InTheMoment
05-14 04:21 PM
Doesn't matter if you only live in AZ or not! If you live in the Border Areas (North and South), or are traveling in those areas, it is better you carry it.
I never carry mine and do not intend to unless fit I the above case. I have memorized my A# and that of my spouse and am willing to go thro' to whatever rare hassle that I may face than losing my wallet and having to replace my GC for $370! Futher I do not want identity thieves getting another piece of info about me.
I never carry mine and do not intend to unless fit I the above case. I have memorized my A# and that of my spouse and am willing to go thro' to whatever rare hassle that I may face than losing my wallet and having to replace my GC for $370! Futher I do not want identity thieves getting another piece of info about me.
wallpaper CHI 1#39;#39; Ceramic Hairstyling
lazycis
09-27 08:29 AM
http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16658&d=1184176069
http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16800&d=1186592058
http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16916&d=1188467645
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1783293&postcount=13212
http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16800&d=1186592058
http://www.immigrationportal.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=16916&d=1188467645
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showpost.php?p=1783293&postcount=13212
venkspr
04-03 07:44 AM
You can use Search and compare salary data based on job title, location, company and year using real data. Search is powered using real data from actual job disclosure from fortune 500 companies and more.. - SalaryQuest.com (http://salaryquest.com) to look up the data. It's based on perm an h1b disclosure data. Good luck.
2011 CHI Digital Ceramic Hairstyling Iron 1 inch in Black
Nakano
03-17 12:21 PM
Hi Everyone,
My H1B visa is valid till Sep 2009. I am planing to go for H1B extension. I heard, some people who applied for extension got rejected in recent past. I am planing to go to Canada for extension.
Please share your advices and experiences... that would be helpful...
Please suggest me following...
- Better place to go for extension( Canada/ India/ some other?)
- What are the things we need to be prepared before that
- What are questions they are asking
- What are the documnets we MUST carry
Please reply for my post. I thank you for you time.
NK
My H1B visa is valid till Sep 2009. I am planing to go for H1B extension. I heard, some people who applied for extension got rejected in recent past. I am planing to go to Canada for extension.
Please share your advices and experiences... that would be helpful...
Please suggest me following...
- Better place to go for extension( Canada/ India/ some other?)
- What are the things we need to be prepared before that
- What are questions they are asking
- What are the documnets we MUST carry
Please reply for my post. I thank you for you time.
NK
more...
desigirl
12-17 09:09 AM
Dec 16th The Daily Show with Jon Stewart Official Website | Current Events & Pop Culture, Comedy & Fake News (http://www.thedailyshow.com/)
Every Segment is a treasure!
Stewart Spends Last Show Of 2010 ENTIRELY On 9/11 First Responders Bill (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/stewart-911-responders-bill_n_798114.html)
It is truly funny to have a comedy show asking the tough questions while the media plays it safe!
Every Segment is a treasure!
Stewart Spends Last Show Of 2010 ENTIRELY On 9/11 First Responders Bill (VIDEO) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/17/stewart-911-responders-bill_n_798114.html)
It is truly funny to have a comedy show asking the tough questions while the media plays it safe!
Robert Kumar
05-21 07:12 PM
Hi All,
One of the threads I read about requirements for I-140 smooth approval.
Please let me know
1.if anybody got any RFE's recently for getting I-140 cleared or processed. If so, what are they asking.
2. How important are salary slips in getting this approved
3. Are they asking for any recently pay stubs, if so, for how much period back in history.
The reason I'm asking this is sometimes we loose pay stubs, and hence I wanted to make sure I have all, in case any is missing.
4. Any risks in getting I-140 premium processed when dates are not close to current.
5. Any other risks.
6. How much time is it taking for regular I140 to get processed.
Any advice to this end is highly appreciated.
Thank You.
Bobby.
One of the threads I read about requirements for I-140 smooth approval.
Please let me know
1.if anybody got any RFE's recently for getting I-140 cleared or processed. If so, what are they asking.
2. How important are salary slips in getting this approved
3. Are they asking for any recently pay stubs, if so, for how much period back in history.
The reason I'm asking this is sometimes we loose pay stubs, and hence I wanted to make sure I have all, in case any is missing.
4. Any risks in getting I-140 premium processed when dates are not close to current.
5. Any other risks.
6. How much time is it taking for regular I140 to get processed.
Any advice to this end is highly appreciated.
Thank You.
Bobby.
more...
SanikaP
09-27 07:49 PM
Dear all,
Myself and my husband both have approved I-797 for H1B from different US companies.
I went for my stamping to US embassy and they asked for more evidence regarding the US company and my case is currently pending with them with all my documents ( passport, I797, marriage certificate, etc).
Now my US company is not able to get a job letter for me.
Meanwhile my husband is planning to go for his stamping. He has good evidence to support his case.
My questions are -
1.) How can I retrieve all my documents from US embassy without affecting my passport and my H1 case?
2.) If I am able to retrieve all the documents safely, can I apply for H4 with my husband`s H1 stamping?
3.) Will they create problem for issuing H4 to me because of my pending H1b case?
4.) With H4 visa and I-797 approval notice, can I start working in US ?
5.) What will be the best way out of this situation without affecting our working visas ?
Please reply if you know anything.
Thanking you
Sanika
Myself and my husband both have approved I-797 for H1B from different US companies.
I went for my stamping to US embassy and they asked for more evidence regarding the US company and my case is currently pending with them with all my documents ( passport, I797, marriage certificate, etc).
Now my US company is not able to get a job letter for me.
Meanwhile my husband is planning to go for his stamping. He has good evidence to support his case.
My questions are -
1.) How can I retrieve all my documents from US embassy without affecting my passport and my H1 case?
2.) If I am able to retrieve all the documents safely, can I apply for H4 with my husband`s H1 stamping?
3.) Will they create problem for issuing H4 to me because of my pending H1b case?
4.) With H4 visa and I-797 approval notice, can I start working in US ?
5.) What will be the best way out of this situation without affecting our working visas ?
Please reply if you know anything.
Thanking you
Sanika
2010 Farouk CHI GF1001N Ceramic
prdgl
06-28 01:41 PM
Can a person join a new employer for doing his LC, based on already sent out ads ???
what they are telling me is that the ad is very general for EB2 which was sent out even before one joined the company. so my question would be that can a person go ahead and use the already sent out ads or one should raise some red falgs, not to go for it ???
please Drop in some of your knowledge on this...
what they are telling me is that the ad is very general for EB2 which was sent out even before one joined the company. so my question would be that can a person go ahead and use the already sent out ads or one should raise some red falgs, not to go for it ???
please Drop in some of your knowledge on this...
more...
go_guy123
10-19 10:36 AM
Someone thought this was okay?
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/target-apologizes-for-immigrant-halloween-costume.html)
This also points to the fact that illegal immigrant amnesty is such a charged issue, CIR is extremely difficult to be passed into law (passed by Congress and Senate)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/target-apologizes-for-immigrant-halloween-costume.html)
This also points to the fact that illegal immigrant amnesty is such a charged issue, CIR is extremely difficult to be passed into law (passed by Congress and Senate)
hair ceramic hairstyling iron1
parag_a2z
12-19 02:30 AM
Hi All,
I have H1B stamped from company A which is valid untill Oct 2008. I am planning to go to India in Jan on my new transferred H1B from company B.
Do I have to take an appointment in India for getting my new H1 stamped? Or can i just show my new approved H1B from company B on my port of entry in US, when I come back?
I have H1B stamped from company A which is valid untill Oct 2008. I am planning to go to India in Jan on my new transferred H1B from company B.
Do I have to take an appointment in India for getting my new H1 stamped? Or can i just show my new approved H1B from company B on my port of entry in US, when I come back?
more...
Macaca
09-29 07:54 AM
Dangerous Logjam on Surveillance (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801332.html) By David Ignatius (davidignatius@washpost.com) | Washington Post, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
hot Farouk CHI 1 Inch Ceramic Flat Hairstyling Iron
deecha
03-05 12:02 AM
Yes.
Hi,
I currently am on F1 Visa- OPT valid till June 2011.
My employer will file for H1 this April.
If my H1 is rejected for any reason, will I be eligible to work on F1 - OPT visa?
Thanks
Santosh
Hi,
I currently am on F1 Visa- OPT valid till June 2011.
My employer will file for H1 this April.
If my H1 is rejected for any reason, will I be eligible to work on F1 - OPT visa?
Thanks
Santosh
more...
house CHI Flat Iron 1quot; Ceramic
HereIComeGC
02-25 02:46 PM
I work in Philadelphia area. I have received a Job offer in NYC area which offers me a salary 70-80% more than what I earn now. Job responsibilities and descriptions are pretty much the same in new position.
I would like to run it by a good lawyer to make sure there would not be an issue with AC21 (I am well past 180 days now).
Can anyone recommend a good lawyer?
Thank you
I would like to run it by a good lawyer to make sure there would not be an issue with AC21 (I am well past 180 days now).
Can anyone recommend a good lawyer?
Thank you
tattoo 2011 The CHI Hairstyling Iron
JAK
07-17 04:55 PM
From the August bulletin it seems we can file only till end of July...so better hurry !!!
more...
pictures Ceramic Hairstyling Iron
deecha
01-26 11:25 AM
Hi Gurus,
I was wondering if anyone on this site has ever filed an EB2-NIW I-140 petition ? And if so, what fields have you filed it in ? Do you necessarily need a masters degree or would 10+ years of experience in systems development qualify ?
I was also wondering if working in the health-care technology field, to create systems to diagnose and monitor cardiovascular systems to detect/prevent heart diseases would be something that could considered in the "national interest" ? If there is a job offer already extended to someone to work on such projects, would you still need a labor certification ?
Thank you in advance for taking the time out to read this and reply.
I was wondering if anyone on this site has ever filed an EB2-NIW I-140 petition ? And if so, what fields have you filed it in ? Do you necessarily need a masters degree or would 10+ years of experience in systems development qualify ?
I was also wondering if working in the health-care technology field, to create systems to diagnose and monitor cardiovascular systems to detect/prevent heart diseases would be something that could considered in the "national interest" ? If there is a job offer already extended to someone to work on such projects, would you still need a labor certification ?
Thank you in advance for taking the time out to read this and reply.
dresses CHI Ceramic Hairstyling Iron
desi3933
06-25 02:40 PM
Do we need copy of I140 approval notice or original while submitting I 485?
Copy of the I-140 approval notice
Not a legal advice
-----------------------
desi3933 at gmail.com
Copy of the I-140 approval notice
Not a legal advice
-----------------------
desi3933 at gmail.com
more...
makeup ceramic hairstyling iron 1
Blog Feeds
11-10 03:40 AM
My friend Margaret Stock has prepared an excellent report for the Immigration Policy Center entitled ESSENTIAL TO THE FIGHT: IMMIGRANTS IN THE MILITARY EIGHT YEARS AFTER 9/11. Margaret, an officer in the army and the undisputed leading national expert on immigration and the American armed forces, notes a number of key findings in her report: As of June 30, 2009, there were 114,601 foreign-born individuals serving in the armed forces, representing 7.91 percent of the 1.4 million military personnel on active duty. Roughly 80.97 percent of foreign-born service members were naturalized U.S. citizens, while 12.66 percent were not U.S. citizens....
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/immigrants-playing-critical-role-in-military.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/immigrants-playing-critical-role-in-military.html)
girlfriend Ceramic Hairstyling Iron
vikrant29nov
03-10 11:36 PM
http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/2824/manageflash.jpg
hairstyles 2011 CHI Ceramic Hairstyling
alex99
06-13 07:03 PM
please advice
creativeFuzion
08-02 09:32 PM
bobbo, great job man! I love the pig one! Haha, is that ex President Clinton I see there? Lol, good job, I love 'em all!
~Philip
~Philip
vikramark
01-12 10:35 AM
Hello,
I had E-Filed AP for me and my family on July 7th, 2008. Still it is showing as pending, On December 16th, 2008, I send a request to USCIS for expedite processing, December 26th I received a letter from USCIS that an officer is assigned to our case but after that there is no change in the status.
Can somebody pls suggest any steps that I should take to get my AP approved?
Thanks in advance
Vikram
I had E-Filed AP for me and my family on July 7th, 2008. Still it is showing as pending, On December 16th, 2008, I send a request to USCIS for expedite processing, December 26th I received a letter from USCIS that an officer is assigned to our case but after that there is no change in the status.
Can somebody pls suggest any steps that I should take to get my AP approved?
Thanks in advance
Vikram
No comments:
Post a Comment