tdasara
06-12 07:06 PM
Investing in a company -> Yes (shareholder)
Own a company -> No
On H1b, you are not even supposed to make money via Google Adsense. Even if the money is diverted to your home country you have to quote these earnings on your taxes. H1b visa holder has to quote his/her worldwide income and its unclear if your income in your home country is taxed here be it Adsense income or a business.
No wonder many entrepreneurial ideas either die or are taking roots in Korea, India or China!
This has been my research on the internet and is not from a legal advisor.
Own a company -> No
On H1b, you are not even supposed to make money via Google Adsense. Even if the money is diverted to your home country you have to quote these earnings on your taxes. H1b visa holder has to quote his/her worldwide income and its unclear if your income in your home country is taxed here be it Adsense income or a business.
No wonder many entrepreneurial ideas either die or are taking roots in Korea, India or China!
This has been my research on the internet and is not from a legal advisor.
wallpaper Cover Letter Internship
anilsal
11-15 11:23 PM
Since you are filing your GC through a lawyer, it is their job to advice you when the time comes. Keep them informed about your case and they should research and guide.
Blog Feeds
09-12 09:40 AM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
Today's guest blogger is William Stock (http://www.klaskolaw.com/our-team.php?action=view&id=3), member of AILA's Board of Governors and partner in the law firm Klasko, Rulon, Stock & Seltzer
Employers who rely on foreign nationals to provide needed expertise in their workforce - from technical programmers to biochemists to wind turbine engineers - should take notice of three troubling trends which are becoming clearer as the discussion about employment-based immigration reform gets drowned out by the ongoing debate about comprehensive immigration reform.
The first trend is captured in this blog post (http://www.klaskolaw.com/our-team.php?action=view&id=3) by Vivek Wadhwa, a professor at Duke University who has studied high-tech entrepreneurship extensively. Current backlogs in the employment-based immigration categories trap foreign workers in the original job for which they were sponsored, meaning their companies cannot promote them to positions where their experience and skills can best be used. Nor can the workers take the initiative to start their own companies - while a small company may be able to sponsor one of its owners as an H-1B, a green card is much less likely in that situation. Wadhwa points out that eliminating the green card backlog (a major part of which consists of cases trapped by bureaucratic delays that should have been approved in past years� quotas, which do not carry over from year to year) would free an enormous amount of human capital to innovate and create the next generation of companies that will drive economic growth in the US.
More troubling, a combination of the green card quotas (which tie foreign nationals to one specific job) and rules for terminated H-1B workers (described in detail here (http://www.klaskolaw.com/articles.php?action=view&id=8)) are driving away the most talented foreign graduates of our universities. Recent surveys and profiles of foreign nationals in the US - particularly Indian engineers in Silicon Valley (http://www.sanfranmag.com/story/home-where-brain) - have highlighted an increase in the number of H-1B who are opting to return home, either from necessity or because the Indian economy now offers them opportunities to start or manage companies that the U.S. can�t match because of their visa situation. While opponents of high-tech immigration love to argue that H-1B visas allow tech workers to come to the US and learn skills that they can use back home, the fact is that most tech workers would prefer to use those skills in the US - and that immigrants are a key part of the Silicon Valley start-up community (given how many start-ups have at least one immigrant founder).
The most troubling trend, however, will not be immediate in its impact. For the first time in five years, US graduate programs reported a drop (http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/aug2009/bs20090820_960342.htm) in the number of international applications to their programs and the number of accepted applicants who chose to come to their programs. These students are the best and brightest from their countries, and when they choose to go to other countries rather than the US, we lose out not only on the tuition dollars they would have spent (at rates higher than out-of-state students pay), but also on their talents for companies in the US.
While these trends are troubling, they are not irreversible. What it will take, however, is a rational reform of our employment-based immigration system to recognize the contributions these immigrants make, and the national interest in providing a welcome mat to them.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8233644330835442863?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/americas-shrinking-immigration.html)
Today's guest blogger is William Stock (http://www.klaskolaw.com/our-team.php?action=view&id=3), member of AILA's Board of Governors and partner in the law firm Klasko, Rulon, Stock & Seltzer
Employers who rely on foreign nationals to provide needed expertise in their workforce - from technical programmers to biochemists to wind turbine engineers - should take notice of three troubling trends which are becoming clearer as the discussion about employment-based immigration reform gets drowned out by the ongoing debate about comprehensive immigration reform.
The first trend is captured in this blog post (http://www.klaskolaw.com/our-team.php?action=view&id=3) by Vivek Wadhwa, a professor at Duke University who has studied high-tech entrepreneurship extensively. Current backlogs in the employment-based immigration categories trap foreign workers in the original job for which they were sponsored, meaning their companies cannot promote them to positions where their experience and skills can best be used. Nor can the workers take the initiative to start their own companies - while a small company may be able to sponsor one of its owners as an H-1B, a green card is much less likely in that situation. Wadhwa points out that eliminating the green card backlog (a major part of which consists of cases trapped by bureaucratic delays that should have been approved in past years� quotas, which do not carry over from year to year) would free an enormous amount of human capital to innovate and create the next generation of companies that will drive economic growth in the US.
More troubling, a combination of the green card quotas (which tie foreign nationals to one specific job) and rules for terminated H-1B workers (described in detail here (http://www.klaskolaw.com/articles.php?action=view&id=8)) are driving away the most talented foreign graduates of our universities. Recent surveys and profiles of foreign nationals in the US - particularly Indian engineers in Silicon Valley (http://www.sanfranmag.com/story/home-where-brain) - have highlighted an increase in the number of H-1B who are opting to return home, either from necessity or because the Indian economy now offers them opportunities to start or manage companies that the U.S. can�t match because of their visa situation. While opponents of high-tech immigration love to argue that H-1B visas allow tech workers to come to the US and learn skills that they can use back home, the fact is that most tech workers would prefer to use those skills in the US - and that immigrants are a key part of the Silicon Valley start-up community (given how many start-ups have at least one immigrant founder).
The most troubling trend, however, will not be immediate in its impact. For the first time in five years, US graduate programs reported a drop (http://www.businessweek.com/bschools/content/aug2009/bs20090820_960342.htm) in the number of international applications to their programs and the number of accepted applicants who chose to come to their programs. These students are the best and brightest from their countries, and when they choose to go to other countries rather than the US, we lose out not only on the tuition dollars they would have spent (at rates higher than out-of-state students pay), but also on their talents for companies in the US.
While these trends are troubling, they are not irreversible. What it will take, however, is a rational reform of our employment-based immigration system to recognize the contributions these immigrants make, and the national interest in providing a welcome mat to them.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-8233644330835442863?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2009/09/americas-shrinking-immigration.html)
2011 example of cover letter for
sac-r-ten
03-03 10:28 AM
Congratulations and thanks for sharing.
more...
Eternal_Hope
04-07 10:32 AM
Hi, I am in exactly the same situation. Would just the I-140 receipt number suffice? My employer also hasn't given me any copies of the I-140 and labor certification copies. My I-140 is approved and it's been more than 180 days since I-485 filing..please advise.
I am planning to change jobs using the EAD / AC-21 in the next couple of months. To start off the process I wanted to get all the approval notices from the lawyer so that I have all the documents in place before I change jobs.
My employer uses a popular law firm to handle the immigration filing etc. I sent an email to the lawyer asking them to send me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.The lawyer responded that according to my company's internal policy they will not provide me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
I would like to know the following -
1) Has someone else also faced a similar issue ?
MANY PEOPLE ARE IN A SIMILAR SITUATION.
2) If so , is there a way to get them to send me a copy of th 140 approval notice
NO - EXCEPT IF THEY HAVE A CHANGE OF HEART (GOOD LUCK FINDING LAWYERS WITH HEARTS!)
3) Does the employer by law have the authority to restrict the distribution of the 140 approval notice
THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE SAY.
4) Do I need the 140 approval notice in order to use EAD/AC-21 to change jobs ?
IT'S GOOD TO HAVE IT AS A REFERENCE, ESPECIALLY IF THERE ARE 'REQUEST FOR EVIDENCE' IN THE FUTURE. IN ANY CASE, AFTER 180 DAYS OF 1-485 FILING, AND IF YOUR 1-140 IS ALREADY APPROVED, EVEN IF YOUR EMPLOYER REVOKES THE 1-140 IT DOESN'T IMPACT YOUR ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS APPLICATION.
AS A SIDENOTE - IN ALL LIKELIHOOD YOUR LAWYERS WOULD HAVE INFORMED YOUR EMPLOYER THAT YOU WERE ASKING FOR I-140 RECEIPT, THEREBY SENDING A SIGNAL TO YOUR EMPLOYER THAT YOU MAY BE JUMPING THE SHIP SOON!
Thanks
ALL THE BEST!
I am planning to change jobs using the EAD / AC-21 in the next couple of months. To start off the process I wanted to get all the approval notices from the lawyer so that I have all the documents in place before I change jobs.
My employer uses a popular law firm to handle the immigration filing etc. I sent an email to the lawyer asking them to send me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.The lawyer responded that according to my company's internal policy they will not provide me a copy of the I-140 approval notice.
I would like to know the following -
1) Has someone else also faced a similar issue ?
MANY PEOPLE ARE IN A SIMILAR SITUATION.
2) If so , is there a way to get them to send me a copy of th 140 approval notice
NO - EXCEPT IF THEY HAVE A CHANGE OF HEART (GOOD LUCK FINDING LAWYERS WITH HEARTS!)
3) Does the employer by law have the authority to restrict the distribution of the 140 approval notice
THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE SAY.
4) Do I need the 140 approval notice in order to use EAD/AC-21 to change jobs ?
IT'S GOOD TO HAVE IT AS A REFERENCE, ESPECIALLY IF THERE ARE 'REQUEST FOR EVIDENCE' IN THE FUTURE. IN ANY CASE, AFTER 180 DAYS OF 1-485 FILING, AND IF YOUR 1-140 IS ALREADY APPROVED, EVEN IF YOUR EMPLOYER REVOKES THE 1-140 IT DOESN'T IMPACT YOUR ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS APPLICATION.
AS A SIDENOTE - IN ALL LIKELIHOOD YOUR LAWYERS WOULD HAVE INFORMED YOUR EMPLOYER THAT YOU WERE ASKING FOR I-140 RECEIPT, THEREBY SENDING A SIGNAL TO YOUR EMPLOYER THAT YOU MAY BE JUMPING THE SHIP SOON!
Thanks
ALL THE BEST!
new_horizon
10-01 08:43 PM
I don't know why the guy brought up sarah palin when discussing joe biden. is it a must that something should be said about her for every gaffee that joe makes?remember how the congressman was sent packing after the macaca comment. why no outcry on this 7-11 comment? double standard?
more...
eb3_nepa
04-29 08:35 PM
Where did you get this info? Could you please point out a reference that says so?
Good point, is that really against the law?
Good point, is that really against the law?
2010 Cover Letter Sample
latbsol
10-01 06:03 PM
Hi guys,
Sorry, I was absent for a long time. I am back now!
@ Hebron:
Yes, I am planning to file the EB2 with the same employer. Of course that is what prompted my questions in the first place.
@ veni:
Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, my employer applied for the H1B amendment and LCA and got them approved. So I hope that is good.
@ JamesSingham:
James, is your case the same as mine? i.e. you converted from EB3 to EB2 with the same employer (for a different job title & responsibilities) and are using the experience you gained with the same employer? Have you filed for EB2 PERM already? What is the current status? BTW how do we prove that the job responsibilities are 50% different. Obviously reading the EB3 job description and EB2 job description should make it clear. But I guess the DOL expects some formal proof about this? What kind of documents/letters/evidence has your current employer included in your application to prove that the two positions are > 50% different? Is there a standard procedure for doing this? Too many questions...sorry. But I hope you understand my situation :(. Please provide you responses. That will greatly help.
Sorry, I was absent for a long time. I am back now!
@ Hebron:
Yes, I am planning to file the EB2 with the same employer. Of course that is what prompted my questions in the first place.
@ veni:
Thanks for the suggestion. Yes, my employer applied for the H1B amendment and LCA and got them approved. So I hope that is good.
@ JamesSingham:
James, is your case the same as mine? i.e. you converted from EB3 to EB2 with the same employer (for a different job title & responsibilities) and are using the experience you gained with the same employer? Have you filed for EB2 PERM already? What is the current status? BTW how do we prove that the job responsibilities are 50% different. Obviously reading the EB3 job description and EB2 job description should make it clear. But I guess the DOL expects some formal proof about this? What kind of documents/letters/evidence has your current employer included in your application to prove that the two positions are > 50% different? Is there a standard procedure for doing this? Too many questions...sorry. But I hope you understand my situation :(. Please provide you responses. That will greatly help.
more...
nozerd
07-02 10:05 AM
If you are going to stay 2 yrs in Canada, you might as well spend 1 more yr and become a Canadian citizen.
I actually have a similar question. I am in the exact same situation. The question is that in this case if you have an H1 stamped in your passport, is it ok to travel to US on that H1 ? or would you need a B2 tourist visa to travel ?
I am asking since technically you are employed by same employer but you are getting paid by Candian payroll not US Payroll.
I actually have a similar question. I am in the exact same situation. The question is that in this case if you have an H1 stamped in your passport, is it ok to travel to US on that H1 ? or would you need a B2 tourist visa to travel ?
I am asking since technically you are employed by same employer but you are getting paid by Candian payroll not US Payroll.
hair Example pages ZIP Archive
katrina
07-21 04:58 AM
As long as you never out of status from the last time you reenter US (Aug 97) you should be OK and should submit your I485
more...
pxu7728
07-20 07:32 PM
cut paste from website : murthy
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_intead.html
Interim EAD Procedure
Posted Feb 23, 2007
�MurthyDotCom
The Vermont Service Center (VSC) has advised that they have instituted a new procedure for issuing interim Employment Authorization Documents (EADs). These are appropriate in situations where the EAD request has been pending for at least 90 days. The expected termination of interim EADs at local USCIS offices was reported in our June 30, 2006 MurthyBulletin article, June 2006 Conference Update: Interim EADs to End, available on MurthyDotCom.
�MurthyDotCom
The new procedure requires that an individual go to the local USCIS office to make the interim EAD request. The local office then will contact the VSC. The VSC will review the file and try to adjudicate the initial EAD application and avoid the need for an interim EAD. If they cannot complete the initial application, however, they can issue an interim EAD.
�MurthyDotCom
The interim EAD will not be issued if there are "national security issues." Therefore, if the case is held up due to security concerns, there may be instances where the interim EAD is not given. Whether or not it is issued depends upon the severity of the security matter.
�MurthyDotCom
This procedure will help some people with delayed EADs. MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers who will be renewing their EADs should not wait until they are close to their expiration dates to request new ones. We recommend filing four months in advance to avoid a lapse in employment authorization.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_intead.html
Interim EAD Procedure
Posted Feb 23, 2007
�MurthyDotCom
The Vermont Service Center (VSC) has advised that they have instituted a new procedure for issuing interim Employment Authorization Documents (EADs). These are appropriate in situations where the EAD request has been pending for at least 90 days. The expected termination of interim EADs at local USCIS offices was reported in our June 30, 2006 MurthyBulletin article, June 2006 Conference Update: Interim EADs to End, available on MurthyDotCom.
�MurthyDotCom
The new procedure requires that an individual go to the local USCIS office to make the interim EAD request. The local office then will contact the VSC. The VSC will review the file and try to adjudicate the initial EAD application and avoid the need for an interim EAD. If they cannot complete the initial application, however, they can issue an interim EAD.
�MurthyDotCom
The interim EAD will not be issued if there are "national security issues." Therefore, if the case is held up due to security concerns, there may be instances where the interim EAD is not given. Whether or not it is issued depends upon the severity of the security matter.
�MurthyDotCom
This procedure will help some people with delayed EADs. MurthyDotCom and MurthyBulletin readers who will be renewing their EADs should not wait until they are close to their expiration dates to request new ones. We recommend filing four months in advance to avoid a lapse in employment authorization.
hot sample cover letter internship
harrydr
10-05 10:49 AM
This is really what Obama's advisors should read. Employers cannot find qualified employees to even fill these great job openings (with unemployment rate nearing 10%). America is loosing already and will keep on loosing if immigrant workers do not take up these jobs to keep US competitive.
Even as layoffs persist, some good jobs go begging - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091004/ap_on_bi_ge/us_good_jobs_unfilled)
Even as layoffs persist, some good jobs go begging - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091004/ap_on_bi_ge/us_good_jobs_unfilled)
more...
house Sample Cover Letter Internship
saimrathi
07-10 03:17 PM
So USCIS will never see the flowers becoz they are boxed.. and they will never get delivered becoz they are being routed from the airport itself. No major news media covered the few deliveries at USCIS.. What was the point of the campaign again?
For those of you who is interested in one line Q/A
"Is the flower campaign working? Yes"
"Are we good enough with what we have done? Not 100%"
What happened
We were at the loading dock by 10 30 am ( Delivery estimate was between 11 am and 1 pm) and DHL appeared to
have already delivered around 50 boxes once around 9 am. All the flowers we sent are boxed . The visuals will
be boxes and not flowers in the evening when the youtube video will be uploaded. UPS delivered nex. We got the
video of the whole delivery and so did the CNN-IBN/Voice of America folks. There were around 30 boxes or so from
UPS. Next Fedex delivered and there were around 10-15 boxes coming out. While we were doing the recording one of the
officers politely told us not to capture federal buildings and we told them that we were only capturing the delivery of
flowers. After this what ever truck was coming in, they were reversing and pushing back into the dock so that the
delivery cannot be taped. CNN-IBN reporter asked for permission to go inside the loading dock and she was promptly
denied any permission. Then We had a down pour for almost 20-30 minutes and we had to leave the place.
It appears that the S&H dept now knows that most of the flowers are being delivered by DHL/UPS/FEDEX, they are taking
care of the diversion at National airport it self.
In the future if any one wants to do a flower campaign, Please select 2 local florists
(only two florists, in that particular city) and have people call and place orders/online. That way
we can talk with 2 florists and track their delivery easily for picture/video. Every one who tried to call
FTD/proflowers had alot of trouble getting any thing out of them. Actually, we cant blame them because they
are not doing it locally,instead they are putting their orders via national carriers.
Where do we go from here
If people really want to go out and get the main stream media attention, DC is the perfect choice. How ever,Don't plan on a weekend. If we do it right, we could be live on TV and the whole country will ask whats going on, along with the law makers. That will offer a platform for solving the issue at its roots.If you really want to do this, Dont come up with reasons like I dont have time off for a day or I have a project due. I can understand if 1 or 2% of our active members say it, but when 98% of our active members say that I can understand what it is. May be its time we figure out whether we prefer anonymity and pontifical verbatim on the online forum to expressing our concern/disappointment openly. Do not get offended and start flaming me. Just my thoughts.
For those of you who is interested in one line Q/A
"Is the flower campaign working? Yes"
"Are we good enough with what we have done? Not 100%"
What happened
We were at the loading dock by 10 30 am ( Delivery estimate was between 11 am and 1 pm) and DHL appeared to
have already delivered around 50 boxes once around 9 am. All the flowers we sent are boxed . The visuals will
be boxes and not flowers in the evening when the youtube video will be uploaded. UPS delivered nex. We got the
video of the whole delivery and so did the CNN-IBN/Voice of America folks. There were around 30 boxes or so from
UPS. Next Fedex delivered and there were around 10-15 boxes coming out. While we were doing the recording one of the
officers politely told us not to capture federal buildings and we told them that we were only capturing the delivery of
flowers. After this what ever truck was coming in, they were reversing and pushing back into the dock so that the
delivery cannot be taped. CNN-IBN reporter asked for permission to go inside the loading dock and she was promptly
denied any permission. Then We had a down pour for almost 20-30 minutes and we had to leave the place.
It appears that the S&H dept now knows that most of the flowers are being delivered by DHL/UPS/FEDEX, they are taking
care of the diversion at National airport it self.
In the future if any one wants to do a flower campaign, Please select 2 local florists
(only two florists, in that particular city) and have people call and place orders/online. That way
we can talk with 2 florists and track their delivery easily for picture/video. Every one who tried to call
FTD/proflowers had alot of trouble getting any thing out of them. Actually, we cant blame them because they
are not doing it locally,instead they are putting their orders via national carriers.
Where do we go from here
If people really want to go out and get the main stream media attention, DC is the perfect choice. How ever,Don't plan on a weekend. If we do it right, we could be live on TV and the whole country will ask whats going on, along with the law makers. That will offer a platform for solving the issue at its roots.If you really want to do this, Dont come up with reasons like I dont have time off for a day or I have a project due. I can understand if 1 or 2% of our active members say it, but when 98% of our active members say that I can understand what it is. May be its time we figure out whether we prefer anonymity and pontifical verbatim on the online forum to expressing our concern/disappointment openly. Do not get offended and start flaming me. Just my thoughts.
tattoo Formal+letter+format+
abracadabra102
10-18 06:09 PM
Some of our members like JunRUN, Hermione etc. already guessed that 800,000 is the total no. of applications received including 131/765 etc. Kudos to you!!.
more...
pictures Sample Of Cover Letter For
wandmaker
01-10 12:46 AM
EB-2, 485 and 140 submitted in June 2007 concurrently, RD and PD both are June 2007. I borrowed my husband's Swiss nationality. Now 140 approved, AP and EAD got, but NC is still pending.
Just curious: When will USCIS process my 485? According to my nationality or my husband's? If it's mine, god, I may have to wait for 4, 5 years because of the terrible VB backlog! Is it after 485, everyone no matter which nationality, the processing time should be the same. All the world line up together. Please correct me if I am wrong.
since you are using your husband's nationality (x-chargability), you should have your GC in 6-12 months provided your name check has cleared.
Just curious: When will USCIS process my 485? According to my nationality or my husband's? If it's mine, god, I may have to wait for 4, 5 years because of the terrible VB backlog! Is it after 485, everyone no matter which nationality, the processing time should be the same. All the world line up together. Please correct me if I am wrong.
since you are using your husband's nationality (x-chargability), you should have your GC in 6-12 months provided your name check has cleared.
dresses example cover letter for
crystal
09-17 12:49 PM
This will be a problem for all the people whose cases gets transfered from other centers to NSC or TSC. May be it is just the receipt date of transfer notice... Not the actual 485 application ? A clarification from USCIS would help
more...
makeup cover letter for internship.
amitjoey
03-17 12:26 PM
Ask your lawyer. I agree, be proactive and if there is a way you can send the results and file it with your case, do it. Any case medicals are valid for 12-18 months, so if an RFE comes, You can send them same ones again. Again, not sure if you can do this, ask your lawyer.
girlfriend General Cover Letter Templates
neeidd
11-10 04:08 PM
AP
I485 Receipt Notice
EAD(just in case)
thats all you need
Thanks for your reply, dj9533
I485 Receipt Notice
EAD(just in case)
thats all you need
Thanks for your reply, dj9533
hairstyles Internship Cover Letter
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)
immi_enthu
08-18 01:52 PM
Need help ....
Today I receive an email from USCIS about my PERM EB2 I-140 PP application that they have have made a decision on my case. Here what it says
"On August 17, 2007, we mailed you a decision on your I140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER. Please follow the instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, please contact customer service."
What does it mean? They approved my case or denied it? Any idea from gurus here. Please respond.
sorry to break the bad news to you,but this usually means a denial. My I 140 was approved recently, the online status cleared said it's approved. I read many posts on this forum who had the same online status as yours and their I 140's were denied.
Today I receive an email from USCIS about my PERM EB2 I-140 PP application that they have have made a decision on my case. Here what it says
"On August 17, 2007, we mailed you a decision on your I140, IMMIGRANT PETITION FOR ALIEN WORKER. Please follow the instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, please contact customer service."
What does it mean? They approved my case or denied it? Any idea from gurus here. Please respond.
sorry to break the bad news to you,but this usually means a denial. My I 140 was approved recently, the online status cleared said it's approved. I read many posts on this forum who had the same online status as yours and their I 140's were denied.
sam_hoosier
05-18 01:13 PM
I want to purchase an house in Washington DC/MD/VA. My office is close to Rockville. Please recommend the best place to buy an house based on the following criteria.
1> Very good school district
2> Low property tax
3> Very low crime rate
4> Rental value should be same as mortgage amount+insurance+PMI+property tax
5> Property values should be in 300K range max
6> Lot of Indians
9> Maximum distance to DC should not exceed 30 miles
10> Close to shopping places
Dont look at VA - commute to MD will be killing.
DC is expensive.
Look at Frederick, Gaithersburg, Rockville, Bethesda in MD
1> Very good school district
2> Low property tax
3> Very low crime rate
4> Rental value should be same as mortgage amount+insurance+PMI+property tax
5> Property values should be in 300K range max
6> Lot of Indians
9> Maximum distance to DC should not exceed 30 miles
10> Close to shopping places
Dont look at VA - commute to MD will be killing.
DC is expensive.
Look at Frederick, Gaithersburg, Rockville, Bethesda in MD
Here's how to cut your power bill by 75%:
ReplyDeleteWant to know how to easily produce all of the green energy you could ever want right at home?
And you’ll be able to make your home completely immune from power outages, blackouts, and energy grid outages…
so even if everyone else in your area (or even the whole country) loses power, you won’t.
INSTRUCTIONS: DIY HOME ENERGY