glamzon
07-26 05:51 PM
withdrawn accoring to Greg siskind's blog
wallpaper Sonam kapoor
Devils_Advocate
07-02 01:43 AM
You can even take an unpaid job/volunteer to keep you clear of the 90 days unemployed clause.
Klue
03-31 08:07 PM
Hi,
If you would like almost anything web design created contact me to set something up, I will offer extremly cheap pricing and will gaurentee satisfasction, visit my site www.freewebs.com/paragonproduction
yes, its a beta and we are moving to a new location.
My abilities are: HTML(advanced) XHTML(moderate) VB(adcanced) xml(moderate)FLASH(moderate)PHOTOSHOP(advanced) 3DSMAX(moderate)
Contact me if you would like to view my portfolio.
If you would like almost anything web design created contact me to set something up, I will offer extremly cheap pricing and will gaurentee satisfasction, visit my site www.freewebs.com/paragonproduction
yes, its a beta and we are moving to a new location.
My abilities are: HTML(advanced) XHTML(moderate) VB(adcanced) xml(moderate)FLASH(moderate)PHOTOSHOP(advanced) 3DSMAX(moderate)
Contact me if you would like to view my portfolio.
2011 Best Wallpaper Of Sonam Kapoor
GCKarma
07-18 11:09 AM
Guys,
Can we file I-485, after August 1 2007 and
before August 17 2007 (as I'm preparing my medicals).Is there a chance USCIS stop taking the application after July 31 2007 by giving some crap reason?Also I understand that filing fee is same for I-485 until August 17 2007.Is that true even for I-765 and I-131.Please clarify.
Can we file I-485, after August 1 2007 and
before August 17 2007 (as I'm preparing my medicals).Is there a chance USCIS stop taking the application after July 31 2007 by giving some crap reason?Also I understand that filing fee is same for I-485 until August 17 2007.Is that true even for I-765 and I-131.Please clarify.
more...
up_guy
09-21 06:37 PM
I work for a big company. Each time when I move to a new project, my company ask me to file an LCA and H-1B amendment for new project location. It takes several month to get approval until then you have wait and face all travel restrictions.
I know that several smaller companies don�t file such amendments
Does anyone who why do we have to file such amendment?
What happens if we don�t file this?
I know that several smaller companies don�t file such amendments
Does anyone who why do we have to file such amendment?
What happens if we don�t file this?
saachinsiva
07-20 06:27 PM
Hi
I did my Masters and then got a job in Company A who filed my H1b Visa on 10/01/2008 and valid until 07/25/2011.
I did not get stamped yet as i never leave US until now.
Meanwhile my employer applied for amendment as i was put into a project in another state and change in my title .
When i check the status it says "On May 7, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I129 PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283."
I am going to my country on August 2nd week for my marriage and my questions are.
can i use my current I797 for visa stamping or should i use new I129 which i did not get yet?
can i use the notice as the proof of I129 in case they need it for stamping?
Also could somebody please tell me how long will it take to receive my I129 after the above mentioned status?
I did my Masters and then got a job in Company A who filed my H1b Visa on 10/01/2008 and valid until 07/25/2011.
I did not get stamped yet as i never leave US until now.
Meanwhile my employer applied for amendment as i was put into a project in another state and change in my title .
When i check the status it says "On May 7, 2010, we mailed you a notice that we have approved this I129 PETITION FOR A NONIMMIGRANT WORKER. Please follow any instructions on the notice. If you move before you receive the notice, call customer service at 1-800-375-5283."
I am going to my country on August 2nd week for my marriage and my questions are.
can i use my current I797 for visa stamping or should i use new I129 which i did not get yet?
can i use the notice as the proof of I129 in case they need it for stamping?
Also could somebody please tell me how long will it take to receive my I129 after the above mentioned status?
more...
raju3g
08-08 04:07 AM
Its not an issue. Make sure u fill all ur future applications like ssn, green card etc as per your passport. also ur birth certificate should be like ur passport details name date of birth and place of birth.
2010 Sonam Kapoor Latest Hot Pics,
martinvisalaw
03-08 08:30 PM
Thanks for linking to me!
more...
mna123
07-30 05:46 PM
I am stuck out side of US for my name check for last 9 months when I applied for H-1. I have approved I 140. is there any way I can file my I 1485 and Advance parole or any thing to get back into US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
Some one has told me that I can use consular processing but have no idea about that.
Please help me and let me know what are possible options for me to return to US.
hair Latest Wallpapers Of Sonam
loudobbs
08-29 12:23 PM
My attorneys screwed up and filed my I140 under the wrong category. (EB3 instead of EB2). They refiled PP but without the original Labor cert attached. My PP application is not approved yet.
I called a couple of weeks ago and they told me they wont do PP because the original labor cert was not attached.
I Emailed them yesterday and this is their reply:
'This petition has been assigned to an officer,but no decision has been made.'
Does this mean anything? meaning is it close to being approved??
Thanks much!!
I called a couple of weeks ago and they told me they wont do PP because the original labor cert was not attached.
I Emailed them yesterday and this is their reply:
'This petition has been assigned to an officer,but no decision has been made.'
Does this mean anything? meaning is it close to being approved??
Thanks much!!
more...
fromnaija
07-18 12:27 PM
Ron Gotcher talked about USCIS processing times here:
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=20705#post20705
http://www.immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?p=20705#post20705
hot The citizens of New York voted
yabadaba
10-05 06:03 PM
10/05/2007: November 2007 Visa Bulletin
There has been no forward movement of the Employment cut-off dates for November. State Department explains that the reason for this is that it is still too early to see what impact the movement of the cut-off dates toward the end of FY-2007 may have on demand. Depending on the rate of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services offices for adjustment of status cases, some forward movement of dates may be possible for December.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3827.html
There has been no forward movement of the Employment cut-off dates for November. State Department explains that the reason for this is that it is still too early to see what impact the movement of the cut-off dates toward the end of FY-2007 may have on demand. Depending on the rate of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services offices for adjustment of status cases, some forward movement of dates may be possible for December.
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3827.html
more...
house Hot pics of Kareena kapoor
khanx66
05-06 09:20 AM
Hi,
I am not sure if I am posting this question to the wrong thread, so sorry if that's so....
I was told by the lawyer that I needed I-140 approved in order to ask for 3 years instead of 1 year for my H1B extension. They filed the extension asking for 1 year, and a week later we have the I-140 approved. My current H1B expiration date is in June 2009.
Now,
1) is there a way to ask H1B extension for 3 years at this point?
2) If so, does that mean a new application, or an amendment/correction to the old one?
3) Is it worth the hassle to ask for 3 Year extension if it's possible?
Thanks in advance for sharing your knowledge/experience/thoughts...
I am not sure if I am posting this question to the wrong thread, so sorry if that's so....
I was told by the lawyer that I needed I-140 approved in order to ask for 3 years instead of 1 year for my H1B extension. They filed the extension asking for 1 year, and a week later we have the I-140 approved. My current H1B expiration date is in June 2009.
Now,
1) is there a way to ask H1B extension for 3 years at this point?
2) If so, does that mean a new application, or an amendment/correction to the old one?
3) Is it worth the hassle to ask for 3 Year extension if it's possible?
Thanks in advance for sharing your knowledge/experience/thoughts...
tattoo Kareena Kapoor has been signed
chippilg
09-25 01:05 PM
I am a USC living in Jordan with my Jordanian husband, he was approved to apply for SB-1 visa ( because of his expired green card) and was sent the IV packet, which included the affidavit of support, just wondering how I'm going to fill the form since I don't work (never have) and live in Jordan with my husband, I was told I should fill out zeros where numbers are required and write unemployed where asked about work, is this the case? I will have a joint sponsor who is my brother in law who is a USC living and residing in the US, will this work? Please help as I couldn't find any answers on the net ( and I have been browsing all day!)
more...
pictures sonam kapoor
desibechara
12-29 04:10 PM
I was wondering about DOL letter which my employer received yesterday..for Recruitment process for 30 days..I wanted to know is it because of the conversion we did to RIR process some days back or is it just that they caught up with my TR application after 5 years..TR-Oct 2001
Please let me know
Desibechara
Please let me know
Desibechara
dresses kareena-kapoor-hot
masterdude
03-11 09:47 PM
Sorry, I got an error so i keep on posting till i was tired.
more...
makeup Sonam Kapoor in tarun khiwal
.jpg "Hot pics of Kareena kapoor")
morchu
06-11 09:18 AM
Yes.
My I-485 is pending with EB3 Feb 2006 priority date. Invoked AC21 and currently working for a different employer. Have Masters degree and 9+ years of experience.
Is there a way to re-apply for Green Card under EB2 category thru a 3rd employer and retain the old EB3 priority date?
Thanks in advance.
My I-485 is pending with EB3 Feb 2006 priority date. Invoked AC21 and currently working for a different employer. Have Masters degree and 9+ years of experience.
Is there a way to re-apply for Green Card under EB2 category thru a 3rd employer and retain the old EB3 priority date?
Thanks in advance.
girlfriend Sonam Kapoor Latest 2011
Blog Feeds
04-26 11:30 AM
The H-1B visa is, by far, the most sought-after temporary work visa in the United States for foreign-born, professional workers. The H-1B category requires sponsorship by a U.S. employer and is limited to specialty positions which generally require the candidates hold at least a bachelor�s degree or the equivalent in a relevant discipline. It now appears that the impact of the economy on H-1B usage will be felt for at least another year. The annual cap or quota for new H-1B visas is set by Congress at 65,000 new visas per year, not including the 20,000 H-1B visas available under...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2010/04/will-the-h1b-cap-be-reached-this-year-.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/h1bvisablog/2010/04/will-the-h1b-cap-be-reached-this-year-.html)
hairstyles Sonam Kapoor
Pooja
07-05 10:15 AM
Is it true that they really approved 60000 cases in June. I have a couple of friends that filed I-485 in 2005 and there background is clear too but still have not been approved. I don't understand what is going inside the blackbox. I read in forum that only 40,000 application were ready for approval but then why didn't these people application was not approved all thou there file was complete.
prout02
02-09 03:20 PM
Do you need to submit copies of your approved LC or I-140 to support your stay beyond 6 years? I don't see it mentioned in the I-129 application.
And do you say yes or no to the following question (Q.5, Part C of H-1B Data Collection and Filing Fee Exemption Supplement form)?
"Has the beneficiary of this petition been previously granted status as an H1-B nonimmigrant in the past 6 years and not left the United States for more than one year after attaining such status?"
This probably wishes to know whether you have a reason to stay here for more than 6 years. But I don't see anywhere to explain that. Any help is greatly appreciated.
And do you say yes or no to the following question (Q.5, Part C of H-1B Data Collection and Filing Fee Exemption Supplement form)?
"Has the beneficiary of this petition been previously granted status as an H1-B nonimmigrant in the past 6 years and not left the United States for more than one year after attaining such status?"
This probably wishes to know whether you have a reason to stay here for more than 6 years. But I don't see anywhere to explain that. Any help is greatly appreciated.
Macaca
07-24 08:04 AM
Reform, the FDR way (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-shlaes23jul23,1,2603353.story) Democrats are right to revere Roosevelt, but even he knew when to reform his own reforms. By Amity Shlaes, AMITY SHLAES is the author of "The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression," a syndicated columnist for Bloomberg News and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. July 23, 2007
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
WHERE'S the fun? That's the feeling you get watching the Democrats in Washington this summer. Gone is the happy plan for a frenzy of lawmaking, the "Hundred Hours" of action Speaker Nancy Pelosi promised when the Democrats took the House. The speaker's artful allusion to Franklin D. Roosevelt's "Hundred Days" quickly became an ironic echo. During that first euphoric legislative period, Roosevelt managed to rescue the banking system from disaster, assist bankrupted farmers, rewrite the economics of agriculture and the rules for flailing businesses, bring back beer � you name it. Contemporary leaders can't even act on pressing issues such as agriculture and immigration, not to mention Social Security.
Why can't politicians be Roosevelts today? For an answer, let's look to the middle of 1935, about two years into FDR's New Deal and the equivalent of about now in the election cycle. The federal government was still smaller than the nation's state and local governments combined. Two out of 10 men were unemployed. FDR took the economic emergency as a powerful mandate for further lawmaking. He jumped into the project with all the glee of a boy leaping into a sandbox. The papers reported that he was going to "blast out of committee" yet another round of bills, and blast he did � that year the country's premier labor law, the Wagner Act, was passed, as was Social Security.
At about the same time, Roosevelt slapped together the Rural Electrification Administration, which came on top of the New Deal's large farm subsidies. For construction workers, artists and writers, he created � also in mid-1935 � the Works Progress Administration, which hired the unemployed, including artists, craftsmen and journalists. To appreciate the size of that gift, imagine a contemporary politician responding to a market crash by putting ex-employees of Google on the federal payroll. The president also built on to an already large structure, the Public Works Administration, which funded town halls, grammar schools and swimming pools in 3,000 counties. The money? Roosevelt passed a tax increase that opponents called the "soak the rich" act. It contained an estate tax rate hike that would make John Edwards drool. By 1936, the government took up more than 9% of gross domestic product. For the first peacetime year in U.S. history, Washington had edged past the state and local governments in size to become a larger part of the national economy. (Just a few years earlier, state and local governments had been twice as large as Washington.) FDR had reversed the old crucial ratio of federalism, and Washington has dominated the country ever since.
Those early commitments set a trend of promises. Some of them became what we now call entitlements. Lyndon Johnson in the 1960s layered on governmental commitments with the Great Society. President Bush has heaped on more, with a new entitlement: prescription drugs for seniors. Only a narrow part of the federal budget remains for discretionary spending � the part left over for new ideas. And setting aside the question of whether an individual program is good, bad or simply in need of an overhaul, we've found as a country that old commitments are simply too hard to undo.
This is partly because of the way the political game works. When you seek to take away a benefit from one targeted recipient, he will fight like crazy to keep it � think of the ferocious battles the farm lobby wages over even tiny reductions in agricultural subsidies. Those who gain from reducing the size of the handout, however, are members of the lobbyless general public who will receive only an incremental advantage, maybe the equivalent of a penny or two apiece. So the rest of us don't have the incentive or ability to apply countervailing pressure. Yet that's exactly what we need today: the energy and exhilaration of FDR in his first term.
Today's timidity would have disturbed FDR, who had no trouble knocking down the sandcastles he had made. Early in the 1930s, he created 4 million jobs with the Civilian Works Administration, then uncreated them when he decided the CWA was too close to the English dole. When he tired of Harold Ickes' Public Works Administration, he scaled it back, and finally abolished it in 1941. As for Ickes' Department of the Interior, FDR decided that it was time to revise it into "a real Conservation Department" � a change many would welcome today.
A few leaders since FDR have persuaded Congress to help them bring about changes on this scale � Ronald Reagan's bipartisan tax reform of 1986 and Bill Clinton's welfare reform a decade later come to mind. These presidents were truer to FDR's spirit than the hesitating Congress of today. Clearing some blank space for new institutions is possible. But lawmakers won't do it if they honor Rooseveltian edifices more than Roosevelt did himself.
No comments:
Post a Comment