senglory
06-23 10:15 AM
How can I get know if my H1B was cancelled or not? Of course without asking about it my last employer.
wallpaper Layered Shag Hairstyles
Nitu Singh
06-21 02:42 PM
When is it safe to change employment once you file for I-485?
thanks!
thanks!
perm2gc
09-07 02:03 PM
Personally I agree with you. On the other hand, there could be some folks who like this sh*t. :D :D It is just an FYI for them.;):D :D :D
2011 Medium Layered Hairstyles
kumar1981
09-18 10:15 AM
Any inputs guyz!
more...
senk1s
09-27 04:04 PM
Do you mean 1099 by anychance?
Do you mean an I9 form -
that is required to be maintained by the employer for all employees (even US Citizens)
Yes on EAD you can/have to fill that
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=31b3ab0a43b5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Do you mean an I9 form -
that is required to be maintained by the employer for all employees (even US Citizens)
Yes on EAD you can/have to fill that
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=31b3ab0a43b5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
Blog Feeds
07-26 05:40 AM
For several years, USCIS has been moving more and more to a secretive style of carrying out its role. Gone are the days when rules were published for comment. Examiners operate in anonymity. A two year appeals process and expensive fees mean that most people simply give up when their cases are denied. Examiners more and more frequently seem to be deciding cases based on their own made up standards rather than what the law requires. I'm happy to report that the American Immigration Lawyers Association is taking the agency to court. Director Mayorkas all but begged AILA to do...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/aila-sues-uscis-to-force-agency-to-open-up-on-h1b-process.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/aila-sues-uscis-to-force-agency-to-open-up-on-h1b-process.html)
more...
martinvisalaw
07-06 09:44 AM
You can only stay in the US if you can change to another lawful status. As a UK citizen, the only work-authorized status that might be available, though difficult, is O-1 for extraordinary ability aliens. Please see my website link for a description of different categories: nonimmigrant visas (http://www.martinvisalaw.com/nonimmigrant%20visas.html). If the company won't start the permanent residence process for you, unfortunately you have very limited options.
2010 Cool Shaggy Bob Cut Hairstyles
va_dude
07-09 03:27 PM
There is no change really for Advance Parole applicants.
The form 131 is used for more than just AP applicants, its used for refugees and re-entry permits too.
Read this from page 2 of that memo.
Q. Do the revised Form I-131 instructions require advance parole applicants to complete biometrics?
A. Applicants for advance parole are not required to submit biometrics at this time. An applicant for advance parole must continue to submit two identical color photographs of the applicant taken within 30 days of the filing of the Form I-131 application.
The form 131 is used for more than just AP applicants, its used for refugees and re-entry permits too.
Read this from page 2 of that memo.
Q. Do the revised Form I-131 instructions require advance parole applicants to complete biometrics?
A. Applicants for advance parole are not required to submit biometrics at this time. An applicant for advance parole must continue to submit two identical color photographs of the applicant taken within 30 days of the filing of the Form I-131 application.
more...
godspeed
06-29 08:33 AM
Last time (in 2008) TSC was very fast in approving the cases, NSC was bit slow, thought it would be a good statistic at a glance on approvals.
What is the purpose of knowing which center processed?
What is the purpose of knowing which center processed?
hair Shag Hairstyle
Macaca
11-14 09:30 PM
Congress Needs Both Comity and Accomplishments (http://aei.org/publications/pubID.27104,filter.all/pub_detail.asp) By Norman J. Ornstein | Roll Call, November 14, 2007
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
A look at the range of public opinion surveys on Congress in recent days, weeks and months can't leave anybody happy. The most recent Associated Press-Ipsos survey showed a 25 percent approval rating, coupled with a staggering 70 percent disapproval--a 45 percent gap in the wrong direction. The most recent NBC-Wall Street Journal survey showed 19 percent approval and 68 percent disapproval, for a 49 percent gap.
Democrats are taking comfort from the fact that much of the anger and disappointment people feel is aimed at Republicans. It should be scant comfort. To be sure, a recent ABC-Washington Post poll showed Republicans at 32 percent approval and 63 percent disapproval. But Democrats are not exactly exempt from public disgust; the same survey showed only 36 percent approval for them, with 58 percent disapproval. If Democrats think they can count on the unhappiness with President Bush and the residue of repugnance with the performance in Washington when the Republicans controlled all the levers of power, they are delusional. There is clearly a broader public anger about the performance of most institutions, but especially those in Washington, and it could very, very easily turn into a broader and deeper reaction against the status quo and all incumbents.
Dig a bit deeper, and it is obvious that voters are tired of the partisan bickering and ideologically driven rancor--they want problems solved in Washington, not yelling or posturing or revenge killing that only results in gridlock. The latter is what they see coming out of Congress.
Of course, this is not entirely fair. The 110th Congress has some significant accomplishments, including implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations, increasing the minimum wage, expanding college aid, implementing "pay-as-you-go" budgeting and working hard to make it a reality, and passing significant lobbying and ethics reform. But many other things have passed the House and foundered in the Senate, or been stopped, like children's health insurance, by a presidential veto. And, of course, Congress has spent countless hours trying futilely to do something to change course in Iraq.
Just as important, the image of Congress is far more that of a dysfunctional body riven with partisanship than a well-oiled, or even marginally oiled machine working hard to help the country and its people with their daily challenges. On this front, the blame is widespread, going both to an irresponsible minority and an insensitive majority.
But the onus is especially heavy on the majority. It is the majority, especially in the House, that has the power to shape debate and either to open up or shut down the process to ideas, amendments and involvement by rank-and-file Members in both parties. It is the majority that has to rise above the cheap shots, irresponsible motions to recommit and outrageous rhetoric, both to serve the larger interests of the House and to serve their own partisan interests in maintaining a majority.
The attitude of some Democrats, including some in the leadership, is eerily reminiscent of the Republican leaders in 2005 and 2006--voters don't really care about the internal dynamics of Congress, and even if they are unhappy, our fundraising advantages and strong candidate recruitment will keep us in charge. That is a formula for repeat disaster. Even if Democrats can continue to maintain a thin edge over Republicans in the approval/disapproval ratio, keep up their funding advantage and gain leverage from the retirements of many Republican moderates in contestable districts, their ability to hold a majority beyond 2008 will be severely limited.
The first thing Democrats should do is develop a basic sensitivity and avoid doing stupid things that gain nothing except additional enmity from their counterparts. A good example was the utterly foolish decision to schedule a revote on SCHIP when many Republicans from California were back home tending to their constituents in the midst of the disastrous fires. There was no good reason for pushing that vote instead of delaying it until Members could be back to participate. It reminded me again of the high-handed and insensitive behavior of Republicans in the 109th Congress, when they would quash debate or screw the Democrats for no good reason other than that they had the power to do so.
The second thing Democrats should do is to accept the possibility of defeat on the floor as something short of a disaster. The biggest failing of the GOP in the 109th was an unwillingness to lose no matter what. Of course, you don't want to lose, and can't afford to lose on some basic important issues and priorities. But in other cases, amendments can be constructive or no great disaster (and in some cases, amendments the majority doesn't like can be allowed to pass and jettisoned in conference).
The third thing Democrats should do is to move aggressively to more debate, and not only between Democrats and Republicans. Now is a perfect time to revive the idea of regular prime-time debates on important issues. Take one evening a week, in special orders, and structure a lively debate on something of concern to the country. Have two or four Members lead the way in debate, and follow with a free-for-all discussion. In some cases, say global warming or trade, have both majority and minority Members on each side. Add to that a regular process of having real debate on bills that reach the floor whenever possible.
Now a fourth suggestion: It is possible that Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) and Minority Whip Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), who are legislators, would react to a new Democratic attitude and approach with their own constructive responses. But it also is possible that they, egged on by their own bomb-throwers, would just try to take advantage of any new opening for greater partisan leverage. So Democratic leaders should also open up serious lines of communication with the retiring Republicans such as Reps. David Hobson (Ohio), Ray LaHood (Ill.) and Deborah Pryce (Ohio). Make a deal: We will bend over backward to accept your amendments and the nonfrivolous or nongotcha ones by your colleagues, and to be more fair and open, if you offer such amendments and encourage others, and if you object to irresponsible motions to recommit. The retirees have one last opportunity to make a difference in the way the House operates and in helping to solve the nation's problems. It is a long shot, but it just might work.
more...
gcformeornot
01-29 09:28 PM
?????
hot Medium Shaggy Hairstyles
sanam9696
06-13 09:42 PM
Anyone has any idea?
I have approved I140 (EB3, PD:Nov'04) from previous employer; after getting my MBA (Jun'06), I have changed the job and my job description has also changed. New employer will file the labor after 3 months (HR Policy)..I have good relations with previous employer, they are ready to file I485. Is it possible to file I485(previous employer), while I am working with new employer?
I am not sure but I came to know (not reliable source), that it is possible to file I485(previous employer) and during the interview, I can submit a support letter from the new employer. is this correct?
Requesting your help..so near...but so far!!!!!
I have approved I140 (EB3, PD:Nov'04) from previous employer; after getting my MBA (Jun'06), I have changed the job and my job description has also changed. New employer will file the labor after 3 months (HR Policy)..I have good relations with previous employer, they are ready to file I485. Is it possible to file I485(previous employer), while I am working with new employer?
I am not sure but I came to know (not reliable source), that it is possible to file I485(previous employer) and during the interview, I can submit a support letter from the new employer. is this correct?
Requesting your help..so near...but so far!!!!!
more...
house short layered hairstyle
rasheedk
05-05 08:46 PM
Hi,
my F-1 Visa expired about a month ago, and I am in my grace period while waiting for my OPT to come through. Yesterday I got the notification that I won the diversity lottery..
My question is as follows:
If I file to change status in the USA, but for some reason I do not get my OPT and get deported, do I lose my chances with the green card? or am I never out of status since I have a pending application? Please help!
my F-1 Visa expired about a month ago, and I am in my grace period while waiting for my OPT to come through. Yesterday I got the notification that I won the diversity lottery..
My question is as follows:
If I file to change status in the USA, but for some reason I do not get my OPT and get deported, do I lose my chances with the green card? or am I never out of status since I have a pending application? Please help!
tattoo New Trendy Short Hairstyles
rbalaji5
05-20 12:23 AM
Hi Friends,
Any way to expedite Indian Passport renewal in India. My wife applied the passport renewal in Chennai in Feb 2011. It is almost 3 months. Usually how long it will take ?. Is there a way to contact them to expedite the process.
I applied Tatkal passport renewal for my son in April 2011. It is a month now. Not received.
There is no enough information on whom to contact and how to expedite the service.:(
Any useful information is appreciated.
Any way to expedite Indian Passport renewal in India. My wife applied the passport renewal in Chennai in Feb 2011. It is almost 3 months. Usually how long it will take ?. Is there a way to contact them to expedite the process.
I applied Tatkal passport renewal for my son in April 2011. It is a month now. Not received.
There is no enough information on whom to contact and how to expedite the service.:(
Any useful information is appreciated.
more...
pictures choppy layered hairstyle.
gonecrazyonh4
10-10 12:19 PM
Is the PERM sponsorship email sent from DOL to the HR representative of the company automatically generated or is it sent after manual review of the application by the authorities?
Out first PERM application was denied and the attorney refiled it again on the same day saying it was because one colum was not filled in.
We refiled on last friday and still havent received the sponsorship mail this time too. Again the attorney tell us it is possibly because monday was public holiday.
I was under the impression that the sponsorship email is automatically generated as long as all the info is correct.
Any idea if the attorney is right on this?
Out first PERM application was denied and the attorney refiled it again on the same day saying it was because one colum was not filled in.
We refiled on last friday and still havent received the sponsorship mail this time too. Again the attorney tell us it is possibly because monday was public holiday.
I was under the impression that the sponsorship email is automatically generated as long as all the info is correct.
Any idea if the attorney is right on this?
dresses bangs hairstyle
JazzByTheBay
09-06 10:22 AM
Just got an email from Expedia.com - fares from Bay Area to Wash. D.C. have dropped by about $50 - the cheapest fares today (9/06/2007):
- SFO - BWI (US Airways) $208
- OAK - DCA (ATA): $218
- SJC - BWI (Continental): $218
The fares shouldn't be a reason to not participate in the rally! Hope to see more folks from CA - Norcal & SoCal.
cheers!
jazz
- SFO - BWI (US Airways) $208
- OAK - DCA (ATA): $218
- SJC - BWI (Continental): $218
The fares shouldn't be a reason to not participate in the rally! Hope to see more folks from CA - Norcal & SoCal.
cheers!
jazz
more...
makeup Women Blonde Shag Hairstyle
Waitingnvain
08-14 04:14 PM
Admin:
I missed the 2nd conference call. Could you please post the transcipt of the call.
Thanks
I missed the 2nd conference call. Could you please post the transcipt of the call.
Thanks
girlfriend Pixie Haircut, Layered Shag
puzon23
02-12 07:40 AM
Hello All,
I just wanted to ask for your general advice. My H1B expires in July 2010 so I know I have to turn in my PERM application before then so I really have only about 2 months to start recruitment process. I also have a green card to Canada so I could go there but I do like my current job in the US and living in New York City is really great!
Anyway, my question is. How tough do you think it will be to start PERM process now in this current economic downturn and the fact that it is in New York (millions of people)? Do you also think there might be some legislation in a near future to make it more difficult for us to get green cards?
I understand you can't answer those questions exactly, but a piece of advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you all!
I just wanted to ask for your general advice. My H1B expires in July 2010 so I know I have to turn in my PERM application before then so I really have only about 2 months to start recruitment process. I also have a green card to Canada so I could go there but I do like my current job in the US and living in New York City is really great!
Anyway, my question is. How tough do you think it will be to start PERM process now in this current economic downturn and the fact that it is in New York (millions of people)? Do you also think there might be some legislation in a near future to make it more difficult for us to get green cards?
I understand you can't answer those questions exactly, but a piece of advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you all!
hairstyles Shaggy Layered Medium Length
TexDBoy
09-14 04:31 PM
It is better to wait to switch after your I-140 approval ....
If you switch before, your employer could cancel the application or might not answer RFE if one is issued ...
If you are sure that employer will be very cooperative, then you can easily shift now ...
If you switch before, your employer could cancel the application or might not answer RFE if one is issued ...
If you are sure that employer will be very cooperative, then you can easily shift now ...
Blog Feeds
04-26 11:30 AM
I've attended hundreds of meetings of immigration lawyers in my career. Many of them have exhibited characteristics of 12-step groups in which we formed circles of victimhood, and "admitted that we were powerless over [INS, USCIS, DOL, State, etc.]and that our lives had become unmanageable." Many of these sessions disgusted me because of the excess of whining complaints over action. Too often immigration lawyers are wont to complain and play victim, but rarely do they model the fictional TV executive, Howard Beale in the movie, Network ("I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!"). I...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/04/my-entry.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2010/04/my-entry.html)
hebron
08-12 04:09 PM
Hi,
My I-140 was approved from Nebraska service center, but my attorney sent my I-485 case to Texas. I came across few people here on IV who have experienced the same.
Did USCIS provide any information regarding this? If so could you provide the link?
Thanks!
My I-140 was approved from Nebraska service center, but my attorney sent my I-485 case to Texas. I came across few people here on IV who have experienced the same.
Did USCIS provide any information regarding this? If so could you provide the link?
Thanks!
No comments:
Post a Comment