krustycat
10-23 03:08 PM
I'm waiting from July 9th.
wallpaper Cigarette ads use these
aadimanav
07-07 11:25 PM
Has anyone seen today's Fox News "The Journal Edition Report". In the last-section of the this programme the journalists talk about this week's "hits and misses". One of the journalist was talking about the injustice done to LEGAL immigrants because of latest visa bulletin stuff.
The programme will be repated
1:30 AM (morning) EST - Sunday - The Journal Editorial Report - Fox News
It is not that important, but I thought I should write in case someone is watchnig news at that time. It is half-an-hour programme and that segment "hits and misses" comes after the last-break (I think during last 10 minutes).
The programme will be repated
1:30 AM (morning) EST - Sunday - The Journal Editorial Report - Fox News
It is not that important, but I thought I should write in case someone is watchnig news at that time. It is half-an-hour programme and that segment "hits and misses" comes after the last-break (I think during last 10 minutes).
priya777
10-17 12:53 PM
AS my PD is current july2003 EB2 and i have my AP documents.. can i travel to india for 1 month ??? as in case my I-485 is approved when i am in india what will happen to my status?
what all documents do i need to take when i go to india? Please help me
what all documents do i need to take when i go to india? Please help me
2011 I have a few ads that show
black_logs
01-22 04:38 PM
People from Arizona please sign up here
more...
alex99
06-13 07:03 PM
please advice
tarunsri
02-28 02:34 PM
Dear forum members,
I have a question regarding transferring my H1b. My scenario is i am on my 7th year of my H1b and it is expiring on Oct 2007. My current employer will be filing an extension of 3 years based on my approved I-140 in the month of June 2007. If everything goes well i will get my three year extension(2007-2010) by Aug 2007.
Question is
1) If i get a new job opportunity after 3 year approval ( start date will be Oct 2007) can i transfer it to my new employer by aug or i have to wait till the start date of H1 approval?
2) When can i start working for the new company?
Any response will be appreciated.
Thanks
sriram
I have a question regarding transferring my H1b. My scenario is i am on my 7th year of my H1b and it is expiring on Oct 2007. My current employer will be filing an extension of 3 years based on my approved I-140 in the month of June 2007. If everything goes well i will get my three year extension(2007-2010) by Aug 2007.
Question is
1) If i get a new job opportunity after 3 year approval ( start date will be Oct 2007) can i transfer it to my new employer by aug or i have to wait till the start date of H1 approval?
2) When can i start working for the new company?
Any response will be appreciated.
Thanks
sriram
more...
kirupa
04-22 05:22 PM
Cr's comments are really good mxn. I also don't know how well the background colors suit your text right now :)
2010 Ads from R.J. Reynolds promote
rcr_bulk
07-15 01:18 PM
I did USPS last month to avoid confusion.
more...
NYCBrown
04-01 11:39 AM
I am working on EAD which I received from my EB3 category(labor date - Oct, 2004). My new employer filed a new application for EB2 category in Nov, 2010, my labor got approved within 3 months and they went for the next step filing my I-140 PETITION. They attached my previous I-140( from Eb3 category) along with the new application seeking to port the old priority date. Here is the REF which they received on 23, March 2011.
"Please provide evidence to show that the petitioner will be employing the beneficiary to fill the specific vacancy. In addition, provide a detail description of the work to be performed, including specific job duties, level of responsibility and number of hours per week of work to be performed.
You must sumbit the requested information within 30 days from the date of this letter. Failure to do so may result in the denial of your petition"
Please suggest. My attorney is working on this.
"Please provide evidence to show that the petitioner will be employing the beneficiary to fill the specific vacancy. In addition, provide a detail description of the work to be performed, including specific job duties, level of responsibility and number of hours per week of work to be performed.
You must sumbit the requested information within 30 days from the date of this letter. Failure to do so may result in the denial of your petition"
Please suggest. My attorney is working on this.
hair ad from Ads Classics
instantkarma
05-28 08:58 AM
Hello,
I have a new job offer from one of the largest product based company's Global Consulting Professional services.
Situation:
1. I am in a PORTABLE AC21 situation over 180 days of 485 filing and an approved I-140.
2. I have requested the company to prefer my EAD over their H1B offering.
Questions:
1. If I take their H1B offer, what are the risks of USCIS asking me a client letter before joining? Please note it is a huge org. The company intends to take me in after obtaining LIN# from premium H1B processing.
2. The prevailing wage on my LC when filed in 2005 was $60,757 and the offered wage at that time from my company was $76545. My NEW offer in 2010 stands at $118000. Is that an issue?
3. If I use my EAD which is expiring September2010 and due renewal can I keep continuing work until obtaining new EAD?
Thanks,
Ari
I have a new job offer from one of the largest product based company's Global Consulting Professional services.
Situation:
1. I am in a PORTABLE AC21 situation over 180 days of 485 filing and an approved I-140.
2. I have requested the company to prefer my EAD over their H1B offering.
Questions:
1. If I take their H1B offer, what are the risks of USCIS asking me a client letter before joining? Please note it is a huge org. The company intends to take me in after obtaining LIN# from premium H1B processing.
2. The prevailing wage on my LC when filed in 2005 was $60,757 and the offered wage at that time from my company was $76545. My NEW offer in 2010 stands at $118000. Is that an issue?
3. If I use my EAD which is expiring September2010 and due renewal can I keep continuing work until obtaining new EAD?
Thanks,
Ari
more...
my_gc_wait
08-10 11:22 AM
it could have been much higher because I used a different search term "USCIS Visa bulletin"
hot Santa smoking.jpg
seeker
01-11 03:46 PM
Guys as I said earlier, lets start calling cornyn's office and plead for skil bill or interim I485 relief.
more...
house collection of vintage ads.
bskmama
07-03 05:54 AM
I'm creating a game in silverlight which would move the object up,down,left or right. i want it to be smooth when i move it. However when i hold the Key, it'll move, and pause for a split second and continue moving smoothly. how do i erase the pause so i can mak the object move smoothly when i hold the keyboard button.
Thank you :)
Thank you :)
tattoo in a 1950 magazine ad for
CADude
09-19 05:44 PM
NO. Read USCIS FAQ
Hi all,
I am resident of CA and have my I140 application approved from Nebraska. My I485 application was filed in TSC. Is this a issue since according to USCIS, CA residents should file in the NSC. Will my I485 will be rejected because of this issue.
Thanks
Hi all,
I am resident of CA and have my I140 application approved from Nebraska. My I485 application was filed in TSC. Is this a issue since according to USCIS, CA residents should file in the NSC. Will my I485 will be rejected because of this issue.
Thanks
more...
pictures In the same magazine as the
nychyna
09-02 05:43 PM
Hello out there. I have a question regarding co-sponsors for international fiance visas. My Dutch boyfriend are looking to marry after 3 years going the Fiance Visa route. I know the financial requirements I need to meet is $18, 212 for the both of us. I do make that, however, I haven't filed my taxes in years and I'm an independant contractor (whole other story). I live in New York, my mother lives in California and is willing to be a co-sponsor; she's retired, makes more than enough in her pension, social security and about $150K in savings. My question is, since she will be the co-sponsor and of course she'd need to fill out the I-134 (Affidavit of Support)--do I ALSO need to fill out the I-134 too?...or just her alone? Please help....Thanks all!!! Also what paperwork do they require?...Last 2 years of current tax returns? Thanks again!
dresses on tobacco advertising are
perm2gc
08-31 01:17 PM
My I-140 is approved. And we are planning to change my wife's status from H4 to F1 student. Is it ok to do that ? I heard that it will be problematic for my wife to go back on Green path. Please advise.I also heard same thing but talking to a attorney is good than posting here..
more...
makeup Winston Cigarette Advertising
she81
01-17 03:03 PM
I realize they dont acknowledge anywhere the lack of visa numbers as a problem with EB immigration. They only speak of processing times delays and hiring more staff to overcome that.
girlfriend See Magazine runs tobacco ads?
ilyaslamasse
03-12 04:03 PM
Then I can't add actions to the frames and stuff...
pom 0]
pom 0]
hairstyles by running cigarette ads
techno_arch
09-19 07:50 PM
I applied for my AP in June and recently at the end of August my AP was approved. I received the AP a couple of weeks later in mail. However I noticed that instead of receiving the I-512 Authorization of Parole of an Alien into the United States, I received an I-797C Notice of Action document for me an my wife. The contents of this I-797C are exactly the same as the previous I-512s that I have filed for and received over the years.
What I am afraid of is that this may cause problem at the port of entry when I return back from India because of the wrong title of the document.
Has anyone else received such a a document I-797C instead of I-512 and is it safe to travel having such a document? Any advice/input is appreciated.
What I am afraid of is that this may cause problem at the port of entry when I return back from India because of the wrong title of the document.
Has anyone else received such a a document I-797C instead of I-512 and is it safe to travel having such a document? Any advice/input is appreciated.
Macaca
12-13 06:23 PM
Intraparty Feuds Dog Democrats, Stall Congress (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB119750838630225395.html) By David Rogers | Wall Street Journal, Dec 13, 2007
WASHINGTON -- Democrats took control of Congress last January promising a "new direction." A year later, the image that haunts them most is one symbolizing no direction at all: gridlock.
Unfinished work is piling up -- legislation to aid borrowers affected by the housing mess, rescue millions of middle-class families from a big tax increase and put stricter gas-mileage limits on the auto industry. Two months into the new fiscal year, Democrats are still scrambling just to keep the government open.
President Bush and Republicans are contributing to the impasse, but there's another factor: Intraparty squabbling between House Democrats and Senate Democrats is sometimes almost as fierce as the partisan battling.
A fracas between Democrats this week over a proposed $522 billion spending package is the latest example. The spending would keep the government running through the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, 2008, but it has opened party divisions over funding the Iraq war and lawmakers' home-state projects.
After enjoying an early rise, Congress's approval ratings have fallen since the spring amid the rancor. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, just 19% of respondents said they approved of the job Congress is doing, while 68% disapproved.
Democrats are hoping to get a boost by enacting the tougher auto- mileage standards before Christmas, but other matters, such as a farm bill to continue government price supports, are likely to wait for the new year.
Republicans suffered from the same House-Senate tensions in their 12 years of rule in Congress. But the situation is more acute now for Democrats, who must cope with both Mr. Bush's vetoes and the narrowest of margins in the Senate, leaving them vulnerable to Republican filibusters.
Democrats in the House interpret the 2006 elections as a mandate for change. They are more antiwar and more willing to shed old ways -- such as "earmarks" for legislators' pet projects -- to confront the White House. Senate Democrats, by comparison, remain more tied to tradition and institutional rules that demand consensus before taking action.
"The Senate and House are out of phase with one another," says Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There was a big change last year, a big change that affected the whole House and one-third of the Senate. That's the fundamental disconnect."
Rather than move to the center after 2006, President Bush has moved right to shore up his conservative base. He has also adopted a confrontational veto strategy calculated to disrupt the new Congress and reduce its effectiveness in challenging him on Iraq.
Just yesterday, the president issued his second veto of Democrat- backed legislation to expand government-provided health insurance for the children of working-class families. In his first six years as president, Mr. Bush issued only one veto. Since Democrats took over Congress, he has issued six vetoes, and threats of more hang over the budget talks now.
For Democrats, teamwork is vital to challenging the president, and it's not always forthcoming. A comment by Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, suggests the distant relationship between the two houses. "We have a constitutional responsibility to send legislation over there," said Rep. Rangel. "Quite frankly I don't give a damn what they feel."
Adds Wisconsin Rep. David Obey, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee: "I can tell you when bills will move and you can tell me when the Senate will sell us out."
With 2008 an election year overseen by a lame-duck president, it's unlikely that Congress will be able to break out of its slump.
Sometimes the disputes resemble play-acting. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has quietly invited House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) to blame the Senate if it suits her purpose to explain the slow pace of legislation, according to a person close to Sen. Reid.
At the same time, he can use her as his foil to fend off Republican demands in the Senate: "I can't control Speaker Pelosi," he said last week in debate on an energy bill. "She is a strong independent woman. She runs the House with an iron hand."
Still, the interchamber differences have real consequences, as seen in the fight over the budget.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd of West Virginia long argued against creating a big package that would combine all the main spending bills. He preferred to confront Mr. Bush with a series of targeted individual bills where he could gain some Republican support and maintain leverage over the president. But Mr. Byrd was undercut by his leadership's failure to allow more time for debate on the Senate floor. After Labor Day, the House began pressing for a single large package.
The $522 billion proposed bill ultimately emerged from weeks of talks that included moderate Republicans. The bill cut $10.6 billion from earlier spending proposals, moving closer to Mr. Bush, while giving him new money he wanted for the State Department as well as a border-security initiative.
No new money was provided specifically for Iraq but the bill gives the Pentagon an additional $31 billion for the war in Afghanistan and body armor for troops in the field. The goal was to provide enough money for Army accounts so its funding would be adequate into April, when a fuller debate could be held on the U.S.'s plans in Iraq.
For Senate Democrats and Mr. Byrd, the effort was a gamble that a moderate center could be found to stand up to Mr. Bush. The more combative Mr. Obey, the House appropriations chairman, was never persuaded this could happen.
After the White House announced its opposition over the weekend, Mr. Obey said Monday that the budget proposal was dead unless changes were made. The effect was to divide Democrats again, instead of putting up a united front against the White House's resistance.
Mr. Obey suggested that lawmakers should be willing to strip out home-state projects, acceding to Mr. Bush's tight line on spending, if that's what it took to make a tough stand on Iraq.
"I am perfectly willing to lose every dollar on the domestic side of the ledger in order to avoid giving them money for the war without conditions," Mr. Obey said. His suggestion met strong resistance from Senate Democrats. At a party luncheon, senators were almost comic in their anger, said one colleague who was present, loudly complaining of being reduced to being "puppets" or "slaves."
On the Senate floor yesterday, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said Democrats were showing signs of "attention deficit disorder." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, accused the new majority of being more interested in "finger pointing" and "headlines" than legislation. "It won't get bills signed into law," he said.
While Ms. Pelosi had personally supported Mr. Obey's approach, she instructed the House committee to preserve the projects as it began a second round of spending reductions yesterday, cutting an additional $6.9 billion from the $522 billion package.
The Senate committee's Democratic staff joined in the discussions by evening, but the White House denied reports that a deal had been reached at a spending ceiling above the president's initial request.
If agreement is not reached by the end of next week, lawmakers may have to resort again to a yearlong funding resolution that effectively freezes most agencies at their current levels. This would be a repeat of the collapse of the budget process last year under Republican rule -- not the "new direction" Democrats had hoped for.
Tied in Knots
The House and Senate are struggling to complete several matters before they head home this month.
Appropriations: Only the Pentagon budget is in place for the new fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The House and Senate are struggling to finish a bill covering the rest of the government.
Farm bill: The Senate still hopes to complete its version of a farm bill but negotiations with the House will wait until next year.
AMT relief: The House and Senate have passed legislation limiting the alternative minimum tax's hit on millions of middle-class taxpayers. But they differ about whether to offset the lost revenue.
Medicare: Doctors are set to see a cut in Medicare payments in 2008, which lawmakers want to prevent. The House acted, but Senate hasn't yet.
Housing: Several bills addressing the housing crisis have passed the House but are languishing in the Senate.
WASHINGTON -- Democrats took control of Congress last January promising a "new direction." A year later, the image that haunts them most is one symbolizing no direction at all: gridlock.
Unfinished work is piling up -- legislation to aid borrowers affected by the housing mess, rescue millions of middle-class families from a big tax increase and put stricter gas-mileage limits on the auto industry. Two months into the new fiscal year, Democrats are still scrambling just to keep the government open.
President Bush and Republicans are contributing to the impasse, but there's another factor: Intraparty squabbling between House Democrats and Senate Democrats is sometimes almost as fierce as the partisan battling.
A fracas between Democrats this week over a proposed $522 billion spending package is the latest example. The spending would keep the government running through the current fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30, 2008, but it has opened party divisions over funding the Iraq war and lawmakers' home-state projects.
After enjoying an early rise, Congress's approval ratings have fallen since the spring amid the rancor. In the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll, just 19% of respondents said they approved of the job Congress is doing, while 68% disapproved.
Democrats are hoping to get a boost by enacting the tougher auto- mileage standards before Christmas, but other matters, such as a farm bill to continue government price supports, are likely to wait for the new year.
Republicans suffered from the same House-Senate tensions in their 12 years of rule in Congress. But the situation is more acute now for Democrats, who must cope with both Mr. Bush's vetoes and the narrowest of margins in the Senate, leaving them vulnerable to Republican filibusters.
Democrats in the House interpret the 2006 elections as a mandate for change. They are more antiwar and more willing to shed old ways -- such as "earmarks" for legislators' pet projects -- to confront the White House. Senate Democrats, by comparison, remain more tied to tradition and institutional rules that demand consensus before taking action.
"The Senate and House are out of phase with one another," says Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. "There was a big change last year, a big change that affected the whole House and one-third of the Senate. That's the fundamental disconnect."
Rather than move to the center after 2006, President Bush has moved right to shore up his conservative base. He has also adopted a confrontational veto strategy calculated to disrupt the new Congress and reduce its effectiveness in challenging him on Iraq.
Just yesterday, the president issued his second veto of Democrat- backed legislation to expand government-provided health insurance for the children of working-class families. In his first six years as president, Mr. Bush issued only one veto. Since Democrats took over Congress, he has issued six vetoes, and threats of more hang over the budget talks now.
For Democrats, teamwork is vital to challenging the president, and it's not always forthcoming. A comment by Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, suggests the distant relationship between the two houses. "We have a constitutional responsibility to send legislation over there," said Rep. Rangel. "Quite frankly I don't give a damn what they feel."
Adds Wisconsin Rep. David Obey, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee: "I can tell you when bills will move and you can tell me when the Senate will sell us out."
With 2008 an election year overseen by a lame-duck president, it's unlikely that Congress will be able to break out of its slump.
Sometimes the disputes resemble play-acting. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) has quietly invited House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Cal.) to blame the Senate if it suits her purpose to explain the slow pace of legislation, according to a person close to Sen. Reid.
At the same time, he can use her as his foil to fend off Republican demands in the Senate: "I can't control Speaker Pelosi," he said last week in debate on an energy bill. "She is a strong independent woman. She runs the House with an iron hand."
Still, the interchamber differences have real consequences, as seen in the fight over the budget.
Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd of West Virginia long argued against creating a big package that would combine all the main spending bills. He preferred to confront Mr. Bush with a series of targeted individual bills where he could gain some Republican support and maintain leverage over the president. But Mr. Byrd was undercut by his leadership's failure to allow more time for debate on the Senate floor. After Labor Day, the House began pressing for a single large package.
The $522 billion proposed bill ultimately emerged from weeks of talks that included moderate Republicans. The bill cut $10.6 billion from earlier spending proposals, moving closer to Mr. Bush, while giving him new money he wanted for the State Department as well as a border-security initiative.
No new money was provided specifically for Iraq but the bill gives the Pentagon an additional $31 billion for the war in Afghanistan and body armor for troops in the field. The goal was to provide enough money for Army accounts so its funding would be adequate into April, when a fuller debate could be held on the U.S.'s plans in Iraq.
For Senate Democrats and Mr. Byrd, the effort was a gamble that a moderate center could be found to stand up to Mr. Bush. The more combative Mr. Obey, the House appropriations chairman, was never persuaded this could happen.
After the White House announced its opposition over the weekend, Mr. Obey said Monday that the budget proposal was dead unless changes were made. The effect was to divide Democrats again, instead of putting up a united front against the White House's resistance.
Mr. Obey suggested that lawmakers should be willing to strip out home-state projects, acceding to Mr. Bush's tight line on spending, if that's what it took to make a tough stand on Iraq.
"I am perfectly willing to lose every dollar on the domestic side of the ledger in order to avoid giving them money for the war without conditions," Mr. Obey said. His suggestion met strong resistance from Senate Democrats. At a party luncheon, senators were almost comic in their anger, said one colleague who was present, loudly complaining of being reduced to being "puppets" or "slaves."
On the Senate floor yesterday, Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn said Democrats were showing signs of "attention deficit disorder." Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, accused the new majority of being more interested in "finger pointing" and "headlines" than legislation. "It won't get bills signed into law," he said.
While Ms. Pelosi had personally supported Mr. Obey's approach, she instructed the House committee to preserve the projects as it began a second round of spending reductions yesterday, cutting an additional $6.9 billion from the $522 billion package.
The Senate committee's Democratic staff joined in the discussions by evening, but the White House denied reports that a deal had been reached at a spending ceiling above the president's initial request.
If agreement is not reached by the end of next week, lawmakers may have to resort again to a yearlong funding resolution that effectively freezes most agencies at their current levels. This would be a repeat of the collapse of the budget process last year under Republican rule -- not the "new direction" Democrats had hoped for.
Tied in Knots
The House and Senate are struggling to complete several matters before they head home this month.
Appropriations: Only the Pentagon budget is in place for the new fiscal year that began Oct. 1. The House and Senate are struggling to finish a bill covering the rest of the government.
Farm bill: The Senate still hopes to complete its version of a farm bill but negotiations with the House will wait until next year.
AMT relief: The House and Senate have passed legislation limiting the alternative minimum tax's hit on millions of middle-class taxpayers. But they differ about whether to offset the lost revenue.
Medicare: Doctors are set to see a cut in Medicare payments in 2008, which lawmakers want to prevent. The House acted, but Senate hasn't yet.
Housing: Several bills addressing the housing crisis have passed the House but are languishing in the Senate.
royus77
07-17 08:32 PM
Hi,
Currently I am on H1B visa.I will file my 485 as secondary applicant.What are my options in case If I have to leave my job and my 485 is still not approved.
Do I need to file H4 (Since 485 is still not approved) ?
Thanks in advance.
You can status will be Adjustment of Status ( AOS ) but cant work . IYou need a APO if you want to travel . If you want to work you need an EAD .
Check with attorney .This is the essence of mail which i got from my attorney when asked regarding my son status
Currently I am on H1B visa.I will file my 485 as secondary applicant.What are my options in case If I have to leave my job and my 485 is still not approved.
Do I need to file H4 (Since 485 is still not approved) ?
Thanks in advance.
You can status will be Adjustment of Status ( AOS ) but cant work . IYou need a APO if you want to travel . If you want to work you need an EAD .
Check with attorney .This is the essence of mail which i got from my attorney when asked regarding my son status
No comments:
Post a Comment