vjmjaan
06-02 07:09 PM
smarth,
Can you please update your profile with information like your filing center e.g. TSC or NSC and the dates of filing and receipting.
This will help others with the same dates.
Thanks,
Can you please update your profile with information like your filing center e.g. TSC or NSC and the dates of filing and receipting.
This will help others with the same dates.
Thanks,
wallpaper Rob Pattinson Body Shy Next to
veni001
02-03 08:08 AM
Thanks for you concern.
I would appreciate it if you can answer to my specific question. :)
Your company would be better off by submitting audited financial to avoid any possible RFP on ability to pay! Also ability to pay not only depends on current standing, if your employer is filing more EB2 for future jobs then he/she may have to prove the business necessity as well.
Good luck.;)
I would appreciate it if you can answer to my specific question. :)
Your company would be better off by submitting audited financial to avoid any possible RFP on ability to pay! Also ability to pay not only depends on current standing, if your employer is filing more EB2 for future jobs then he/she may have to prove the business necessity as well.
Good luck.;)
chanduv23
10-13 07:37 AM
Jaime - my friend - I am in for another rally. What worries me is that, there is still a lack of motivation from the immigrant community. We need atleast 50,000 skilled workers rallying in DC.
2011 Robert Pattinson shows a
ashwaghoshk
08-18 01:40 PM
@ Meet
You will not get new H1. Your remaining time on H1 will be extended once you decide to do COS from H4 to H1. If you were out of country for one full year ony then you will get NEW H1 and then the new fee hike applies to you.
But if you were not out of country for one year then you will get the same H1 extended for the remainder period (6 years minus what ever you have used so far). The new fee hike applies to new H1 applications only.
Hope that helps.
You will not get new H1. Your remaining time on H1 will be extended once you decide to do COS from H4 to H1. If you were out of country for one full year ony then you will get NEW H1 and then the new fee hike applies to you.
But if you were not out of country for one year then you will get the same H1 extended for the remainder period (6 years minus what ever you have used so far). The new fee hike applies to new H1 applications only.
Hope that helps.
more...
jsb
01-07 01:03 PM
The AP (which is a travel document) just allows you to enter the country (or like I mentioned before) to apply for permission to enter the US.
The I-94 determines your status and the date on the I-94 (and in the passport) is the date till which you are allowed to be in the US as a parolee. This is usually one year from the date you enter the US as a parolee. The assumption is that you get your GC before that one year is up - and it has worked histrorically - but we now know better, thanks to the July 2007 fiasco.
Think of this analogy - AP is like the H1B visa, based on which you fill out the I-94. The I-94 determines the validity of your status.
At some point you might have to get a new I-94 issued (not sure how; maybe local USCIS office can issue you one) if it happens that you don't travel internationally before that one year is up.
Once you have no valid H1 or L1, you technically are a foreigner without a visa. CBP, by law, can't admit anybody in without a visa, and hence the work-around of AP (which is an authorization to CBP to let you, a foreigner, in, in inspite of you not having a valid visa). One yr stamp by CBP is a workaround for another law for people who are admitted without a visa. Idea behind this is to determine what to do with you (person in the US without a visa) within that one year. AOS/EAD are other workarounds for managing govt inefficiency for those already in the country (but not for entry to the country). Complex maze of work-arounds !!
The I-94 determines your status and the date on the I-94 (and in the passport) is the date till which you are allowed to be in the US as a parolee. This is usually one year from the date you enter the US as a parolee. The assumption is that you get your GC before that one year is up - and it has worked histrorically - but we now know better, thanks to the July 2007 fiasco.
Think of this analogy - AP is like the H1B visa, based on which you fill out the I-94. The I-94 determines the validity of your status.
At some point you might have to get a new I-94 issued (not sure how; maybe local USCIS office can issue you one) if it happens that you don't travel internationally before that one year is up.
Once you have no valid H1 or L1, you technically are a foreigner without a visa. CBP, by law, can't admit anybody in without a visa, and hence the work-around of AP (which is an authorization to CBP to let you, a foreigner, in, in inspite of you not having a valid visa). One yr stamp by CBP is a workaround for another law for people who are admitted without a visa. Idea behind this is to determine what to do with you (person in the US without a visa) within that one year. AOS/EAD are other workarounds for managing govt inefficiency for those already in the country (but not for entry to the country). Complex maze of work-arounds !!
waitnwatch
12-13 11:01 AM
and did anybody notice that the ICE is changing its track. They are now charging these folks of stealing ID's instead of the normal illegal charge. Ultimately this is opening up the way for local law-enforcement to charge people not on immigration violations but ID theft. This is pretty innovative and must have some political backing somewhere.
more...
qplearn
12-19 10:44 AM
I think the Sen.Cornyn's staff do not mind when we call. They like people that support their bill. We have to call just to maintain the momentum.
Sen.'s office in DC
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Good to know that. Actually, I have never called his office! I am doing that right away...
Sen.'s office in DC
517 Hart Senate Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
Tel: 202-224-2934
Fax: 202-228-2856
Good to know that. Actually, I have never called his office! I am doing that right away...
2010 about Robert Pattinson#39;s
we_can
01-02 04:30 PM
After the renewal, I got a passport with a new passport number (the old passport is still there stapled with the new one).
My labor and H1B all have the old #. Is there a need to do anything with the new passport number wrt to my existing H1 and labor and such?
My labor and H1B all have the old #. Is there a need to do anything with the new passport number wrt to my existing H1 and labor and such?
more...
prem_goel
06-12 05:00 PM
i got an rfe too. I think its sent to both the attorney and the applicant. They said they mailed the RFE yesterday, so hopefully by early next week I should have it. I am guessing its employment verification due to me filing change-of-address. i know for sure that my ex-employer did not revoke 140.
hair Robert Pattinson where he
chanduv23
11-01 06:06 AM
We are meeting tonight, looking forward to seeing all dedicated and active state chapter members..!
How did it go? Hope you took pictures :)
How did it go? Hope you took pictures :)
more...
gc03
11-17 07:41 AM
Congratulations! Jai hind
hot Rob Pattinson Body Shy Next to
zulo1715
10-20 04:34 PM
Hello,
I got my I-485 approval today, but my situation is a little complicated. I'm gonna explain that to you, and I appreciate your comments and thoughts.
My I-140 got approved two months ago, but the sad part is that I lost my job the day after I got my I-140 approval. My employer told me that it was because of the lack of projects, and I'd be back as soon as they got a new project (I don't think that happens soon; actually, I'm not counting on that). I was also told that they would not cancel my GC application (i.e. they won't revoke my I-140), and they would help me even if an RFE was raised to ask for an employment letter. Fortunately enough looks like I've not been out of status since I lost my job (I already filed my I-485 and got the approval for I-140 when I lost my job).
OK! here's what I'm worried about. My lawyer told me that as soon as I get my green card, I'm all set. He told me so when I asked him what would happen if I just wait for my GC approval and not to work for any other employer before then. I even have my EAD, but I decided not to go for another employer to make sure that I'm not raising a flag before getting my GC (that would be fine if I passed more than 180 days after my I-485 approval with an approved I-140). I know that some guys here say it's better (or even it's needed) to work for the company who sponsored your GC 6 months to one year after getting green card in order not to have an issue when applying for citizenship, but the thing is that my company doesn't have any project right now.
- Is there anything I can do to make sure that I'll be safe and sound in the future? What do I need to do now to make sure that my citizenship process in futute is OK?
- Is there anything that the sponsoring company can do regarding this; I mean help me out?
- Can I work for another employer now that I have my GC in hand?
Thank you,
I got my I-485 approval today, but my situation is a little complicated. I'm gonna explain that to you, and I appreciate your comments and thoughts.
My I-140 got approved two months ago, but the sad part is that I lost my job the day after I got my I-140 approval. My employer told me that it was because of the lack of projects, and I'd be back as soon as they got a new project (I don't think that happens soon; actually, I'm not counting on that). I was also told that they would not cancel my GC application (i.e. they won't revoke my I-140), and they would help me even if an RFE was raised to ask for an employment letter. Fortunately enough looks like I've not been out of status since I lost my job (I already filed my I-485 and got the approval for I-140 when I lost my job).
OK! here's what I'm worried about. My lawyer told me that as soon as I get my green card, I'm all set. He told me so when I asked him what would happen if I just wait for my GC approval and not to work for any other employer before then. I even have my EAD, but I decided not to go for another employer to make sure that I'm not raising a flag before getting my GC (that would be fine if I passed more than 180 days after my I-485 approval with an approved I-140). I know that some guys here say it's better (or even it's needed) to work for the company who sponsored your GC 6 months to one year after getting green card in order not to have an issue when applying for citizenship, but the thing is that my company doesn't have any project right now.
- Is there anything I can do to make sure that I'll be safe and sound in the future? What do I need to do now to make sure that my citizenship process in futute is OK?
- Is there anything that the sponsoring company can do regarding this; I mean help me out?
- Can I work for another employer now that I have my GC in hand?
Thank you,
more...
house Robert Pattinson#39;s and Taylor
gccovet
06-17 04:07 PM
What happens if I transfer my H1B from A to B (A has concurrently filed I140/485, >180 days, I 140 NOT approved). Can I have B do AC21 after I 140 from A gets approved (may take 4-5 more months) ? Do I HAVE to be with employer "A" till I 140 gets approved? (employer A does not intend to revoke I 140...and I understand there is a risk if ther is an RFE on I 140 during this period)
Thanks
If Company A does not withdraw -140 then you are in good shape. But if A withdraws, you have to start all over again.
TO be on AC-21 (EAD) you just have to get new I-9 to 'B' and (your choice) send letter to USCIS.
Thanks
If Company A does not withdraw -140 then you are in good shape. But if A withdraws, you have to start all over again.
TO be on AC-21 (EAD) you just have to get new I-9 to 'B' and (your choice) send letter to USCIS.
tattoo robert pattinson mmm
coopheal
12-17 03:30 PM
Dates were current till 2005. USCIS and its previous incarnation didn't even finish cases from 2001. Even in 2007 all blow out sale they didnt complete older cases. Also all along they kept on wasting visa as well.
Ideally these would be considered as severe circumstances and USCIS/Congress/Administration would work on getting us some relief because we would make such huge noice for this.
Oh wait.... we are highly skilled GC aspirants.... we won't contribute and won't participate in various IV efforts. We would rather come over here blame core for our situation.
Ideally these would be considered as severe circumstances and USCIS/Congress/Administration would work on getting us some relief because we would make such huge noice for this.
Oh wait.... we are highly skilled GC aspirants.... we won't contribute and won't participate in various IV efforts. We would rather come over here blame core for our situation.
more...
pictures Robert Pattinson
sodh
07-12 01:43 PM
Send Tancredo an invite to debate this issue in Miami and see what he has to say.
dresses Robert Pattinson and Kristen
satishku_2000
01-25 11:09 AM
Some one counting on indian gov. call me pessimist but good luck with that. I would be happy if Indian gov / politicians are out of this. You never know what kind of statements that can come out of their mouths ...
I have more hope and faith US system rather than Indian .
God bless America.
I have more hope and faith US system rather than Indian .
God bless America.
more...
makeup He has no need for any ody
desi3933
03-27 03:46 PM
I talked to my lawyer and he says you need to withdraw the old 485 and apply for new 485 using marriage.....
I can't imagine lawyer suggesting that. You should consider getting second professional opinion.
One I-485 can be linked to more than one immigrant petitions. You will need a cover letter after I-130 approval and reference to existing I-485 application along with amendments to refer approved I-130 immigrant petition.
________________
Not a legal advice.
I can't imagine lawyer suggesting that. You should consider getting second professional opinion.
One I-485 can be linked to more than one immigrant petitions. You will need a cover letter after I-130 approval and reference to existing I-485 application along with amendments to refer approved I-130 immigrant petition.
________________
Not a legal advice.
girlfriend robert pattinson school
sanju
04-19 10:59 PM
can someone tell me (PM if you dont want it on a pubic board) what went wrong with SKIL Bill last year? Where did it fail (senate/house?) did it just get dropped, or went up for vote and did not make it?
Googling around, and am not able to find anything...
Nothing went wrong with SKIL bill. Neither did SKIL bill fail. We computer programmers think that the world is built around Boolean logic 1/0, true/false, pass/fail, right/wrong. In politics most of the stuff is "in-between".
Every year many bills get introduced and only a small faction (less than 2%) are taken up for discussion/vote in the congress. Some bills pass in one house and are not taken up in the second house of the congress. Some bill pass both houses but they do not go to conference committee. A bill could be termed as “failed” if it has been voted down a majority vote in at least one house of the congress.
Last year (just like this year) key lawmakers wanted to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill which means, everything related to immigration subject will be done in one bill. So SKIL bill was introduced but it could not be scheduled for discussion and vote in the congress. ‘Introducing” a bill simply means that a bill was registered with the one house of the congress and a bill number was allocated to that bill, that’s it. It is then the job of the majority leader in the Senate and Speaker of the House to put the bill in the calendar/schedule for discussions and, up or down vote. SKIL bill was never put on the schedule of either of the two chambers of the congress. Most articles suggested that if the SKIL bill was put on schedule all by itself, this bill would have easily passed with the majority vote. But key lawmakers did not want a separate bill for each category. They want a comprehensive bill which includes reforming employment based, nurses, family based, diversity lottery, refuges, undocumented and anything “immigration” under the sun. That is why SKIL was never discussed and voted on the floor of the congress. SKIL bill was made of the comprehensive immigration bill S.2611 that passed the Senate last year. So SKIL bill was passed by the Senate. Then there were drastic differences between the House and Senate version of the immigration bill. House version of the immigration bill border wall and enforcement only bill and House majority leadership was not ready to do any negotiations on the bill passed by the Senate. By July-August of 2006, Republican leadership decided to use “immigration” as an election platform to energize their base. So they did not want to take up a bill to fix the problem. Republican leadership in the House wanted the issue to be there so that they would go back to their base and scare voters with the “illegal alien” election platform. So in the end nothing happened. After the elections, after Republicans lost the majority in the House and the Senate, Republicans lost the need/leadership to address the immigration issue and Democrats announced to address this in the 110th Congress so that they could take up the credit for solving the problem. So for all practical purposes, nothing actually happened on immigration issue or SKIL bill.
This year too, SKIL bill is very unlikely to go anywhere all by itself. We all have to wait for the compressive immigration reform bill to pass or die. No one knows by when comprehensive bill could be considered as dead this year. Several times I have talked with my congressman’s office and they have told me that SKIL could be considered by itself only if key lawmakers know that comprehensive immigration bill is no longer possible. They never fail to add that this is a pure speculation and no one can predict how it will all unroll and we just have to wait for the things to happen in next few months. Sometimes they have also said that if comprehensive bill fails, there may not be any bill till 2009. My congressman’s office did say that we should continue to talk to other lawmakers to tell them about our problems and a need for an immigration bill.
Hope this answers your question.
Googling around, and am not able to find anything...
Nothing went wrong with SKIL bill. Neither did SKIL bill fail. We computer programmers think that the world is built around Boolean logic 1/0, true/false, pass/fail, right/wrong. In politics most of the stuff is "in-between".
Every year many bills get introduced and only a small faction (less than 2%) are taken up for discussion/vote in the congress. Some bills pass in one house and are not taken up in the second house of the congress. Some bill pass both houses but they do not go to conference committee. A bill could be termed as “failed” if it has been voted down a majority vote in at least one house of the congress.
Last year (just like this year) key lawmakers wanted to pass a comprehensive immigration reform bill which means, everything related to immigration subject will be done in one bill. So SKIL bill was introduced but it could not be scheduled for discussion and vote in the congress. ‘Introducing” a bill simply means that a bill was registered with the one house of the congress and a bill number was allocated to that bill, that’s it. It is then the job of the majority leader in the Senate and Speaker of the House to put the bill in the calendar/schedule for discussions and, up or down vote. SKIL bill was never put on the schedule of either of the two chambers of the congress. Most articles suggested that if the SKIL bill was put on schedule all by itself, this bill would have easily passed with the majority vote. But key lawmakers did not want a separate bill for each category. They want a comprehensive bill which includes reforming employment based, nurses, family based, diversity lottery, refuges, undocumented and anything “immigration” under the sun. That is why SKIL was never discussed and voted on the floor of the congress. SKIL bill was made of the comprehensive immigration bill S.2611 that passed the Senate last year. So SKIL bill was passed by the Senate. Then there were drastic differences between the House and Senate version of the immigration bill. House version of the immigration bill border wall and enforcement only bill and House majority leadership was not ready to do any negotiations on the bill passed by the Senate. By July-August of 2006, Republican leadership decided to use “immigration” as an election platform to energize their base. So they did not want to take up a bill to fix the problem. Republican leadership in the House wanted the issue to be there so that they would go back to their base and scare voters with the “illegal alien” election platform. So in the end nothing happened. After the elections, after Republicans lost the majority in the House and the Senate, Republicans lost the need/leadership to address the immigration issue and Democrats announced to address this in the 110th Congress so that they could take up the credit for solving the problem. So for all practical purposes, nothing actually happened on immigration issue or SKIL bill.
This year too, SKIL bill is very unlikely to go anywhere all by itself. We all have to wait for the compressive immigration reform bill to pass or die. No one knows by when comprehensive bill could be considered as dead this year. Several times I have talked with my congressman’s office and they have told me that SKIL could be considered by itself only if key lawmakers know that comprehensive immigration bill is no longer possible. They never fail to add that this is a pure speculation and no one can predict how it will all unroll and we just have to wait for the things to happen in next few months. Sometimes they have also said that if comprehensive bill fails, there may not be any bill till 2009. My congressman’s office did say that we should continue to talk to other lawmakers to tell them about our problems and a need for an immigration bill.
Hope this answers your question.
hairstyles Robert Pattinson Vanity Fair
learning01
05-05 01:53 PM
in this administration. Corrupt and not working. Sad state of affairs.
GOP's Ed Rollins: Hookergate is "Big"
By Justin Rood - May 3, 2006, 10:15 PM
GOP super-strategist Ed Rollins (late of the Katherine Harris campaign) made a couple interesting comments on Charlie Rose last night. First, he indicated strongly that he believes a number of the other lawmakers in trouble with Hookergate are Defense appropriators. He also says as many as 15 lawmakers could get indicted over the mess in the next few months.
Maybe Ed's playing the expectations game: if voters buy the 15 number, and only seven actually get busted, well then the kids aren't so bad after all. Still, it's interesting speculation from an insider. I just found the show transcript on Nexis -- emphasis is mine:
ED ROLLINS. . . If this House scandal is as big as I think it is from talking to people that are around it -- of course it started with Cunningham and it`s moving beyond that.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Duke Cunningham.
ED ROLLINS: Duke Cunningham, a congressman from San Diego who took bribes. There was a real little cabal on the Defense Appropriations Committee in which a couple of people who basically made an awful lot of money off of defense contractors and basically rewarded a bunch of members, Republicans.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Including a story that broke over the weekend, perhaps the use of prostitutes.
Harpers Magazine: Red Lights on Capitol Hill? (http://www.harpers.org/sb-red-lights-on-capitol-hill.html)
WSJ: Prosecutors May Widen Congressional-Bribe Case - Cunningham Is Suspected Of Asking for Prostitutes; Were Others Involved? (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114610728002837324-FnHaEYAFT_b7QFGwPxnAIiEcHEI_20060527.html?mod=tff_ main_tff_top)
My feeling is that there wont be any new bills for years sometimes. Both house and senate are deeply divided on the immigration issues. All of them want reform. But nobody can agree on any proposals being put forward to.
Most of them want 11 million illegal immigrants here for their contributions. Most of them dont want 11 million illegal immigrants when they look at what they have to pay for their contributions.
When taking into account of all of these I feel like people will argue for sometime and then will become happy with whats left. The 11 million will stay as illegal for some more years. And the legal immigrants will wait in the line for their rest of the life.
GOP's Ed Rollins: Hookergate is "Big"
By Justin Rood - May 3, 2006, 10:15 PM
GOP super-strategist Ed Rollins (late of the Katherine Harris campaign) made a couple interesting comments on Charlie Rose last night. First, he indicated strongly that he believes a number of the other lawmakers in trouble with Hookergate are Defense appropriators. He also says as many as 15 lawmakers could get indicted over the mess in the next few months.
Maybe Ed's playing the expectations game: if voters buy the 15 number, and only seven actually get busted, well then the kids aren't so bad after all. Still, it's interesting speculation from an insider. I just found the show transcript on Nexis -- emphasis is mine:
ED ROLLINS. . . If this House scandal is as big as I think it is from talking to people that are around it -- of course it started with Cunningham and it`s moving beyond that.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Duke Cunningham.
ED ROLLINS: Duke Cunningham, a congressman from San Diego who took bribes. There was a real little cabal on the Defense Appropriations Committee in which a couple of people who basically made an awful lot of money off of defense contractors and basically rewarded a bunch of members, Republicans.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Including a story that broke over the weekend, perhaps the use of prostitutes.
Harpers Magazine: Red Lights on Capitol Hill? (http://www.harpers.org/sb-red-lights-on-capitol-hill.html)
WSJ: Prosecutors May Widen Congressional-Bribe Case - Cunningham Is Suspected Of Asking for Prostitutes; Were Others Involved? (http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB114610728002837324-FnHaEYAFT_b7QFGwPxnAIiEcHEI_20060527.html?mod=tff_ main_tff_top)
My feeling is that there wont be any new bills for years sometimes. Both house and senate are deeply divided on the immigration issues. All of them want reform. But nobody can agree on any proposals being put forward to.
Most of them want 11 million illegal immigrants here for their contributions. Most of them dont want 11 million illegal immigrants when they look at what they have to pay for their contributions.
When taking into account of all of these I feel like people will argue for sometime and then will become happy with whats left. The 11 million will stay as illegal for some more years. And the legal immigrants will wait in the line for their rest of the life.
Rinsha
02-26 07:31 PM
Came across this article:
Title: U.S. Immigration Reform Bill Could Pass by July
http://www2.csoonline.com/blog_view.html?CID=29025
Can someone please explain, even just in broad strokes, how the Immigration Reform (if passed) would affect someone in EB3 - ROW?
Thanks
Title: U.S. Immigration Reform Bill Could Pass by July
http://www2.csoonline.com/blog_view.html?CID=29025
Can someone please explain, even just in broad strokes, how the Immigration Reform (if passed) would affect someone in EB3 - ROW?
Thanks
lord_labaku
10-23 12:19 PM
so brooklyn then?
0 comments:
Post a Comment