it when I get a reply.
In mean time I have another question, My flight is from Chicago to Delhi, but I have to take a loacl flight from Miami to Chicago, all my international baggage check in's are at the Miami. My question here is should I surrender the I-94 at Miami since I am doing all my International baggage check in's or should it be in Chicago.
Please let me know if anybody had this situation.
-Success.
In mean time I have another question, My flight is from Chicago to Delhi, but I have to take a loacl flight from Miami to Chicago, all my international baggage check in's are at the Miami. My question here is should I surrender the I-94 at Miami since I am doing all my International baggage check in's or should it be in Chicago.
Please let me know if anybody had this situation.
-Success.
more...
cnag
07-09 10:23 PM
That's true. Priority Mail + Delivery Confirmation.
Can the docs be sent thru Fedex??
Can the docs be sent thru Fedex??
hot house Angelina Jolie Wild Hair
tnite
07-02 11:56 AM
UPDATE ON JULY VISA AVAILABILITY
The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation
have been made available. Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.
Department of State Publication 9514
ie. they will not approve any more GC's for 2007. The question is will they accept applications mailed in today and keep them in abeyance ? I hope so...
What a waste!!!!!!
The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation
have been made available. Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.
Department of State Publication 9514
ie. they will not approve any more GC's for 2007. The question is will they accept applications mailed in today and keep them in abeyance ? I hope so...
What a waste!!!!!!
more...
house Angelina Jolie - Hackers (1995
Simran21
10-01 05:35 AM
While taking a VISA appointment , there is a question which says "Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?"
Here are my doubts
1. I had a H1 B VISA which expired in May 2007 processed by my previous employer. As I am applying for the same VISA class , but though a differnt employer, should the answer be 'YES'?
2. Since my daughter will be appearing for the H4 VISA interview for the FIRST TIME, Is she also eligible to come along with me if I choose "YES" to the question "Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?".
Thanks in advance.
Here are my doubts
1. I had a H1 B VISA which expired in May 2007 processed by my previous employer. As I am applying for the same VISA class , but though a differnt employer, should the answer be 'YES'?
2. Since my daughter will be appearing for the H4 VISA interview for the FIRST TIME, Is she also eligible to come along with me if I choose "YES" to the question "Are you applying for same visa class that expired in the last 12 months?".
Thanks in advance.
tattoo Angelina Jolie turns 34.
gc_on_demand
06-06 12:39 PM
I had 1 year contract for employment and I was not paid regularly. Also they were deducting money for health insurance which I didnot receive.
So I left company and they didnot pay me money. I had one year contract or 10000 USD fine.
iI donot work for them since 2005. I have time sheet signed by client and email from vendor to confirm that they paid my money to employer.
Can i go to labor and complain ? Will they ask me to pay back 10k ?
So I left company and they didnot pay me money. I had one year contract or 10000 USD fine.
iI donot work for them since 2005. I have time sheet signed by client and email from vendor to confirm that they paid my money to employer.
Can i go to labor and complain ? Will they ask me to pay back 10k ?
more...
pictures hackers from that to this.
tinuverma
11-09 02:44 PM
Guys
I am still waiting for an answer here..which date would be the AOS...july 23rd or oct 17th?
I am still waiting for an answer here..which date would be the AOS...july 23rd or oct 17th?
dresses Angelina Jolie 040 jpg
wahwah
01-09 11:44 PM
i assume you're using cross-chargeability of your husband's country of birth.
if that is the case, swiss eb2 had current pd, so you should get your gc in 6-9months.EB-2, 485 and 140 submitted in June 2007 concurrently, RD and PD both are June 2007. I borrowed my husband's Swiss nationality. Now 140 approved, AP and EAD got, but NC is still pending.
Just curious: When will USCIS process my 485? According to my nationality or my husband's? If it's mine, god, I may have to wait for 4, 5 years because of the terrible VB backlog! Is it after 485, everyone no matter which nationality, the processing time should be the same. All the world line up together. Please correct me if I am wrong.
if that is the case, swiss eb2 had current pd, so you should get your gc in 6-9months.EB-2, 485 and 140 submitted in June 2007 concurrently, RD and PD both are June 2007. I borrowed my husband's Swiss nationality. Now 140 approved, AP and EAD got, but NC is still pending.
Just curious: When will USCIS process my 485? According to my nationality or my husband's? If it's mine, god, I may have to wait for 4, 5 years because of the terrible VB backlog! Is it after 485, everyone no matter which nationality, the processing time should be the same. All the world line up together. Please correct me if I am wrong.
more...
makeup Angelina+jolie+hackers+
BharatPremi
03-13 11:25 AM
Name check is not an issue, the IO told me that name check is started soon after receipt of application, and 180 days have passed. There is a new rule that name check cannot delay I485 by more than 180 days.
WOM - the 2 years may have changed, since WOM cases were usually fighting name check. I think that it is probably one for an attorney, so I'll likely consult attorney in May regarding WOM.
Any more comments welcome.
e.g. raising via Congressman's office.
Receipt date vs notice date of last transfer -- which sets the processing date.
Even though it may not bring the result what you want, trying Congressman's office would at least serve the purpose of creating the record which may help you in turn while fighting WOM. So I would definately do that first. Now in theory "Receipt Date" should set the processing date but when you call USCIS they always talk about ND, somehow it seems that they can see only ND.. Yes, that is definately a grey area.
WOM - the 2 years may have changed, since WOM cases were usually fighting name check. I think that it is probably one for an attorney, so I'll likely consult attorney in May regarding WOM.
Any more comments welcome.
e.g. raising via Congressman's office.
Receipt date vs notice date of last transfer -- which sets the processing date.
Even though it may not bring the result what you want, trying Congressman's office would at least serve the purpose of creating the record which may help you in turn while fighting WOM. So I would definately do that first. Now in theory "Receipt Date" should set the processing date but when you call USCIS they always talk about ND, somehow it seems that they can see only ND.. Yes, that is definately a grey area.
girlfriend Angelina Jolie Hollywood 2009
stucklabor
02-04 04:51 PM
Behind Bush's New Stress on Science, Lobbying by Republican Executives
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
Article Tools Sponsored By
By JOHN MARKOFF
Published: February 2, 2006
SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 1 � President Bush's proposal to accelerate spending on basic scientific research came after technology industry executives made the case for such a move in a series of meetings with White House officials, executives involved said Wednesday.
In his State of the Union message Tuesday evening, Mr. Bush called for a doubling within 10 years of the federal commitment to "the most critical basic research programs in the physical sciences."
The president's science adviser, John H. Marburger III, said Mr. Bush would request $910 million for the first year of the research initiative, with a commitment to spending $50 billion over 10 years.
Computer scientists have expressed alarm that federal support for basic research is being eroded by shifts toward applied research and shorter-term financing. But in his speech, Mr. Bush pointed to work in supercomputing, nanotechnology and alternative energy sources � subjects that were favorites in the Clinton administration but had not been priorities for the current White House.
What was different this year, according to a number of Capitol Hill lobbyists and Silicon Valley executives, was support on the issue by Republican corporate executives like Craig R. Barrett, the chairman of Intel, and John Chambers, the chief executive of Cisco Systems.
Industry officials eager to see a greater government commitment to research held a series of discussions with administration officials late last year that culminated in two meetings in the Old Executive Office Building on Dec. 13.
There, a group led by Mr. Barrett and Norman R. Augustine, a former Lockheed Martin chief executive, met with Vice President Dick Cheney. A second group headed by Charles M. Vest, the former president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, met with Joshua B. Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget.
The industry and science leaders told the officials that the administration needed to respond to concerns laid out in a report by a National Academy of Sciences panel headed by Mr. Augustine. It warned of a rapid erosion in science, technology and education that threatened American economic competitiveness.
The report, "Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future," has been circulating in draft form since October. It was put together by a group of top technology and science leaders, who say the country faces a crisis that the Bush administration is ignoring.
"The gravitas of that group," Dr. Vest said, "has a lot to do with how we got as far as we did."
Still, even after the meetings, the executives and educators were not certain that the administration would respond. So President Bush's proposal on Tuesday night came as something of a surprise.
Albert H. Teich, director of science policy for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the nation's largest professional organization for scientists, called Mr. Bush's proposal "a breath of fresh air."
"We haven't seen this interest in basic research from this president before," Mr. Teich said. "We in the science community have talked about the state of basic research for quite a while, with its flat or declining budgets, and we are hopeful about this initiative."
Mr. Barrett of Intel, according to people who worked with him, had grown particularly frustrated with the lack of progress on the matter.
In a speech to the National Academy of Engineering in October, in which he described the findings of the Gathering Storm report, Mr. Barrett said: "If you look at the achievement of the average 12th-grade student in math and science, which is of interest to us here, that 12th-grader in the U.S. ranks in the bottom 10 percent among their international peers. I think it is incumbent upon all of us to look at that report and help raise our voices collectively to our local officials, state officials and national officials."
The executives said that the administration had also been induced to respond by a growing bipartisan movement in Congress supporting basic research and education.
Two bills tackling this matter have recently been introduced. One is the Protect America's Competitive Edge Act, by Senators Pete V. Domenici, Republican of New Mexico; Jeff Bingaman, Democrat of New Mexico; Lamar Alexander, Republican of Tennessee; and Barbara A. Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland. A similar bill was introduced by Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut. Several of the senators met with President Bush in December to encourage him to support the competitiveness legislation.
"We're excited the president has jump-started this and that it is very bipartisan," Dr. Vest said.
Now the technologists and the educators are waiting to see the specifics of the financing when the president's budget is introduced next week. The report had called for an annual 10 percent increase over the next 10 years, and several executives said they now expected a rise of 7 percent annually, putting annual spending around twice the current level in 10 years.
Peter A. Freeman, the National Science Foundation's assistant director for computer and information science and engineering, said the president's initiative would make a big difference.
"We're obviously not at liberty to say what will be in the president's budget next week," Mr. Freeman said, "but we're very hopeful based on the State of the Union address. This is a strong sign that this administration will continue to be very supportive of fundamental science and engineering."
Despite there being little detail yet with precise figures, even those who had been publicly critical of the administration were enthusiastic.
"This is really a huge deal and I'm very encouraged," said David A. Patterson, a computer scientist at the University of California, Berkeley, who is president of the Association for Computing Machinery, a professional group.
At the same time, though, Mr. Patterson was concerned that the president's proposal to double funds for basic research drew little applause from the Congressional audience on Tuesday night. "It just shows the challenge we have," he said. "It wasn't obvious to the legislators."
Warren E. Leary contributed reporting from Washington for this article.
hairstyles to Hackers co-star Johnny
a_yaja
06-26 03:31 PM
My view is immigration intent part will not impact much. Just it is giving more power to consulate. Consulate may reject some candidates who are not having strong job offers. It is similar to F1 visa. But nowadays F1 visa rejections are very less compared to past
I disagree. It is easier for students to get F1 because they are unsure of their future (no job, no money, what will they do without either of these) and consular officers can then accept future uncertainity as "no intent to immigrate". Replace a just graduated college student with someone who has 5 - 10 years of experience but not married or does not own property. The consular officer will immediately reject the visa.
This is also the case with a lot of B1/ B2 visa applicants. I have seen many first time visa applicants who are parents who have had their visa rejected because they did not own a home and/ or they did not show proof of having substantial bank money.
H1s will also have to prove this from now on. And tell me someone who has a good job and a house and kids going to school who will want to come to US on a H1.
I disagree. It is easier for students to get F1 because they are unsure of their future (no job, no money, what will they do without either of these) and consular officers can then accept future uncertainity as "no intent to immigrate". Replace a just graduated college student with someone who has 5 - 10 years of experience but not married or does not own property. The consular officer will immediately reject the visa.
This is also the case with a lot of B1/ B2 visa applicants. I have seen many first time visa applicants who are parents who have had their visa rejected because they did not own a home and/ or they did not show proof of having substantial bank money.
H1s will also have to prove this from now on. And tell me someone who has a good job and a house and kids going to school who will want to come to US on a H1.
lostinbeta
09-06 03:22 PM
Hey, thanks Hojo, it took me a while to get that text to work correctly on the board. Darn CSS. I was trying to use span tags when I really needed to use div tags.
Your footer doesn't show Hojo? I right click and it says Movie Not Loaded.
Your footer doesn't show Hojo? I right click and it says Movie Not Loaded.
buehler
07-18 07:36 AM
We filed I-140 on july 16th thru labour substitution. Expecting a receipt by july ending.Now I have a very serious concern regarding I-485 filing before Aug 17 2007, pls advice !!
My spouse is in india from August 17 2006 after already staying in US on H1B for 6 years.He's planning to come back here on dependant visa(L2) after 1 year out of country stay as he wants to reset his H1B clock (He plans to apply H1B in April 2008 quota).
If we want to apply for I-485 he needs to come here atleast by Aug 10 2007- to fulfill the medicals & sign the documents, to file by Aug 17th 2007 deadline. We are afraid to take chances this time, that if he just enters US before 1 year out of country stay, he may not be eligible for new H1B in 2008, if somthing happens to current filing.
Pls sincerely advice if he can still apply for H1B in April 2008, if he just missed 365 days out of country rule by 6 or 7 days (incase he comes back on Aug 10th 2007 for filing, he would fulfill 360 days out of country and not 365 as needed) ?
You do understand that he can only file for his visa in Apr 2008. The visa become valid only in Oct 2008 and he doesn't have to be in this country on the date of filing for H1-B. So why worry about 365 day count?
My spouse is in india from August 17 2006 after already staying in US on H1B for 6 years.He's planning to come back here on dependant visa(L2) after 1 year out of country stay as he wants to reset his H1B clock (He plans to apply H1B in April 2008 quota).
If we want to apply for I-485 he needs to come here atleast by Aug 10 2007- to fulfill the medicals & sign the documents, to file by Aug 17th 2007 deadline. We are afraid to take chances this time, that if he just enters US before 1 year out of country stay, he may not be eligible for new H1B in 2008, if somthing happens to current filing.
Pls sincerely advice if he can still apply for H1B in April 2008, if he just missed 365 days out of country rule by 6 or 7 days (incase he comes back on Aug 10th 2007 for filing, he would fulfill 360 days out of country and not 365 as needed) ?
You do understand that he can only file for his visa in Apr 2008. The visa become valid only in Oct 2008 and he doesn't have to be in this country on the date of filing for H1-B. So why worry about 365 day count?
No comments:
Post a Comment