sam_hoosier
12-27 10:45 AM
All,
With the current rate of outsourcing happening around in US and the rate of influx of temporary workers coming in on mostly L1 and may be few on H1 B Visas every year through the outsourcing companies , i am sceptical about the future of GC aspirants. With the way of GC processing happening which are caused by restrictions /policies of governing bodies and no sight of positive relief in near future i am little apprehensive about the future.
I feel that there might be no areas that are not impacted by Outsourcing boom . Most of the companies that i see and my friends work ,i see many of the operations are outsourced or planning in place to get outsourced.
with the current rate of outsourcing and subprime mess which may cause slow down in economy , i am not sure if there would be any positions to support our AOS , when our PD becomes current. Some times i think , the fight for GC is even worth it.
Every one feel free to post your views/opinions/Analysis on this topic ....
The impact of outsourcing (if any) would only be on lower level software/IT jobs which are getting sent to cheaper destinations. However the GC applicant pool is much wider than just IT/software programmers, so overall the impact would be smaller.
With the current rate of outsourcing happening around in US and the rate of influx of temporary workers coming in on mostly L1 and may be few on H1 B Visas every year through the outsourcing companies , i am sceptical about the future of GC aspirants. With the way of GC processing happening which are caused by restrictions /policies of governing bodies and no sight of positive relief in near future i am little apprehensive about the future.
I feel that there might be no areas that are not impacted by Outsourcing boom . Most of the companies that i see and my friends work ,i see many of the operations are outsourced or planning in place to get outsourced.
with the current rate of outsourcing and subprime mess which may cause slow down in economy , i am not sure if there would be any positions to support our AOS , when our PD becomes current. Some times i think , the fight for GC is even worth it.
Every one feel free to post your views/opinions/Analysis on this topic ....
The impact of outsourcing (if any) would only be on lower level software/IT jobs which are getting sent to cheaper destinations. However the GC applicant pool is much wider than just IT/software programmers, so overall the impact would be smaller.
wallpaper hairstyles funny quotes about
anai
07-19 02:20 PM
Most people from India will have PPD test positive as they have received BCG vaccine in childhood. PPD test in not mandatory. Negative chest xray is sufficient to prove that you are free from active TB (you may still have dormant infection but that doesn't matter at this point of time). Plus USCIS/CDC had published a guideline for civil surgeons instructing how to perform the Medical exam for immigration purposes and it clearly says that applicant can choose not to have PPD test and negative cxr will be sufficient.
Please cite the source for the claim that an applicant has some sort of a choice about the skin test. I disagree with your claim for the following three reasons.
(1) See instructions to form I-693 (the medical form): http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-693.pdf "Applicants two years old or older will be required to have a tuberculin skin test."
(2) Also, while this next link is less authoritative than USCIS's link above, see this page on murthy: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_tbtest.html (dated mid May)
(3) Note also the USCIS memo (dated April) that went into effect by mid June:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/RFEFactSheet041207.pdf
This states that, unlike earlier, petitions filed without initial evidence are more likely to be rejected than to be RFE-ed. (See towards end of first page). "To avoid denial, USCIS urges applicants and petitioners to file complete
applications with all of the required initial evidence. The initial evidence for each application and petition type is clearly listed on the form instructions and in the regulations."
As always, please read the instructions to the forms. Most questions will have answers there.
And if the original poster found any of the answers in this thread useful, consider contributing to IV.
Please cite the source for the claim that an applicant has some sort of a choice about the skin test. I disagree with your claim for the following three reasons.
(1) See instructions to form I-693 (the medical form): http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-693.pdf "Applicants two years old or older will be required to have a tuberculin skin test."
(2) Also, while this next link is less authoritative than USCIS's link above, see this page on murthy: http://www.murthy.com/news/n_tbtest.html (dated mid May)
(3) Note also the USCIS memo (dated April) that went into effect by mid June:
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/RFEFactSheet041207.pdf
This states that, unlike earlier, petitions filed without initial evidence are more likely to be rejected than to be RFE-ed. (See towards end of first page). "To avoid denial, USCIS urges applicants and petitioners to file complete
applications with all of the required initial evidence. The initial evidence for each application and petition type is clearly listed on the form instructions and in the regulations."
As always, please read the instructions to the forms. Most questions will have answers there.
And if the original poster found any of the answers in this thread useful, consider contributing to IV.
alterego
08-10 02:46 PM
The original intent of labour substitution was not bad. If you understand that EB immigration was designed with the AMERICAN EMPLOYER and their needs in mind you will understand why labour substitution was allowed. It was a way for american employers to get employees in critical shortage areas and keep american industry competitive. It really was not meant to either be fair or not fair to you and me. If you understand this then it all makes more sense.
That was then and this is now. So what has it evolved to?
Labour substitution became a bargainig chip, for employee/employers. It was bought and sold. It was used, abused and misused and done so rather widespreadly. It started to be used mainly by Desi Bodyshoppers. In some cases for friends and even relatives, to the extent that AMERICAN employers and their employees became the ones getting hurt/delayed by it.
So the rules were changed. Those of us who went through the traditional channels realise that those of you who took labour subs. did nothing legally wrong. Simply understand that we cannot and will not have any sympathy for you if and when something goes wrong.
As for the folks asking people not to give their opinion. Please post in a private forum then.
That was then and this is now. So what has it evolved to?
Labour substitution became a bargainig chip, for employee/employers. It was bought and sold. It was used, abused and misused and done so rather widespreadly. It started to be used mainly by Desi Bodyshoppers. In some cases for friends and even relatives, to the extent that AMERICAN employers and their employees became the ones getting hurt/delayed by it.
So the rules were changed. Those of us who went through the traditional channels realise that those of you who took labour subs. did nothing legally wrong. Simply understand that we cannot and will not have any sympathy for you if and when something goes wrong.
As for the folks asking people not to give their opinion. Please post in a private forum then.
2011 2011 funny quotes on attitude.
willwin
06-12 11:02 AM
Can we have some update at 11 AM ?
Looks like they are talking about unemployment now ....
I guess it is 11 am EST, correct?
Looks like they are talking about unemployment now ....
I guess it is 11 am EST, correct?
more...
ss1026
08-20 06:18 PM
I would like to know How to file a complaint about labor fraud? I just found out that my employer didn't file 485 for me and instead he used the labor for someone else. Is there anyway I can file a complaint? I have no other option except to wait until the dates are current again. I paid all the expenses for labor, 140 and 485.
I don't think I can truly understand how frustrated and angry you must be and I really hope there is a legal avenue by which you could atleast get some kind of monetary reward. I hope you could take this employer through the DOL fraud dept and cause him to really pay for this.
One of the side benefits of the end of labor substitutions is that unscrupulous employers like your desi employer will not be able to sell a labor to the highest bidder or give it away to a new hire as a 'sign on' bonus. Either the original candidate gets it or goes to waste. Though it seems a little tough, it more than makes up by preventing such stories as yours in the future. Good luck
I don't think I can truly understand how frustrated and angry you must be and I really hope there is a legal avenue by which you could atleast get some kind of monetary reward. I hope you could take this employer through the DOL fraud dept and cause him to really pay for this.
One of the side benefits of the end of labor substitutions is that unscrupulous employers like your desi employer will not be able to sell a labor to the highest bidder or give it away to a new hire as a 'sign on' bonus. Either the original candidate gets it or goes to waste. Though it seems a little tough, it more than makes up by preventing such stories as yours in the future. Good luck
anai
07-19 02:28 PM
Could you please post the correct link? This one is not working. I wanted to check about the initial evidence
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/RFEFactSheet041207.pdf
(Have updated my original post with this link. Thanks for pointing out.)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/RFEFactSheet041207.pdf
(Have updated my original post with this link. Thanks for pointing out.)
more...
rockstart
01-15 08:08 AM
I have sent the letter to WH and cast vote.
2010 funny quotes about attitude.
s_r_e_e
08-31 10:10 PM
Even today i came across a friend saying according to his so and so friends thinking , EB2 should move very fast as last time it jumped from 2002 - 2004 or what ever in 2 months !!!!... There are lot of people who dont understand the depth of the problem , the yearly limit , country quota etc..
I think the only way to make them understand is to tell that since 1 million people are in queue and only 140K GC per year , your GC will take any where from 8-15 years.. :)
I think the only way to make them understand is to tell that since 1 million people are in queue and only 140K GC per year , your GC will take any where from 8-15 years.. :)
more...
mallu
12-02 02:40 PM
12/02/2007: News of DHS Plan to Approve Immigration Applications Without FBI Name Check Results After Certain Months Stirs Confusion
A couple of sources reported lately that DHS was planning to place a cap on the FBI fingerprint check period and should the agency fail to receive the FBI report within certain undisclosed period of time, the agency will proceed with adjudication of pending immigration applications. Reportedly, the information was released at a DHS meeting with the immigration stakeholders but there are no details of information available about the so-called plan of change of course in managing homeland security matter.
This reminds of the agency's past history in 1998 acting on the backlogs in CIA clearance for over one year causing a huge I-485 backlogs for years and announcing that the INS would adjudicate pending I-485 applications without waiting for the CIA completion of the security clearance on a condition that should the CIA report indicate a negative information, the INS would "revoke" the approved I-485 applications. The people who suffered the most from the lack of coordination betweren the INS and the CIA at the time were Chinese. The INS stop-gap action stirred some political concern and short-lived. The CIA clearance backlogs gradually improved afterwards helping the INS to remove the 485 backlogs over a period of time.
Such unusual stop-gap action was taken "before" 9/11. Since 9/11, the security and name checks have presented the DHS with a challenging task of balancing betweein securing homeland and reducing clearance time. The FBI name checks have presented a serious problem of backlogs particularly in two areas: One is name check backlogs in the new hires of federal government employees and the other is the immigration backlogs. According to the CIS Ombudsman reports, in 2006 the DHS had about 82,824 backlogs pending more than one year. and in 2007 the number increased to 106,738 cases. Such backlogs induced federal litigations in the form of mandamus actions by the applicants with some successful results. The burden of such litigations on the DHS financial and litigation resources has mounted over the years. In order to deal with the problem, the USCIS one time "informally" handled such problem by approving applications (I-485 and natulalization cases) when the applicants brought mandamus actions in the federal courts. Such action had brought a boom of business for some immigration lawyers rushing to filing of a sort of "massive" mandamus actions. Obviously, this action raised a serious polical outcry for the agency compromising the nation's security by adjudicating applications without the name check results, leading to suspension of the DHS informal policy and a subsequent announcement that the agency would not give any favorable consideration in adjudication of applications where a federal lawsuit was pending.
The environment of the agency's security management indeed changed before and after 9/11 and the precedent of INS approving I-485 applications without name check results without prejudice to potential revocation of such approved I-485 applications afterwards may not be that easily reintroduced as the agency will have to overcome two hurdles: A political pressure in the upcoming national election and a potential compromise of security. There was a legislative proposal in the Congress in one of the FY 2008 appropriation bills (CJS Appropriation Bill) which mandated the DHS to adjudicate immigration and naturalization applications, should the FBI fail to clear the name checks within six months from the effective date of the legislation. This legislation has yet to be finalized. Please stay tuned.
A couple of sources reported lately that DHS was planning to place a cap on the FBI fingerprint check period and should the agency fail to receive the FBI report within certain undisclosed period of time, the agency will proceed with adjudication of pending immigration applications. Reportedly, the information was released at a DHS meeting with the immigration stakeholders but there are no details of information available about the so-called plan of change of course in managing homeland security matter.
This reminds of the agency's past history in 1998 acting on the backlogs in CIA clearance for over one year causing a huge I-485 backlogs for years and announcing that the INS would adjudicate pending I-485 applications without waiting for the CIA completion of the security clearance on a condition that should the CIA report indicate a negative information, the INS would "revoke" the approved I-485 applications. The people who suffered the most from the lack of coordination betweren the INS and the CIA at the time were Chinese. The INS stop-gap action stirred some political concern and short-lived. The CIA clearance backlogs gradually improved afterwards helping the INS to remove the 485 backlogs over a period of time.
Such unusual stop-gap action was taken "before" 9/11. Since 9/11, the security and name checks have presented the DHS with a challenging task of balancing betweein securing homeland and reducing clearance time. The FBI name checks have presented a serious problem of backlogs particularly in two areas: One is name check backlogs in the new hires of federal government employees and the other is the immigration backlogs. According to the CIS Ombudsman reports, in 2006 the DHS had about 82,824 backlogs pending more than one year. and in 2007 the number increased to 106,738 cases. Such backlogs induced federal litigations in the form of mandamus actions by the applicants with some successful results. The burden of such litigations on the DHS financial and litigation resources has mounted over the years. In order to deal with the problem, the USCIS one time "informally" handled such problem by approving applications (I-485 and natulalization cases) when the applicants brought mandamus actions in the federal courts. Such action had brought a boom of business for some immigration lawyers rushing to filing of a sort of "massive" mandamus actions. Obviously, this action raised a serious polical outcry for the agency compromising the nation's security by adjudicating applications without the name check results, leading to suspension of the DHS informal policy and a subsequent announcement that the agency would not give any favorable consideration in adjudication of applications where a federal lawsuit was pending.
The environment of the agency's security management indeed changed before and after 9/11 and the precedent of INS approving I-485 applications without name check results without prejudice to potential revocation of such approved I-485 applications afterwards may not be that easily reintroduced as the agency will have to overcome two hurdles: A political pressure in the upcoming national election and a potential compromise of security. There was a legislative proposal in the Congress in one of the FY 2008 appropriation bills (CJS Appropriation Bill) which mandated the DHS to adjudicate immigration and naturalization applications, should the FBI fail to clear the name checks within six months from the effective date of the legislation. This legislation has yet to be finalized. Please stay tuned.
hair wallpaper funny attitude
pd_recapturing
06-18 10:47 PM
There is a question on part 7 of AP efiling. I guess, same question is also there in paper form as well. Could somebody please explain as to what to do about this. Here is the question:-
On a separate piece of paper, please explain how you would qualify for an Advance Parole and what circumstances warrant issuance of Advance Parole. Include copies of any documents you wish considered. (See instructions.)
Do we really need to send this ? I do not remember that I did send it last time. Thanks
On a separate piece of paper, please explain how you would qualify for an Advance Parole and what circumstances warrant issuance of Advance Parole. Include copies of any documents you wish considered. (See instructions.)
Do we really need to send this ? I do not remember that I did send it last time. Thanks
more...
Gravitation
12-13 10:12 AM
I hope it doesn't retrogress in future.
I still don't understand why is EB-2 not moving forward especially that EB-1 is current.
Too many people converted to perm-EB2 when EB3 retrogression hit. Also, excess EB2 RoW are not flowing to EB2-India but to EB3 instead.
I still don't understand why is EB-2 not moving forward especially that EB-1 is current.
Too many people converted to perm-EB2 when EB3 retrogression hit. Also, excess EB2 RoW are not flowing to EB2-India but to EB3 instead.
hot funny quotes about attitude.
gc28262
03-27 12:27 PM
Matters related to Driver license are largely decided by States but with "Secure ID Initiative" passed in the Congress, some of the powers have shifted to the Federal Govt. Many aspects of Secure ID initiative are still work in progress but some of the states have taken pro-active steps.
Driver license is not merely used for letting the person drive BUT ALSO serves as a photo ID.
Your immigrant status is linked to how long you can stay in this country. Your stay in this country is prescribed by the laws established by USCIS, Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. Driver's license is the single most important photo identification is this land. It shows who you are, where you reside and if you are legally in this country.
You use your photo ID to board a plane, when applying for a loan, to deal with various govt. agencies etc.
As for your question as to why driver's license is used for ID: That same question has been debated by lawmakers and thus came the idea of "Real ID". Go lookup info regarding Real ID and you will be pretty happy with using Driver's license as the ID.
Why is any of the above causing your grief ? Why references to slavery ? As long as the system is transparent and documented on their websites (like DMVs), I fail to understand your angst.
qasleuth,
I understand that is the way rules are being framed in this country. For me, right to drive is a human rights issue. Unlike other countries, where public transport system is well established, in USA you can hardly move without a drivers license and a car.
Using drivers license as an Id, for me that is non-sense. Drivers license should be used for what it is meant for, driving.
US may make n number of laws. As a self respecting individual who just happens to be on a non-immigrant visa, I cannot digest the reasoning behind these laws and cannot agree to so many hurdles being put up for a basic need like a DL.
If they want an ID, let them separate it from drivers license.
I can't agree to every single law being setup by some ignorant lawmaker.
Some examples.
NC DMV had a law stating that you have to have SSN to get DL. ITIN was not acceptable. How would our non-working spouses on H4 drive when they are legally present in this country ? Is it fair ?
TX DMV has another rule that says unless you have at least one year remaining on the visa you won't be issued a license. What if somene moves to TX during last 6 months of one's visa and can't get a license while their extendion for H1 is pending with USCIS ? One should not drive in the last six months of his visa. Does it make sense ?
I have come across many such restrictions/situations which does not make sense. So my angst.
Driver license is not merely used for letting the person drive BUT ALSO serves as a photo ID.
Your immigrant status is linked to how long you can stay in this country. Your stay in this country is prescribed by the laws established by USCIS, Department of Homeland Security and other agencies. Driver's license is the single most important photo identification is this land. It shows who you are, where you reside and if you are legally in this country.
You use your photo ID to board a plane, when applying for a loan, to deal with various govt. agencies etc.
As for your question as to why driver's license is used for ID: That same question has been debated by lawmakers and thus came the idea of "Real ID". Go lookup info regarding Real ID and you will be pretty happy with using Driver's license as the ID.
Why is any of the above causing your grief ? Why references to slavery ? As long as the system is transparent and documented on their websites (like DMVs), I fail to understand your angst.
qasleuth,
I understand that is the way rules are being framed in this country. For me, right to drive is a human rights issue. Unlike other countries, where public transport system is well established, in USA you can hardly move without a drivers license and a car.
Using drivers license as an Id, for me that is non-sense. Drivers license should be used for what it is meant for, driving.
US may make n number of laws. As a self respecting individual who just happens to be on a non-immigrant visa, I cannot digest the reasoning behind these laws and cannot agree to so many hurdles being put up for a basic need like a DL.
If they want an ID, let them separate it from drivers license.
I can't agree to every single law being setup by some ignorant lawmaker.
Some examples.
NC DMV had a law stating that you have to have SSN to get DL. ITIN was not acceptable. How would our non-working spouses on H4 drive when they are legally present in this country ? Is it fair ?
TX DMV has another rule that says unless you have at least one year remaining on the visa you won't be issued a license. What if somene moves to TX during last 6 months of one's visa and can't get a license while their extendion for H1 is pending with USCIS ? One should not drive in the last six months of his visa. Does it make sense ?
I have come across many such restrictions/situations which does not make sense. So my angst.
more...
house cool quotes about attitude. Funny Quotes About Attitude.
tdasara
01-31 03:16 PM
Well $900 for 485 includes AP/EAD (unlimited) and this would avoid the hazzle of renewing it with fee every year.
tattoo on attitude. funny quotes
sai66
01-25 08:43 PM
Hi All,
I got my I-140 Approved in 2007 and I-485 applied in July Fiasco.(summary : 7 Hears H1 Completed, Substitution Labor, I-140 Approved and I-485 Applied > 180 Days).
Now I am getting a Full Time position in my client company. My Employer is saying I should not go otherwise he will revoke my I-140 and I don't know really what else can he do with my I-485 application. I really want to take that Full Time offer and apply for AC-21. But can anyone tell me that If after applying AC-21 and joining as full time in my client company(American Company) if my employer revokes I-140 or cancels I-485 what will be the effects on my GC application(I will be on EAD while joining this company).
I read somewhere that at that time I need to apply for MTR(Motion To Reopen) and I should not work until this MTR gets approved which might typically take 60 to 90 days. Is it true? Because if this is the case then I will lose my Full Time Job right because no company will not be willing to give 2-3 months off. Will my EAD and AP gets invalid at that point.
Even if my case gets denied after employer revokes I-140/I-485 then can I file for MTR and still work at the same time with out taking leave. Will the MTR be approved? I am looking at all possible solutions. If I cannot work during filing of my MTR then it doesn't make sense to take that full time offer and then my employer revokes I-140/I-485 and I will loose my status.
Since lot of folks who took Full Time offer are getting I-485 Denial notices instead of NOID so that was concerning me.
Please explain me in detail.
I got my I-140 Approved in 2007 and I-485 applied in July Fiasco.(summary : 7 Hears H1 Completed, Substitution Labor, I-140 Approved and I-485 Applied > 180 Days).
Now I am getting a Full Time position in my client company. My Employer is saying I should not go otherwise he will revoke my I-140 and I don't know really what else can he do with my I-485 application. I really want to take that Full Time offer and apply for AC-21. But can anyone tell me that If after applying AC-21 and joining as full time in my client company(American Company) if my employer revokes I-140 or cancels I-485 what will be the effects on my GC application(I will be on EAD while joining this company).
I read somewhere that at that time I need to apply for MTR(Motion To Reopen) and I should not work until this MTR gets approved which might typically take 60 to 90 days. Is it true? Because if this is the case then I will lose my Full Time Job right because no company will not be willing to give 2-3 months off. Will my EAD and AP gets invalid at that point.
Even if my case gets denied after employer revokes I-140/I-485 then can I file for MTR and still work at the same time with out taking leave. Will the MTR be approved? I am looking at all possible solutions. If I cannot work during filing of my MTR then it doesn't make sense to take that full time offer and then my employer revokes I-140/I-485 and I will loose my status.
Since lot of folks who took Full Time offer are getting I-485 Denial notices instead of NOID so that was concerning me.
Please explain me in detail.
more...
pictures cool quotes about attitude. cool quotes about attitude.
GCInThisLife
07-19 02:43 PM
Let me correct it.. I read somewhere that it is considered not a major problem if some one is out of status for less than 180 days cumulatively.
Sorry you answer is not clear to me. You mean I was out of status and I will have problem at 485 stage?
Sorry you answer is not clear to me. You mean I was out of status and I will have problem at 485 stage?
dresses funny quotes about attitude
psk79
10-27 04:32 PM
The service request is usually a waste of time. They will send a generic response to everyone when case is pending w/o visa numbers. I and almost all of my friends received a response that additional information was needed for processing your case and hence additional delay blah blah.. I think this guy just decided to use security message for your responses. I wouldn't worry about it. If you want to really check this, you can definitely make an appointment at local office and talk to the IO there. But it was even a bigger waste of time in my case. The IO at local office looked at his system/systems and told me that if it is a green card application its faster(just another month or so) and if it is a h visa there is a few month delay:confused: Go figure..
more...
makeup cool quotes about attitude
sanjose
07-13 03:26 PM
congratulations..truly inspirational.. how did you acquire such phenominal emotional stamina?
girlfriend funny quotes on attitude. quotes on attitude funny.
chanduv23
03-26 01:47 PM
one doenst have to argue but can definitely question why its not there on their website if its not htere..they just cant decide one fine morning to just start as king for stuff...
I agree. They have to follow well set guidelines.
I would say - those having issues must all get together and write to the Authorities asking them to update rules on website and not arbitrary.
I agree. They have to follow well set guidelines.
I would say - those having issues must all get together and write to the Authorities asking them to update rules on website and not arbitrary.
hairstyles funny quotes photography.
radhay
04-01 10:30 PM
Sorry to hear the screw up. I had some what similar issue with H1B extension when attorney didn't timely file my application. USCIS approved H1B with no I-94 attached basically asking to leave country and get stamping in India.
We then contacted Murthy firm who filed 'nunc-pro-tunk' petition saying it was a mistake by employer/attorney and I shouldn't be penalized. USCIS then issued new approval with I-94.
I am not sure if this works for 485 but a competent attorney should be able to give a conclusive answer. Since you have the document you should try this and also change the attorney at the same time. You can also get a statement from old attorney about his mistake.
We then contacted Murthy firm who filed 'nunc-pro-tunk' petition saying it was a mistake by employer/attorney and I shouldn't be penalized. USCIS then issued new approval with I-94.
I am not sure if this works for 485 but a competent attorney should be able to give a conclusive answer. Since you have the document you should try this and also change the attorney at the same time. You can also get a statement from old attorney about his mistake.
tammman
08-25 02:17 AM
I just received my e-filed EAD, NSC
I didnt see any soft LUDs on my profile.
Received my Card on aug23rd for 2 yrs.
E-Filed: July 19, 2008
I didnt see any soft LUDs on my profile.
Received my Card on aug23rd for 2 yrs.
E-Filed: July 19, 2008
suhanya
08-15 04:47 PM
my non-lawyerly suggestion: do not file ac21 until well into whichever job you takel
I have read on various forums that there is no necessity to notify unless there is an RFE, but to maintain appropriate evidence at all times. you may want to consider doing that until you are well settled in whichever job you take.
by the way, what is your PD?
hope this helps.
My priority date is Feb 28 2005
I have read on various forums that there is no necessity to notify unless there is an RFE, but to maintain appropriate evidence at all times. you may want to consider doing that until you are well settled in whichever job you take.
by the way, what is your PD?
hope this helps.
My priority date is Feb 28 2005
No comments:
Post a Comment