GooblyWoobly
09-25 01:42 PM
3)Once you got EAD card onhand you can directly go to any nearest SSN office and apply.You should get SSN card with in 15 business days or earlier..
HTH,
Just to make sure you don't get confused about Answer 3..... No, there is no time limit within which you must get the SSN. You can apply any time for SSN as long as your EAD is valid. But I see no reason why you should wait. Moreover, if she starts working, she cannot get paid until her SSN comes along.
HTH,
Just to make sure you don't get confused about Answer 3..... No, there is no time limit within which you must get the SSN. You can apply any time for SSN as long as your EAD is valid. But I see no reason why you should wait. Moreover, if she starts working, she cannot get paid until her SSN comes along.
wallpaper makeup like selena gomez.
pd_recapturing
04-30 06:46 PM
I have done interfiling myself with PD of March 2000, no luck yet. Interfile is a matter of luck, there is no guarantee that the letter you send will reach your file. Also USCIS does not give any confirmation that received your interfile and will transfer the PD. All depends on when they process your case and see your interfile, they may take action.
I had sent my interfile January sent by Fax and also by Fedex, followed up with a phone call numerous times. Not discouraging, but wanted to share my experience.
Jai, Whats the fax # ? I am also in same boat. Have sent 3 letters so far. This is very frustrating. I do not know how come lawyers say that interfiling is easy and way to go rather than filing a new 485 ...
I had sent my interfile January sent by Fax and also by Fedex, followed up with a phone call numerous times. Not discouraging, but wanted to share my experience.
Jai, Whats the fax # ? I am also in same boat. Have sent 3 letters so far. This is very frustrating. I do not know how come lawyers say that interfiling is easy and way to go rather than filing a new 485 ...
rajenk
08-12 12:46 PM
Thank you all for your response.
The reason for my opening a new thread is to get attention from other members to get my question answered. I did not want to bury my question in to those lengthy threads, and the chance of getting such question answered is highly improbable. OK now to my additional questions on this subject.
Questions:
1. Did you guys receive all the receipts (yours and dependents) together in a single postal mail?
2. If that is the case then in my situation should I safely assume my wife's application was rejected?
Please respond I have only 5 days to re-submit a new application for my wife. If I miss it then our whole GC dream will become a nightmare:(
My PD is 11/30/05 EB3
Thanks
Raj
The reason for my opening a new thread is to get attention from other members to get my question answered. I did not want to bury my question in to those lengthy threads, and the chance of getting such question answered is highly improbable. OK now to my additional questions on this subject.
Questions:
1. Did you guys receive all the receipts (yours and dependents) together in a single postal mail?
2. If that is the case then in my situation should I safely assume my wife's application was rejected?
Please respond I have only 5 days to re-submit a new application for my wife. If I miss it then our whole GC dream will become a nightmare:(
My PD is 11/30/05 EB3
Thanks
Raj
2011 career. Justin Bieber
sanju
03-12 10:28 AM
Congratulations GCMan007, thats awesome.
If you have already received your approval notice then the change in online status is a matter of time. I saw an nearlier post on the forum that said it took over a week for the online status to show that I-485 was approved.
If you could complete your profile information, it will greatly help folks like me who have the PD in the same date range.
After a long 5 years I finally received 485 case approved letter for both my case and my spouse's case. However the online status still shows pending. Is this common?. How long would it take for the online case status to be updated.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
If you have already received your approval notice then the change in online status is a matter of time. I saw an nearlier post on the forum that said it took over a week for the online status to show that I-485 was approved.
If you could complete your profile information, it will greatly help folks like me who have the PD in the same date range.
After a long 5 years I finally received 485 case approved letter for both my case and my spouse's case. However the online status still shows pending. Is this common?. How long would it take for the online case status to be updated.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
more...
chanduy9
07-05 11:25 AM
Here is the link
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6029
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6029
sonia_sd
09-24 06:21 PM
I checked the site, couldn't find this info any more, probably its got archived. Thanks for your efforts in letting the group know.
No worries,
go and check here: The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
in the above link go locating the following news line, read and enjoy
""08/14/2009: Will USCIS Discontinue Concurrent I-140/485 Filing Procedure, Replaced by Preregistration and Two-Tier Filing System? ""
No worries,
go and check here: The Oh Law Firm (http://www.immigration-law.com/Canada.html)
in the above link go locating the following news line, read and enjoy
""08/14/2009: Will USCIS Discontinue Concurrent I-140/485 Filing Procedure, Replaced by Preregistration and Two-Tier Filing System? ""
more...
jayleno
08-08 10:08 PM
Hey ..You could take GMAT training or something from Kaplan which issues F-1 Visa for 3 months which is the duration of the course. 20 hours of mandatory attendence is there per week and you cannot work during that time....but you are covered legally. First get an F-1 and then apply for a H-1. I did this in 2004.
2010 selena gomez eye makeup.
GKBest
08-03 08:25 PM
You can always file Motion to open the denied case.You also need to go through the reasons for denial , which you will be knowing soon in USCIS response.Without knowing the reason for denial , it will be pure speculation suggesting future course of action.You can continue to work untill your case is being adjudicated.
From the way I understand if the case is denied, you cannot work but you are authorized to stay if your appeal has been decided in your favor. However, some lawyers say that you can work with the H1 employer since the decision is not yet final. So which one is correct?
From the way I understand if the case is denied, you cannot work but you are authorized to stay if your appeal has been decided in your favor. However, some lawyers say that you can work with the H1 employer since the decision is not yet final. So which one is correct?
more...
cool_desi_gc
11-14 10:14 PM
My Last name was mispelt on the 485/131/765 notices.I called USCIS and the took a note of the correct names and told that they will correct them when the officer gets my file.The names were mispelt on the EAD card as well.I was asked by the USCIS to return the card and send another application along with the card asking for the correction.
hair selena gomez posters. selena
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
AILA Leadership Has Just Posted the Following:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S4SAxLd4wPI/AAAAAAAAAEo/E-XH7jwIW9c/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S4SAxLd4wPI/AAAAAAAAAEo/E-XH7jwIW9c/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S4SAxLd4wPI/AAAAAAAAAEo/E-XH7jwIW9c/s320/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QZpVppv4FTs/S4SAxLd4wPI/AAAAAAAAAEo/E-XH7jwIW9c/s1600-h/2010-02-23+Magnifying+Glass.jpg)
By Eleanor Pelta, AILA First Vice President
The latest salvo in the war against H-1B workers and their employers (and this time, they�ve thrown L-1�s in just for fun,) is the Economic Policy Institute�s briefing paper by Ron Hira, released last week, which concludes that the practice of using H-1B and L-1 workers and then sending them back to their home countries is bad for the economy. While Hira�s findings are certainly headline-grabbing, the road that Hira takes to get there is filled with twists, turns and manipulations and simply lacks real data.
Hira starts with the premise that some employers use H-1B�s and L visas as a bridge to permanent residence, and some employers use those categories for temporary worker mobility. (His particular political bent is belied by his constant usage of the term �guest-worker status��a term that brings with it the politically charged connotations of the European guest worker programs for unskilled workers�for the practice of bringing H-1B�s and L�s in to the U.S. on a temporary basis.) After examining his �data,� he divides the world of employers into two broad categories:
� Bad guys (generally foreign employers, no surprise, or U.S. employers with off-shore companies in India) that bring in H-1B and L workers for temporary periods, exploit them, underpay them and send them home after they get training from the American workers whose jobs they will outsource when they return home
� Good guys (U.S. corporations �Hira uses the more genteel label, �firms with traditional business models�) that bring H-1B and L workers to the U.S., pay them adequate wages, and sponsor them for permanent residence, thereby effecting a knowledge transfer to American colleagues that is good for the economy
Hira�s tool, a statistic he calls �immigration yield,� is simply a comparison of H-1B and L usage and the number of PERM applications filed by the highest users of those visas. He essentially concludes that because the highest users of H-1B�s and L�s are Indian consulting companies, and these companies have only a minimal number of PERM�s certified, they are using H�s and L�s as cheap temporary labor. He is unable to explain away the high number PERM filings of one of the IT consulting companies, and so he addresses this anomaly by saying �part of the explanation might be that it is headquartered in the United States.�
There are too many things wrong with this analysis to list in this blog, but here are a just a few ways in which Hira�s study is problematic:
Hira�s clear implication is that companies that don�t sponsor H-1B�s and L�s for PERM are using these workers instead of more expensive American labor. He ignores that fact the H-1B program has rules in place requiring payment of the prevailing wage to these workers. But even worse, he has not presented any data whatsoever on the average wages paid to these workers. He also doesn�t address the expense of obtaining such visas. He simply concludes that because they are here temporarily, they are underpaid.
Hira makes the argument that companies who use H-1B and L workers as temporary workers generally use their U.S. operations as a training ground for these workers and then send then back to their home countries to do the job that was once located here. Again, this assertion is not supported by any real statistical data about, or serious review of, the U.S. activities of such workers, but rather by anecdotal evidence and quotes from news stories taken out of context.
With respect to the fact that the L-1B visa requires specialized knowledge and so would normally preclude entry to the U.S. for the purpose of gaining training, Hira cites and outdated OIG report that alleges that adjudicators will approve any L-1B petition, because the standards are so broad. Those of use in the field struggling with the 10 page RFE�s typically issued automatically on any specialized knowledge petition would certainly beg to differ with that point.
Hira clearly implies that American jobs are lost because of H-1B and L �guest workers,� but has no direct statistical evidence of such job loss.
The fact is that usage of H-1B and L visas varies with the needs of the employer. Some employers use these programs to rotate experienced, professional workers into the United States and then send the workers abroad to continue their careers. Some employers bring H-1B�s and L�s into the U.S. to rely on their skills on a permanent basis. Judging from the fraud statistics as well as DOL enforcement actions, the majority of employers who use H-1B workers pay these workers adequate wages and comply with all of the DOL rules regarding use of these workers, whether the employers bring them in for temporary purposes or not. By the same token, the minority of employers who seek to abuse H and L workers may well do so, whether they intend to sponsor them for permanent residence or not. Indeed, arguably, the potential for long-term abuse is much worse in the situation in which a real �bad guy� employer is sponsoring an employee for a green card, because of the inordinate length of time it takes for many H-1B and L workers to obtain permanent residency due to backlogs.
Hira does make that last point, and it is just about the only one we agree on. Congress needs to create a streamlined way for employers to access and retain in the U.S. foreign expertise and talent, without at 10-15 year wait for permanent residence. But our economy still needs the ability for business to nimbly move talent to the U.S. on a temporary basis when needed, or to rotate key personnel internationally. In a world where global mobility means increased competitiveness, Hira�s �statistics� simply don�t support elimination of these crucial capability.https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/186823568153827945-6000198492670312275?l=ailaleadership.blogspot.com
More... (http://ailaleadership.blogspot.com/2010/02/epis-latest-study-of-h-1b-and-l-usage.html)
more...
deba
02-04 09:25 AM
I am surprised to hear that you were not allowed to board from India. As I mentioned, I have no idea what the procedures are right now. You might run into an official or Airline agent who is not aware of the rules. In my case, I traveled from the US couple of times with AP/Canada PR. First time it was AA/BA and the next time it was AA/Emirates. The checking you will go through will include both immigration and airline staff. If you are transiting thru London Heathrow, you will have to get past a passport check and security screening again to get to your boarding gate. This is where the Airport staff will check your papers. The gate agent will check your papers at the boarding gate and might even issue a different boarding pass. In case you have any doubts, I suggest you take another route or get a visa. The higher cost you might pay by flying Lufthansa for example, will offset the cost of a visa. You don't want to get stranded in any case. Good Luck.
hot selena gomez wallpaper.
jonty_11
07-16 07:09 PM
It would help if you guys provide ur PDs to get an idea what PD folks are getting CP interview calls?
more...
house Nick Jonas and Selena Gomez
immi2006
08-21 09:40 PM
All the fresh H1's wait little longer, while older h1 case gets adjucated. Presently, a guy who filed in 1999, 2000, 2001 is clue less, on what is happening, a guy who filed in 2005/6 had a 140 already, is this fair ?
So to make it more evenly distributed, delay the process by 2/3 years for every new h1 applicant, and also insisting on 2 years of tax filing , will ensure, the older applications gets processed in the meanwhile, and also help the newer applications get streamlined.
Hope u got the point...
So to make it more evenly distributed, delay the process by 2/3 years for every new h1 applicant, and also insisting on 2 years of tax filing , will ensure, the older applications gets processed in the meanwhile, and also help the newer applications get streamlined.
Hope u got the point...
tattoo selena gomez haircut 2011.
imv116
06-06 05:26 PM
Hi,
I have some questions in regard to using AC21.
Using AC21, what are the risks involved with I140, provided it is:
1. Already approved and more than 180 days after filling I485?
2. New job/position is “same or similar” as mentioned in I140?
Situation:
1. Employer wants to revoke the I140 or in way threatens
2. Can I have the freedom to change employer, provided I have a “same or similar” position and I timely file AC21 with new employment details.
Also, with links to a MEMO from USCIS dated August 4, 2003. Are there any updates to that memo?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDportme.html
Please give your suggestions
Thanks All,
IMV116
I have some questions in regard to using AC21.
Using AC21, what are the risks involved with I140, provided it is:
1. Already approved and more than 180 days after filling I485?
2. New job/position is “same or similar” as mentioned in I140?
Situation:
1. Employer wants to revoke the I140 or in way threatens
2. Can I have the freedom to change employer, provided I have a “same or similar” position and I timely file AC21 with new employment details.
Also, with links to a MEMO from USCIS dated August 4, 2003. Are there any updates to that memo?
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/I140_AC21_8403.pdf
http://www.murthy.com/news/UDportme.html
Please give your suggestions
Thanks All,
IMV116
more...
pictures selena gomez hairstyles for
Redeye
12-19 05:02 PM
During the July fiasco, lawyer applied first set on July 2nd and since we were n't sure if the application reached USCIS we put a yello cover sheet which said refiling because earlier 485 could be misplaced. Even after that, both first and second were accepted and I got EAD, FP and AP on the first one and EAD, FP on the second one. Attorney suggested to follow up with FP second time also and said we will be asked by USCIS which application to keep. Is this true?
Or will both my applications be rejected since we did not get back to them?
I know some other folks on IV are also in same boat. I am planning to use EAD so I am kind of worried otherwise it is clean case with I 140 approved.
Or will both my applications be rejected since we did not get back to them?
I know some other folks on IV are also in same boat. I am planning to use EAD so I am kind of worried otherwise it is clean case with I 140 approved.
dresses and selena gomez kissing
jnraajan
03-28 05:25 PM
Has anyone successfully tried this option and recd a response?
more...
makeup pics of selena gomez room.
shx
03-31 06:14 PM
Its almost common knowledge that most of L1s are given to rank and file employees. Out of all the L1 people that I know, there's not even one that can be said to possess specialized knowledge. I'm sure there are a few legitimate L1 cases.
Don't give me this divide and conquer crap. A loophole is a loophole and it needs to be plugged, be it H1 or L1.
Don't give me this divide and conquer crap. A loophole is a loophole and it needs to be plugged, be it H1 or L1.
girlfriend selena gomez and justin bieber
greencardvow
08-03 07:12 PM
This is a really complicated case. You should consult a good attorney. The people in this forum are not lawyers. They just have some knowledge about immigration process and laws.
If I was in your place I will file for another H1B through Company B. There is a risk in this also as your current H1B extension is denied.
Stay in good terms with your current employer. Tell him once he is able to resolve the issue of H1B denial, you will come back to him. Also tell him once you get your EAD you will come back.
The problem is USCIS denied H1B extension due to non-compliance of rule in paying the employees, they can probably deny the 485 for the same reason.
Reason: Employer didn't follow labor rules in paying for some of the other employees.
If I was in your place I will file for another H1B through Company B. There is a risk in this also as your current H1B extension is denied.
Stay in good terms with your current employer. Tell him once he is able to resolve the issue of H1B denial, you will come back to him. Also tell him once you get your EAD you will come back.
The problem is USCIS denied H1B extension due to non-compliance of rule in paying the employees, they can probably deny the 485 for the same reason.
Reason: Employer didn't follow labor rules in paying for some of the other employees.
hairstyles selena gomez makeup in who
karthkc
06-02 11:19 AM
its fine. Your salary should match the LCA salary. The LC salary is for 'future job'. the only place it might come into play is if your employer is very small, and there are ability-to-pay issues (here, if your current salary matches LC salary then its easier to say that employer has ability to pay).
Unless I am mistaken, this was true only for non-PERM scenario if you were already employed for the firm that sponsored your GC.
In the case when your sponsoring employer is the same as the H1B employer, under PERM, you are supposed to be paid no less than 100% of the prevailing wage that is mentioned in your LC at the time the LC is filed.
Here is a posting I found from a while ago on this..
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2994050912&m=1621048341
Unless I am mistaken, this was true only for non-PERM scenario if you were already employed for the firm that sponsored your GC.
In the case when your sponsoring employer is the same as the H1B employer, under PERM, you are supposed to be paid no less than 100% of the prevailing wage that is mentioned in your LC at the time the LC is filed.
Here is a posting I found from a while ago on this..
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=2994050912&m=1621048341
pbuckeye
06-25 08:02 AM
Hi Gurus / Attorneys,
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
Can you try to get the MSA/SOW/PO between the client and vendor for the MTR (or client and your employer)? Sometimes the SOW reads almost like a client letter (with name, job duties, client supervisor name, signed by IT and legal department at client site).
Another option could be to get an email from the client stating that they cannot provide a letter because of company policy AND/OR get a letter from the vendor stating the same and provide the contact information of the supervisor at client location.
I have come to this country in 1999 and have worked for company A and after 7 years , I transferred my H1B to company B based company A's approved I-140 in 2007 before July fiasco. Hence missed the July 2007.
Now I have been working for company B for the last 3 years and got my I-140 approved again and applied for H1B extension. Received RFE asking for client letter.
Client was reluctant to give the letter and my H1B got denied.
Asking client for the letter : Client says that they can't give a letter, it's against their company policy :confused:
My Options :
1. MTR : I am not sure if I can get the client letter to open MTR and also file a new H1 in parallel.
2. Go back to my home country : My employer said that they will apply for a new H1B for consular processing (does this come under quota ?)
I own a home here and now leaving everything in a week is making me worried.
Also my priority date is Nov 2002 under EB3 and I am not sure how I can pursue this from my home country, if needed.
Thanks in advance for all your help and suggestions !!
Can you try to get the MSA/SOW/PO between the client and vendor for the MTR (or client and your employer)? Sometimes the SOW reads almost like a client letter (with name, job duties, client supervisor name, signed by IT and legal department at client site).
Another option could be to get an email from the client stating that they cannot provide a letter because of company policy AND/OR get a letter from the vendor stating the same and provide the contact information of the supervisor at client location.
sbmallik
07-23 01:55 PM
In the stated situation, I would opt for changing the I-485 case to consular processing.
No comments:
Post a Comment