We won this case by submitting evidence of this applicant's substantial publication record as well as numerous recommendation letters which outlined the innovative work performed by the applicant. In addition, referees described the applicant as "one of the best in the field" for his significant discoveries in the biological chemistry industry. The applicant was employed with a very prestigious research institute which only hires the top scientists in the world.
We won this case for an applicant with over sixteen years research experience. She had a substantial publication record. Her expertise was sought for a collaboration with top researchers from the industry. Her contributions to research and academics and her significant international recognition were described in detail in the ten exceptional recommendation letters.
We were able to provide evidence of this individual's membership in a prestigious professional society, international honors and numerous letters of recommendation from industries leading scientists. This individual acted as a judge of the work of his research peers. We were able to provide 15 letters of recommendation reflecting the innovative work performed by this applicant. We also provided evidence to show the extensive citations of his findings.
We won this case by providing strong recommendation letters and evidence of U.S. government support of this applicant's innovative research. His previous scholarly publications and impressive presentations were just a few key elements to his unique background. The FAA in particular was interested in the creative talents of this applicant.
We won this case for the applicant who had eleven years teaching and research experience. Recommendation letters indicated that the applicant had a superb knowledge of not only theory but also economic technique. The applicant was highly regarded by students, peers and experts in the field. He was frequently called upon to review for the top, world-renowned journals in economics.
We won this case for the applicant utilizing nine strong recommendation letters from sources around the world which included field experts as well as industry.
We won this case for an applicant with over thirteen years research and teaching experience. His extraordinary talents and unique background as well as his vast knowledge in econometrics was shown by use of over six detailed recommendation letters. This applicant had an extensive publication record and was frequently asked to present at international conferences.
We won this case based on the applicant's critical role in a key U.S. Air Force project. His level of expertise in this specialized field was highly sought after and necessary to achieve the military's objectives. We provided letters from experts in the Air Force stressing their need to keep the applicant on the project or else it would fail.
We won this case for a tenured-track professor with ten years research and teaching experience. The applicant was a critical component to a U.S. Department of Energy funded project. The applicant was also the key element to securing National Science Foundation funds for his employer. His vast knowledge of inorganic chemistry and his unique multidisciplinary background was proven throughout his numerous recommendation letters offered by experts around the world.
We won this case for the applicant who is considered a leading expert in international affairs, particularly Indo-Chinese relations. We utilized eight detailed recommendation letters which highlighted the importance of this applicant's vast knowledge on China and his outstanding expertise on nonproliferation and security affairs. He had over twenty publications on this critical topic at the time of filing.
We won this case stressing the international scope of the extraordinary work that this applicant had done over the course of many years. He was identified by experts around the world as belonging to the top 5% of scientists in his field. His innovative and pioneering work was admired by his research peers around the globe. Many U.S. educational institutes were seeking his services as a research professor. This applicant was "invited" to present his research findings on countless occasions to an audience of the top researchers in the world.
We won this case by providing evidence of the impact of the work this applicant was conducting in her field. Numerous referees provided detailed recommendation letters outlining the necessity for the continued efforts of this applicant. Her teaching capabilities were noted as being far superior to others in her field. This applicant's unique background was shown to be scarce in the United States.
I am a US citizen. My parents (father 72 y and mother 65y) have a valid multiple entry visit visa to USA issued in 2012 and valid till 2022. They used to make short visits to USA every year till 2016 with duration of stay averaging around 55 days each year. After my father’s retirement in April 2017 they have settled down in India.
During their visit in June 2017 they stayed here for just under 6 months (174 days). They visited this year as well for about 173 days, arriving in SFO in June 2018. Upon their arrival at SFO, the CBP officer cautioned that the 6 month stay is not acceptable each time they visit, perhaps they will be given only 1 month stay during their next visit and that they should apply for green card if they wish to stay longer.
Based on your expertise, we would appreciate if you could let us know whether there is a possibility that the CBP officer would have placed an adverse remark/ comment on their system and would enforce a short stay of 1-2 months during their next visit (tentatively in June 2019). Being aged, they are more comfortable with making 6 months visits on multiple entry visa rather than staying for longer periods in USA to keep Green Card valid.
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
Are you preparing for the naturalization test? As you study for the U.S. history and government (civics) test, make sure that you know the most current answers to these questions.
I am exploring an option to move to Canada temporarily in order to save my Canadian PR. My PD date is March 2012 and have an approved I140. Currently my H1B extension based on approved I140 is in process and hopefully it shall come soon and will be good till Feb 2022. Plan is to move to Canada after H1B approval and H1B visa stamping from India. <br>
Questions<br>
1. If Priority date becomes current during my stay in Canada then what are my options.<br>
2. If Priority date does not become current and I tried to enter US after staying for more than year outside US. Two situation could occur H1B extension (I797) is still valid (before Feb 2022). Will I be challenged at port of entry whether i am going to perform the same duties as mentioned in I-129.<br>
3. To convince them on job responsibilities will the letter from employer be sufficient Or need something else?<br>
4. Recent pay stubs shall also be helpful to prove my continue employment with my same employer ?
5. H-1B extension (I-797) is expired (after Feb 2022) OR because of some reason I have to file new H-1B extension to enter Can i use my approved I-140 to file new H-1B extension(or claim the H-1B period) and that will be cap exempt ? OR I have to file new H-1B petition and re-enter the lottery.
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
1. Am I allowed to open a corporation and run a business on GC-EAD?<br>
2. If no, can I still work on a 1099 and file my taxes or do I have to be on a W-2 for an employer?
Watch the Video on this FAQ: Starting business on I-485 EAD
Video Trascript
1. Sure you can. You can work for yourself, you can do multiple jobs as long as you have an EAD.
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
1. I have approved I-140, on 7th yr of extension and my current H1B Visa and I-94 valid with emp A until dec 31,2018 based on my latest approval I received in Nov 1st week.
I have another 1 month to apply for an extension and I am requesting my employer to apply in premium processing.
1)If my extension is applied in Premium before I-94 expiration but pending beyond my expiration date 12/31/2018,
I will be 'out of status' even though 'authorized to stay' until decision is made. Is this correct that this may affect my future H1bs in case it is denied
and attract NTA(notice to appear) in future because of my 'out of status' from date of expiration to date of denial or while leaving the country upon denial.<br>
2. Is it better if I leave the country on the last day of my I-94 expiration(Dec 31, 2018) while my H1B extension is pending in order to avoid 'out of status' or 'unlawful presence' scenarios by staying here.
If I leave the country while extension is pending in above scenario, is it possible for me to go for consular processing, get VISA stamped after it is approved and enter the US legally?
or
is h1b extension is considered as abandoned?
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
WASHINGTON— USCIS has launched a new Online Fee Calculator to assist members of the public in calculating the correct fee amount to include when filing their forms with USCIS at an agency lockbox facility.
I applied for EB3 in 2011 and port to EB2, now EB3 dates are moving forward and if it reach to my priority date am I still eligible for EB3 as I initially applied for or do I need to downgrade to EB3. Will there be any questions raised?
Watch the Video on this FAQ: EB-2 approved applying for EB-3
Video Transcript
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
Number 26
Volume X
Discussion Topics, Thursday, 10 January 2019:
FAQ: The logistics of porting a priority date, how to? ||Consequences of and logistical problems in dealing with criminal arrests or convictions in immigration cases||What to do when the 240 days H-1B work authorization is expiring?||Downgrading a case from EB2 to EB3 for priority date advantage||
Other: How to calculate H-1B time while the case is pending ||Successor in interest cases ||Transferring family-based cases ||Converting pending H-1B cases to premium ||H-1B visa stamping problems ||CSPA issues while the I 140 is pending||Filing an appeal against H-1B denial ||Effect on employment-based green card of relocation or moving abroad || REmoval of condition on green card through marriage
PERM Processing Times (as of 12/31/2018)
I am H4 dependent visa holder. My I94 expired 9 months ago on Feb 2018 due to old Passport expiration. But my visa is valid until Dec 2019. I have over stayed more than 180days >365 days. I recently realized my mistake.Can you provide the best solution for this I94 problem? Explain please.
Watch the Video on this FAQ: I-94 expired -- Unlawful Presence
Video Transcript
Note: This is a verbatim transcript of the referenced audio/video media delivered as oral communication, and, therefore, may not conform to written grammatical or syntactical form.
Rajiv S Khanna PC & Case Manager Vijay Durgam has been phenomenal. Detail oriented, patient and relentless. My case has been handled with utmost care. The flawless handling is reflected in the outcome.