ujjvalkoul
02-28 12:37 PM
You should be fine. Not only you filed your extension on time (so the approval should apply retroactively, more likely that's the USCIS mistake), but two law provisions protect you:
1) 8 C.F.R. section 274A.12(b)(20) - An H1B holder whose employer has filed a new H1B petition to extend the stay (through the current employer - NOT a job change) can work for up to 240 days based upon the pending H1B petition;
2) 8 U.S.C. 1255(k) allows you to adjust status even if you worked without authorization for not more than 180 days.
Oh, yes, I've had a similar RFE for my dependants to show continuous H4 status so it's not unusual.
canu post the USCIS link for these 2 laws
1) 8 C.F.R. section 274A.12(b)(20) - An H1B holder whose employer has filed a new H1B petition to extend the stay (through the current employer - NOT a job change) can work for up to 240 days based upon the pending H1B petition;
2) 8 U.S.C. 1255(k) allows you to adjust status even if you worked without authorization for not more than 180 days.
Oh, yes, I've had a similar RFE for my dependants to show continuous H4 status so it's not unusual.
canu post the USCIS link for these 2 laws
wallpaper best short haircuts 2011 for
acecupid
07-23 09:24 AM
Need some help here answering a question in form I-539 Part 4, Section 3, Item a, b and c as follows:
Answer the following questions. If you answer "Yes" to any question, describe the circumstances in detail and explain on a separate sheet of paper.
Are you, or any other person included on the application, an applicant for an immigrant visa?
Has an immigrant petition ever been filed for you or for any other person included in this application?
Has Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, ever been filed by you or by any person included in this application?
I am confused regarding the answers and would really appreciate any help answering them. Please review below staus for family and I and advise. Your reasons supporting the answer would be extremely helpful and much appreciated.
Here's my status:
-Working in US since 2004 on a H1B so this is my 7th year extension.
-This would be the second instance of filing the extension working with the same company -I switched my H1B to back in 2006.
-I-140 was filed in March 2007 and approved in October the same year.
-I-485 for family and I was filed in July/August wave in 2007.
-LCA was filed last week and H1B renewal and extension of stay petition is expected to be filed next week. I have only 2 1/2 months remaining. Should that be a worry?
I had been using an attorney for all my previous filings for any kind of case but don't want to go back to him any more because of the quality of service, or lack thereof, I have been receiving from him lately. Not to mention the fee he has quoted is 50% more than last time. Even my office finds the amount to be very outrageous therefore they have decided to help me out and file the case themselves.
The questions which you posted at very straight forward. What is your confusion ? Has anyone applied a petition for your family with an immigrant intent ?
Answer the following questions. If you answer "Yes" to any question, describe the circumstances in detail and explain on a separate sheet of paper.
Are you, or any other person included on the application, an applicant for an immigrant visa?
Has an immigrant petition ever been filed for you or for any other person included in this application?
Has Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, ever been filed by you or by any person included in this application?
I am confused regarding the answers and would really appreciate any help answering them. Please review below staus for family and I and advise. Your reasons supporting the answer would be extremely helpful and much appreciated.
Here's my status:
-Working in US since 2004 on a H1B so this is my 7th year extension.
-This would be the second instance of filing the extension working with the same company -I switched my H1B to back in 2006.
-I-140 was filed in March 2007 and approved in October the same year.
-I-485 for family and I was filed in July/August wave in 2007.
-LCA was filed last week and H1B renewal and extension of stay petition is expected to be filed next week. I have only 2 1/2 months remaining. Should that be a worry?
I had been using an attorney for all my previous filings for any kind of case but don't want to go back to him any more because of the quality of service, or lack thereof, I have been receiving from him lately. Not to mention the fee he has quoted is 50% more than last time. Even my office finds the amount to be very outrageous therefore they have decided to help me out and file the case themselves.
The questions which you posted at very straight forward. What is your confusion ? Has anyone applied a petition for your family with an immigrant intent ?
kiran_k02
12-12 12:33 AM
Hi
My wife need to travel to india urgently. Our visa/I94 expired in Oct. We already applied 485 and is pending.
1) Will there be any issue at airpot as I94 is expired.A xerox copy of 485 receipt is sufficient. There shouldn't be any issue at the airport, I actually did not surrender my I-94 once out of ignorance and gave it to immigration officer on my way back. Anyway, As per your plan, take a copy of I485 receipt.
2) Does she need to travel any path in this case( I heard thru London is issue if visa is expired.France/Amsterdam Etcc..) London, you would need transit visa if you do not have US Visa stamped on your passport (even AP cannot help you here). I don't know about other Airports.
Thanks in advance.
Sree
I am a layman like you, please do your research and talk to your attorney to get final confirmation on these issues.
My wife need to travel to india urgently. Our visa/I94 expired in Oct. We already applied 485 and is pending.
1) Will there be any issue at airpot as I94 is expired.A xerox copy of 485 receipt is sufficient. There shouldn't be any issue at the airport, I actually did not surrender my I-94 once out of ignorance and gave it to immigration officer on my way back. Anyway, As per your plan, take a copy of I485 receipt.
2) Does she need to travel any path in this case( I heard thru London is issue if visa is expired.France/Amsterdam Etcc..) London, you would need transit visa if you do not have US Visa stamped on your passport (even AP cannot help you here). I don't know about other Airports.
Thanks in advance.
Sree
I am a layman like you, please do your research and talk to your attorney to get final confirmation on these issues.
2011 underwood hairstyles 2011.
martinvisalaw
04-02 01:18 PM
As other posters have said, your wife should file her H-4 extension ASAP, requesting a backdated (nunc pro tunc) approval. I have done a number of similar cases and had them approved, but this is no guarantee that your wife's would be approved. She does need to explain the delay in filing, and be prepared to leave the US if there is no decision on her extension by about mid-July.
more...
guesswho
04-10 01:55 AM
I though there is already an option where you could apply in PERM requesting transfer of the non-perm application to PERM (as against a new PERM application). That way you can keep the old PD.
tnite
11-14 02:14 PM
Hi,
Do anyone knows what kind of additional information is requested for Travel Document. Here is the message I see online:
Receipt Number: SRCXXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: We mailed you a notice requesting additional evidence.
On November 13, 2007, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence and/or information in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence and/or information requested. This case will be held in suspense until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the information and/or evidence requested, you will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something further from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service.
Possible documents :
1.copies of Old I -94's
2.Color copies of the relevent pages of passport
Do anyone knows what kind of additional information is requested for Travel Document. Here is the message I see online:
Receipt Number: SRCXXXXXXXXXX
Application Type: I131, APPLICATION FOR USCIS TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Current Status: We mailed you a notice requesting additional evidence.
On November 13, 2007, we mailed a notice requesting additional evidence and/or information in this case. Please follow the instructions on the notice to submit the evidence and/or information requested. This case will be held in suspense until we either receive the evidence or the opportunity to submit it expires. Once you submit the information and/or evidence requested, you will be notified by mail when a decision is made, or if the office needs something further from you. If you move while this case is pending, call customer service.
Possible documents :
1.copies of Old I -94's
2.Color copies of the relevent pages of passport
more...
WithoutGCAmigo
05-18 11:17 AM
Start with contacting another attorney. Let another attorney review your case and give his/her opinion.
Just don't rely on one attorney.
Just don't rely on one attorney.
2010 ricardo-quaresma-wallpaper
ashutrip
06-15 04:11 PM
What about the option
Refiling LC in PERM due to .... changing jobs, etc
Even PERM is Baclogged.......per my lawyer Atlanta is taking 6 months.....Amazing
Refiling LC in PERM due to .... changing jobs, etc
Even PERM is Baclogged.......per my lawyer Atlanta is taking 6 months.....Amazing
more...
Blog Feeds
10-15 06:30 PM
[Federal Register: October 6, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 192)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 51236-51237]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06oc09-4]
---------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
22 CFR Part 41
[Public Notice: 6779]
Visas: Documentation of Nonimmigrants Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, as Amended; Requirements for Aliens in Religious Occupations
AGENCY: State Department.
ACTION: Final rule.
---------------------------------------
SUMMARY: To comply with the Department of Homeland Security regulation requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. This rule establishes the requirement that consular officers ensure that R-1 visa applicants have obtained an approved U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I- 129 petition from the Department of Homeland Security before issuance of a visa.
DATES: This rule is effective October 6, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren A. Prosnik, Legislation and Regulations Division, Visa Services, Department of State, 2401 E Street, NW., Room L-603D, Washington, DC 20520-0106, (202) 663-2951.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Why is the Department promulgating this rule?
On November 26, 2008, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) promulgated regulations requiring sponsoring employers to file petitions for all aliens for whom R-1 nonimmigrant status is sought. 73 FR 72276. As a result, the requirements for an R-1 nonimmigrant visa now include establishing that the applicant is the beneficiary of an approved petition. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has implemented the petition requirement for nonimmigrant religious workers as a way to determine the bona fides of a petitioning religious organization located in the United States and to determine that a religious worker will be admitted to the United States to work for a specific religious organization at the request of that religious organization. This rule amends the Department regulations to ensure consistency with the regulations set forth by DHS.
Regulatory Findings
Administrative Procedure Act
This regulation involves a foreign affairs function of the United States and, therefore, in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1), is not subject to the rule making procedures set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553.
Regulatory Flexibility Act/Executive Order 13272: Small Business
Because this final rule is exempt from notice and comment rulemaking under 5 U.S.C. 553, it is exempt from the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements set forth at sections 603 and 604 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). Nonetheless, consistent with section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), the Department certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. This regulates individual aliens who seek consideration for R-1 nonimmigrant visas and does not affect any small entities, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(6).
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UFMA), Public Law 104-4, 109 Stat. 48, 2 U.S.C. 1532, generally requires agencies to prepare a statement before proposing any rule that may result in an annual expenditure of $100 million or more by State, local, or tribal governments, or by the private sector. This rule will not result in any such expenditure, nor will it significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
This rule is not a major rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804, for purposes of congressional review of agency rulemaking under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104- 121. This rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a major increase in costs or prices; or adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based companies to compete with foreign based companies in domestic and import markets.
Executive Order 12866
The Department of State has reviewed this proposed rule to ensure its consistency with the regulatory philosophy and principles set forth in Executive Order 12866 and has determined that the benefits of this final regulation justify its costs. The Department does not consider this final rule to be an economically significant action within the scope of section 3(f)(1) of the Executive Order since it is not likely to have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or to adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities.
Executive Orders 12372 and 13132: Federalism
This regulation will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Nor will the rule have federalism implications warranting the application of Executive Orders No. 12372 and No. 13132.
Executive Order 12988: Civil Justice Reform
The Department has reviewed the regulations in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order No. 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not impose information collection requirements under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35.
[[Page 51237]]
List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 41
Aliens, Foreign officials, Immigration, Nonimmigrants, Passports and Visas.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of State amends 22 CFR Part 41 as follows:
PART 41--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 41 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1104; Public Law 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681- 795 through 2681-801; 8 U.S.C.1185 note (section 7209 of Pub. L. 108-458, as amended by section 546 of Pub. L. 109-295).
2. Revise Sec. 41.58 to read as follows:
Sec. 41.58 Aliens in religious occupations.
(a) Requirements for ``R'' classification. An alien shall be classifiable under the provisions of INA 101(a)(15)(R) if:
(1) The consular officer is satisfied that the alien qualifies under the provisions of that section; and
(2) With respect to the principal alien, the consular officer has received official evidence of the approval by USCIS of a petition to accord such classification or the extension by USCIS of the period of authorized stay in such classification; or
(3) The alien is the spouse or child of an alien so classified and is accompanying or following to join the principal alien.
(b) Petition approval. The approval of a petition by USCIS does not establish that the alien is eligible to receive a nonimmigrant visa.
(c) Validity of visa. The period of validity of a visa issued on the basis of paragraph (a) to this section must not precede or exceed the period indicated in the petition, notification, or confirmation required in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(d) Aliens not entitled to classification under INA 101(a)(15)(R). The consular officer must suspend action on the alien's application and submit a report to the approving USCIS office if the consular officer knows or has reason to believe that an alien applying for a visa under INA 101(a)(15)(R) is not entitled to the classification as approved.
Dated: September 24, 2009.
Janice L. Jacobs,
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. E9-24089 Filed 10-5-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-06-P
More... (http://ashwinsharma.com/2009/10/07/dos-final-rule-on-amended-requirements-for-religious-workers.aspx?ref=rss)
hair Mar , crown hairstyles best
sukhyani
12-20 11:50 AM
yeah the two shows 'Daily Show with Jon Stewart' and 'Colbert Report' run back to back. I have not seen any media personality that influential in shaping public opinion. They are mostly honest and ruthlessly blunt about issues.
IV members, please post your comments on his message board. If there are a substantial number of posts, only then we can hope for him to ever talk about our issue on his show.
IV members, please post your comments on his message board. If there are a substantial number of posts, only then we can hope for him to ever talk about our issue on his show.
more...
vaishnavilakshmi
07-17 05:16 PM
Hi !,
yeah,Point-D clearly states that the visas available for july applications and applicants earlier and from august priority dates are unavailable.Lets c how they consider us!Iam a july 2nd filer.
vaishu
yeah,Point-D clearly states that the visas available for july applications and applicants earlier and from august priority dates are unavailable.Lets c how they consider us!Iam a july 2nd filer.
vaishu
hot wallpaper Hairstyle Trends
little_willy
07-28 06:24 PM
My friend who is a contractor in the company where I am working, is right now on H1B. He is a very hard worker and cheerful fellow. My employer (among big5 tech companies in US) offered him fulltime position.
His EAD is going to be expired soon, as he is a july 07 filer. He is worried that if he joins my employer at this point, and if he doesn't get his EAD renewed in time, he would be in trouble.
He already sent papers for renew but haven't heard back. After six weeks, his current EAD will expire.
can anyone guide, what are his options? my employer will not file H1B. is there anything like interim EAD?
You can expedite his case as I consider this an emergency. Check this link for more details. http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=179864#post179864
His EAD is going to be expired soon, as he is a july 07 filer. He is worried that if he joins my employer at this point, and if he doesn't get his EAD renewed in time, he would be in trouble.
He already sent papers for renew but haven't heard back. After six weeks, his current EAD will expire.
can anyone guide, what are his options? my employer will not file H1B. is there anything like interim EAD?
You can expedite his case as I consider this an emergency. Check this link for more details. http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=179864#post179864
more...
house Short scene hairstyles for
loudobbs
09-25 11:21 AM
before the new quota begins..
Any ideas how many visas are left? I still see a few approvals in ...
Could we see more approvals coming starting Oct 1 st?
I am getting desperate. MY PD is Aug 03 EB2 and it is current. Every day is a torture working for my current employer...
my last resort will be AC-21 Jan 2008
Any ideas how many visas are left? I still see a few approvals in ...
Could we see more approvals coming starting Oct 1 st?
I am getting desperate. MY PD is Aug 03 EB2 and it is current. Every day is a torture working for my current employer...
my last resort will be AC-21 Jan 2008
tattoo short hair styles for women
senthil1
03-02 10:18 AM
It doesn't matter. In 2008 total new h1b is around 125k and L1 is 84K. total exodus is nowhere near to total incoming persons.
Source:
http://www.rediff.com/money/2009/mar/02bcrisis-100000-pros-may-return-to-india-from-us.htm
100,000 pros may return to India from US
As economic downturn continues to grip the United States, as many as 100,000 highly skilled Indians -- and as many Chinese -- may return home over next three to five years, which will boost the economies and competitiveness of both the emerging Asian nations.
The reverse immigration could end up as a big loss to the US, which has so far relied heavily on the immigrants to give it a technological edge over the rest of the world, according to a study conducted by Indian-American Vivek Wadhwa and released by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The majority of these Western-educated, skilled and talented young Indian and Chinese professionals are planning to start new ventures, says the report released on Monday.
Much before the American economic slowdown, a large number of these professionals had already begun returning home lured apparently by prospects of a better future back home.
It also indicates that placing limits on foreign workers in the US is not the answer to its rising unemployment rate and may undermine efforts to spur technological innovation.
"A substantial number of highly skilled immigrants have started returning to their home countries in recent years, draining a key source of brain power and innovation," said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
Based on a six month survey of 1,203 Indian and Chinese who went back home, the report finds though restrictive immigration policies caused some returnees to depart the US, the most significant factors in the decision to return home were career opportunities, family ties, and quality of life.
"There are no hard numbers available on how many have returned, but anecdotal evidence shows that this is in the tens of thousands," said Wadhwa, executive-in-residence for Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University.
Wadhwa is also a fellow at the Labour and Work life Programme at Harvard Law School and is a BusinessWeek columnist.
"With the economic downturn, my guess is that we'll have over 100,000 Indians and as many Chinese return home over the next 3-5 years. This flood of western educated and skilled talent will greatly boost the economies of India and China and strengthen their competitiveness," he said.
India is already becoming a global hub for R&D. This will allow it to branch into many new areas and will accelerate the trend, Wadhwa said.
The report reveals that family considerations are strong magnets pulling immigrants back to their home countries. Care for aging parents was considered by 89.4 per cent of Indians and 79.1 per cent of Chinese respondents to be much better in their home countries, says the 24-page report.
Source:
http://www.rediff.com/money/2009/mar/02bcrisis-100000-pros-may-return-to-india-from-us.htm
100,000 pros may return to India from US
As economic downturn continues to grip the United States, as many as 100,000 highly skilled Indians -- and as many Chinese -- may return home over next three to five years, which will boost the economies and competitiveness of both the emerging Asian nations.
The reverse immigration could end up as a big loss to the US, which has so far relied heavily on the immigrants to give it a technological edge over the rest of the world, according to a study conducted by Indian-American Vivek Wadhwa and released by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The majority of these Western-educated, skilled and talented young Indian and Chinese professionals are planning to start new ventures, says the report released on Monday.
Much before the American economic slowdown, a large number of these professionals had already begun returning home lured apparently by prospects of a better future back home.
It also indicates that placing limits on foreign workers in the US is not the answer to its rising unemployment rate and may undermine efforts to spur technological innovation.
"A substantial number of highly skilled immigrants have started returning to their home countries in recent years, draining a key source of brain power and innovation," said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
Based on a six month survey of 1,203 Indian and Chinese who went back home, the report finds though restrictive immigration policies caused some returnees to depart the US, the most significant factors in the decision to return home were career opportunities, family ties, and quality of life.
"There are no hard numbers available on how many have returned, but anecdotal evidence shows that this is in the tens of thousands," said Wadhwa, executive-in-residence for Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University.
Wadhwa is also a fellow at the Labour and Work life Programme at Harvard Law School and is a BusinessWeek columnist.
"With the economic downturn, my guess is that we'll have over 100,000 Indians and as many Chinese return home over the next 3-5 years. This flood of western educated and skilled talent will greatly boost the economies of India and China and strengthen their competitiveness," he said.
India is already becoming a global hub for R&D. This will allow it to branch into many new areas and will accelerate the trend, Wadhwa said.
The report reveals that family considerations are strong magnets pulling immigrants back to their home countries. Care for aging parents was considered by 89.4 per cent of Indians and 79.1 per cent of Chinese respondents to be much better in their home countries, says the 24-page report.
more...
pictures short hair styles for women
Dhundhun
06-11 07:03 PM
Hello,
I called USCIS Boston Field office today ( 800 # on the FP Notices ) and the Customer Service Rep told me that If we have already given finger prints then we can ignore the second FP notices. But she did not ask for any of our A# or Receipt #. I asked her to pull out my record based on 485 receipt # and verify if the finger prints we gave earlier are correct and we do not have to worry about the second finger prints notices. She said she cannot do that.
SO, I got Infopass appointment for tomorrow. If at all, the officer says tomorrow that I do not have to worry about the second FP notices then what should I do ???
1) Do they send any kind of letter in mail saying I should ignore the second set of FP notices. ( OR )
2) Should I ask for any thing in writing saying that we are good with the finger prints we already gave and do not have to worry about the new notices (OR)
3) Do they put any stamps and write on our new FP original notices saying Finger Prints not required for the second time.
Thank you for letting me know.
If they can endorse in any form on your notice (or other wise give any paper), it will be good for future. Otherwise I have heard that they just tend to say that ignore notice.
In any case keep the record of your visit.
Please update us.
I called USCIS Boston Field office today ( 800 # on the FP Notices ) and the Customer Service Rep told me that If we have already given finger prints then we can ignore the second FP notices. But she did not ask for any of our A# or Receipt #. I asked her to pull out my record based on 485 receipt # and verify if the finger prints we gave earlier are correct and we do not have to worry about the second finger prints notices. She said she cannot do that.
SO, I got Infopass appointment for tomorrow. If at all, the officer says tomorrow that I do not have to worry about the second FP notices then what should I do ???
1) Do they send any kind of letter in mail saying I should ignore the second set of FP notices. ( OR )
2) Should I ask for any thing in writing saying that we are good with the finger prints we already gave and do not have to worry about the new notices (OR)
3) Do they put any stamps and write on our new FP original notices saying Finger Prints not required for the second time.
Thank you for letting me know.
If they can endorse in any form on your notice (or other wise give any paper), it will be good for future. Otherwise I have heard that they just tend to say that ignore notice.
In any case keep the record of your visit.
Please update us.
dresses quaresma wallpaper. ricardo
pbojja
10-13 02:01 PM
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5joRRCZn_Du7r-_F3AFHt3eicyQ1gD93IMS1O0
This is ridiculous , If you are having 11 -26 year old kid or wife , you should be outraged . Dont risk the life for GC , I know its just a vacination but why only for immigrants ?they want to test the vacination on immigrants ?
If you have a kid do a i-report to CNN , get the attention of media , write to 60 minutes.
This is ridiculous , If you are having 11 -26 year old kid or wife , you should be outraged . Dont risk the life for GC , I know its just a vacination but why only for immigrants ?they want to test the vacination on immigrants ?
If you have a kid do a i-report to CNN , get the attention of media , write to 60 minutes.
more...
makeup makeup celebrity hair
Sunx_2004
10-08 04:29 PM
I am also in the same situation. But not sure about H1 transfer. I posted all the questions to our lawyer and waiting for reply.
Did your attorney replied back?
Did your attorney replied back?
girlfriend african american hairstyles
setpit_gc
08-13 02:09 PM
What if that company not willing to offer any employment or no longer exists?.
hairstyles Cool Trend Scene Hairstyle
flex
10-02 02:38 PM
Thanks Pom, but I'm having a bit of a time grouping these designers http://www.kirupa.com/forums/smileys_files/stickpoke.gif
senthil1
03-02 10:18 AM
It doesn't matter. In 2008 total new h1b is around 125k and L1 is 84K. total exodus is nowhere near to total incoming persons.
Source:
http://www.rediff.com/money/2009/mar/02bcrisis-100000-pros-may-return-to-india-from-us.htm
100,000 pros may return to India from US
As economic downturn continues to grip the United States, as many as 100,000 highly skilled Indians -- and as many Chinese -- may return home over next three to five years, which will boost the economies and competitiveness of both the emerging Asian nations.
The reverse immigration could end up as a big loss to the US, which has so far relied heavily on the immigrants to give it a technological edge over the rest of the world, according to a study conducted by Indian-American Vivek Wadhwa and released by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The majority of these Western-educated, skilled and talented young Indian and Chinese professionals are planning to start new ventures, says the report released on Monday.
Much before the American economic slowdown, a large number of these professionals had already begun returning home lured apparently by prospects of a better future back home.
It also indicates that placing limits on foreign workers in the US is not the answer to its rising unemployment rate and may undermine efforts to spur technological innovation.
"A substantial number of highly skilled immigrants have started returning to their home countries in recent years, draining a key source of brain power and innovation," said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
Based on a six month survey of 1,203 Indian and Chinese who went back home, the report finds though restrictive immigration policies caused some returnees to depart the US, the most significant factors in the decision to return home were career opportunities, family ties, and quality of life.
"There are no hard numbers available on how many have returned, but anecdotal evidence shows that this is in the tens of thousands," said Wadhwa, executive-in-residence for Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University.
Wadhwa is also a fellow at the Labour and Work life Programme at Harvard Law School and is a BusinessWeek columnist.
"With the economic downturn, my guess is that we'll have over 100,000 Indians and as many Chinese return home over the next 3-5 years. This flood of western educated and skilled talent will greatly boost the economies of India and China and strengthen their competitiveness," he said.
India is already becoming a global hub for R&D. This will allow it to branch into many new areas and will accelerate the trend, Wadhwa said.
The report reveals that family considerations are strong magnets pulling immigrants back to their home countries. Care for aging parents was considered by 89.4 per cent of Indians and 79.1 per cent of Chinese respondents to be much better in their home countries, says the 24-page report.
Source:
http://www.rediff.com/money/2009/mar/02bcrisis-100000-pros-may-return-to-india-from-us.htm
100,000 pros may return to India from US
As economic downturn continues to grip the United States, as many as 100,000 highly skilled Indians -- and as many Chinese -- may return home over next three to five years, which will boost the economies and competitiveness of both the emerging Asian nations.
The reverse immigration could end up as a big loss to the US, which has so far relied heavily on the immigrants to give it a technological edge over the rest of the world, according to a study conducted by Indian-American Vivek Wadhwa and released by the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation.
The majority of these Western-educated, skilled and talented young Indian and Chinese professionals are planning to start new ventures, says the report released on Monday.
Much before the American economic slowdown, a large number of these professionals had already begun returning home lured apparently by prospects of a better future back home.
It also indicates that placing limits on foreign workers in the US is not the answer to its rising unemployment rate and may undermine efforts to spur technological innovation.
"A substantial number of highly skilled immigrants have started returning to their home countries in recent years, draining a key source of brain power and innovation," said Robert Litan, vice president of Research and Policy at the Kauffman Foundation.
Based on a six month survey of 1,203 Indian and Chinese who went back home, the report finds though restrictive immigration policies caused some returnees to depart the US, the most significant factors in the decision to return home were career opportunities, family ties, and quality of life.
"There are no hard numbers available on how many have returned, but anecdotal evidence shows that this is in the tens of thousands," said Wadhwa, executive-in-residence for Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University.
Wadhwa is also a fellow at the Labour and Work life Programme at Harvard Law School and is a BusinessWeek columnist.
"With the economic downturn, my guess is that we'll have over 100,000 Indians and as many Chinese return home over the next 3-5 years. This flood of western educated and skilled talent will greatly boost the economies of India and China and strengthen their competitiveness," he said.
India is already becoming a global hub for R&D. This will allow it to branch into many new areas and will accelerate the trend, Wadhwa said.
The report reveals that family considerations are strong magnets pulling immigrants back to their home countries. Care for aging parents was considered by 89.4 per cent of Indians and 79.1 per cent of Chinese respondents to be much better in their home countries, says the 24-page report.
msgoud
03-07 10:05 PM
my brother got recently married and his wife went to stamping in kolkata and they gave 221g for h4 and 2 days later they even cancelled my brothers exiting stamped H1 and his visa.he is in IT industry
any ideas whats next for him.
does he need to apply for a new H1B or can any lawyer help him convince.
any ideas whats next for him.
does he need to apply for a new H1B or can any lawyer help him convince.
0 comments:
Post a Comment