2011년 6월 18일 토요일

free animated desktop wallpaper

images Download Animated Wallpaper: free animated desktop wallpaper. Animated Desktop Wallpaper
  • Animated Desktop Wallpaper


  • go_guy123
    08-24 04:52 PM
    ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> 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.




    wallpaper Animated Desktop Wallpaper free animated desktop wallpaper. Animated Desktop Wallpaper
  • Animated Desktop Wallpaper


  • vactorboy29
    02-24 02:25 PM
    Consider this, I am an H1B and my perm has not been filed yet. I have been contributing to the IV posts(not monetary so far)...and haven't asked any question/query myself yet..... what do you want me to do pay money to reply to a post where a guy needs help on how to complain to DOL or if there is a link on CNN and I want to share with fellow IVians??

    Yes this is discussion forum but we have Job to get it done through our members. if members doesn't help us financially then we are loosing our edge. Nothing is free here (America), all actions are cost associated with it just calling senator or writing letter is just part of action.we need to convince our fellow member to contribute financially like donating money for good cause.Thanks




    free animated desktop wallpaper. free animated wallpaper.
  • free animated wallpaper.


  • kaisersose
    07-24 03:07 PM
    ashkam - Thanks alot for the info....my case is "If your job (description, location and salary) remains same or similar under the new company"...still i don't understand why my attorney says to start all over again.

    I feel like packing up and go back home ...this country's immi system is all messed up...not sure i can mentally handle it anymore :(

    Spend $200 dollars for a 15 min conversation with any of the top attorneys. Your confusion will be laid to rest.

    Just send your questions and all required details to them ahead of time and also write down all possible follow up questions for yourself so that both parties are prepared before the call.

    If they say you have to start afresh, then you can consider packing your bags. Good luck!




    2011 Animated Desktop Wallpaper free animated desktop wallpaper. Wallpapers Active Desktop,
  • Wallpapers Active Desktop,


  • alex99
    04-08 02:14 PM
    (EB1)
    2007 2006 2005
    26,697 36,960 64,731
    (EB2)
    44,162 21,911 42,597
    (EB3)
    85,030 89,922 129,070


    How come EB3 is getting major share from the annual limit for last three years(2007,2006, and 2005)

    Gurus : please through some light on this?



    more...

    free animated desktop wallpaper. Desktop Wallpapers and
  • Desktop Wallpapers and


  • nk2006
    09-25 11:02 AM
    Good find - shows the plight of legal immigrants.

    A bit of nitpicking - actually the chart is underestimating the time for EmploymentBased / skilled immigrants wait - says 11-16 years to get citizenship sort of suggesting 16 years is the worst case scenario to get citizenship. Its a bit underestimate especially for people coming from India/China. I have seen many people (including me) on these forums who entered US "legally" ten years ago and still waiting for GC with no idea when they would finally get it. Some of them might finally get citizenship 20 years after entering the country "legally".

    On the whole it shows the reality of legal immigration and its waiting times.




    free animated desktop wallpaper. Animated Desktop Wallpaper
  • Animated Desktop Wallpaper


  • optimystic
    04-08 06:21 PM
    See my details in signature.

    Just waiting for the Processing dates in Nebraska to progress now.



    more...

    free animated desktop wallpaper. Jungle Storm 3D Animated
  • Jungle Storm 3D Animated


  • svm
    08-31 12:10 PM
    I am also in the same boat. I am Aug 2007 filer. I got an interview at local office on Feb 2009 to check on my vaccination papers.. They told me my papers will be at their office until the dates become current, and that they will issue Finger print notice before apprving the case(when the date become current) that as my FP was close to expiry then. They gave me a letter that said only contact them 30 days after the dates become current. I havent got the FP notice yet. Not sure if I should contact the local office.




    2010 free animated wallpaper. free animated desktop wallpaper. Download Animated Wallpaper:
  • Download Animated Wallpaper:


  • mirage
    07-29 02:25 PM
    I did not have prior information about this call, else I would,ve ask them 2 questions.

    1) Why Don't USCIS give 2 years AP too..

    2) USCIS should publish some statistics on how many Employement based AOS applications they have pending, what EB categories they are in along the the chargeable country and priority dates..

    Thanks



    more...

    free animated desktop wallpaper. free animated desktop
  • free animated desktop


  • MArch172008
    06-05 01:20 PM
    My labour got approved on May 23rd .

    Is it possible to switch company and use this labour whihc got approved by this company?

    Thanks for all your support and sharing for knowledge.




    hair Wallpapers Active Desktop, free animated desktop wallpaper. free animated desktop
  • free animated desktop


  • srisra
    07-13 09:25 PM
    my lawyer says... apply now.. dont know what will be situ in october.. it might go forward.. backward...my pd is 10/2003.

    he says since my medicals are over.. all docs are ready ... so he says file and be part of lawsuit..
    is this wise idea...if i say yes.. he will file by next week..
    i already sent money for my wife...
    my company is not covering my wife's expenses.
    the lawyer is charing 600 for legal and 745 for filing...
    are these
    reasonable fees



    more...

    free animated desktop wallpaper. animated wallpaper Products
  • animated wallpaper Products


  • LongJourny
    01-20 06:10 PM
    Hi,

    I was working for a company A and filed for h1 transfer through company b. I was able to transfer successfully. However, Company A realised that some how and fired me immediately. because of this I had to leave this company A before even I start working for Company B. As an Example, Company A termininated by job on august 23 rd and I started workin for the company B from August 31. I have filed, h1 transfer, while working for Company A and got approved.

    I have been working for company for over a period of 3 years, got stamped once after wards, and also renewed my H1. Now I needs to get it stamped. I need to mention my previous employment history with dates along with employment letters in DS-156 form. Now I am afraid if they might reject my visa. Can you please help me understand my situation and offer any suggestion. thanks in advance




    hot Desktop Wallpapers and free animated desktop wallpaper. Animated Desktop Wallpaper
  • Animated Desktop Wallpaper


  • ajay
    04-21 10:58 AM
    My wife had gone to DMV in fair oaks mall and they had asked her to produce the original I485 and unfortunately we don't carry it. Our license is going to expire next month.

    Anybody know what we can do in this situation. Has anybody got a licence recently from VA state.

    thanks



    more...

    house for Animated Desktop free animated desktop wallpaper. free 3d desktop wallpaper
  • free 3d desktop wallpaper


  • aj_jadeja
    02-07 08:56 PM
    Here is some more info

    I am traveling from

    From GSP ( Greenville Spartanburg) to Ahmedabad
    or from ATLANTA to Ahmedabad

    thanks


    my opinion what ever route u go u will have minimum 2 stops . IF u take direct flights like ny/chicago to delhi then u will have to fly from delhi to ahd.

    what ever route u fly cost will be from $1300 to $1500

    so my take would be this.

    Atlanta - LA - singapore - ahmedabad (via singapore airlines).

    no transist visa needed

    service and food/drinks of singapore airline just superb.

    singapore airport is also superb. nice entertainment area / food court. btw it has desi fast food place so you can enjoy good food there too.

    last thing singapore to ahd direct flight :)

    aj




    tattoo Animated Desktop Wallpaper free animated desktop wallpaper. a free animated wallpaper
  • a free animated wallpaper


  • pappu
    06-05 11:52 AM
    no, no....it does not make me feel any better...
    I am so sorry to hear about your never ending wait....
    :( :(

    unfortunately, we cannot go back to our home country, as unemployment rate is insanely high, we would be both without jobs, no place to live, another civil war may break any day now and we do not want to go through all that all over again...

    As each day pass, Canada looks even better as our new motherland ...or at least we hope
    :rolleyes:
    I agree. Such delays are forcing several professionals to consider Australia and Canada. Its a loss to this country and gain for other countries since they have favourable immigration laws. However it is really tough to uproot ourselves and go some place else and start over. Canada still does not have a good economy and job prospects as in USA, thus the struggle is going to be hard for you if you were to look for a job.



    more...

    pictures Jungle Storm 3D Animated free animated desktop wallpaper. free animated desktop
  • free animated desktop


  • prom2
    11-26 10:30 AM
    I saw in four Jun filers approvals at TSC dated 11/24.

    Good luck




    dresses Animated Desktop Wallpaper free animated desktop wallpaper. 3d wallpapers for desktop
  • 3d wallpapers for desktop


  • kedrex
    01-13 06:04 AM
    ^



    more...

    makeup free animated desktop free animated desktop wallpaper. for Animated Desktop
  • for Animated Desktop


  • jchan
    05-14 05:26 PM
    Didn't the last recapture of visas (AC21) happen in 2000, an election year ? Also H1B law was modified to include 20000 visas for US Masters students during 2004. Actually, history is in our favor.

    I was about the say the same thing. I still remember vividly when the 20k new H1B was made available and the nervous waiting for that to be implemented back then. Whew, can't believe it's been 4 years an I am still stuck in this same old waiting game.




    girlfriend a free animated wallpaper free animated desktop wallpaper. free animated desktop
  • free animated desktop


  • go_guy123
    08-24 04:52 PM
    ILW.COM - immigration news: Ninth Circuit In Herrera v. <em>USCIS</em> 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.




    hairstyles animated wallpaper Products free animated desktop wallpaper. animated wallpaper windows 7
  • animated wallpaper windows 7


  • keiryu
    06-28 04:28 PM
    You can have AOS and H-1b concurrently. If you have the time, I would renew your H-1B visa at the consulate and re-enter using H-1b. It is much less hassle than to return using AP.




    justAnotherFile
    07-11 09:18 PM
    this is not a published article.
    He has just taken the issue you emailed him, verbatim and posted it as an alert on this board. NO claims or copyrights on the verbiage.
    so I guess it is ok.




    locomotive36
    11-15 09:44 AM
    With only 3 days to go for voting, lets do our best to ensure that Narayanan Krishnan wins.

    Please take a minute to vote and vote many times as possible. Please share with family and friends!

    Thankyou and God Bless!



    댓글 없음:

    댓글 쓰기