EkAurAaya
04-16 01:31 PM
This is precisely why my Lawyer (amongst the top) advised to maintain H1B (so keep filing for extensions).
If your H1 expires and you are here based on AOS 485 > and for some reason 485 gets rejected you are out of status.
Good luck!
If your H1 expires and you are here based on AOS 485 > and for some reason 485 gets rejected you are out of status.
Good luck!
wallpaper wiz khalifa tattoos Pictures
sharma258
02-10 03:44 PM
Hi Guys,
please let me know how long we need to stay with sponsoring employer after getting GC.
Thanks
please let me know how long we need to stay with sponsoring employer after getting GC.
Thanks
franklin
07-05 01:40 PM
I guess you mistook my statement... what I said was, where did they get enough EB2-ROW to approve and so fast that they used up all the visas earmarked for EB2-ROW... Its unavailability now that will cause a backlog and thus retorgression after october...
in other words, if demand is higher than supply there will be a demand side backlog and this backlog occurs due to more demand than supply and thus unavailability of the "commodity"... this "unsatisfied demand" or "backlog" will then cause retrogression...
my question was, where did so much EB2-ROW demand come from when in reality with country quotas and EB2-ROW being current all along there NEVER was a extrodinary demand and a pending backlog in this cat. to begin with...
No, I didn't misunderstand your statement at all. EB2 Row didn't have a massive demand. EB3 ROW did.
So to answer your question - How can EB2 ROW go Unavailable? It is very simple. All the visas were distributed for the year, all the ROW ones (recently) went to EB3 ROW. It doesn't make a jot of a difference whether they were distributed to EB2 ROW (and probably weren't, since as I mentioned, it was never Retrogressed, and therefore never in demand or never a problem)
You seem to be misunderstanding my (albeit brief) statement. Technically, the numbers available for ROW are much greater (7% x roughly 250 countries). The mere fact that there has been retrogression in EB3 ROW for years shows that demand. It doesn't matter what EB2 ROW has done.
When the visa numbers are done, they are done. If there are spare visas in the ROW category, they trickle down to EB3. If there are no bottlenecks at EB1 or EB2, the supply is greater than demand and EB3 benefits.
There is easily enough demand from ROW all categories combined to make up the difference.
This is assuming, of course, that the 7% country limits were observed.
btw - my guess is that EB2 will become current again, and EB3 will go back to May date (aug 03)
in other words, if demand is higher than supply there will be a demand side backlog and this backlog occurs due to more demand than supply and thus unavailability of the "commodity"... this "unsatisfied demand" or "backlog" will then cause retrogression...
my question was, where did so much EB2-ROW demand come from when in reality with country quotas and EB2-ROW being current all along there NEVER was a extrodinary demand and a pending backlog in this cat. to begin with...
No, I didn't misunderstand your statement at all. EB2 Row didn't have a massive demand. EB3 ROW did.
So to answer your question - How can EB2 ROW go Unavailable? It is very simple. All the visas were distributed for the year, all the ROW ones (recently) went to EB3 ROW. It doesn't make a jot of a difference whether they were distributed to EB2 ROW (and probably weren't, since as I mentioned, it was never Retrogressed, and therefore never in demand or never a problem)
You seem to be misunderstanding my (albeit brief) statement. Technically, the numbers available for ROW are much greater (7% x roughly 250 countries). The mere fact that there has been retrogression in EB3 ROW for years shows that demand. It doesn't matter what EB2 ROW has done.
When the visa numbers are done, they are done. If there are spare visas in the ROW category, they trickle down to EB3. If there are no bottlenecks at EB1 or EB2, the supply is greater than demand and EB3 benefits.
There is easily enough demand from ROW all categories combined to make up the difference.
This is assuming, of course, that the 7% country limits were observed.
btw - my guess is that EB2 will become current again, and EB3 will go back to May date (aug 03)
2011 wiz khalifa tattoos
brb2
11-03 07:02 AM
Problems for EB based immigration is due to visa number shortages and relief can be achieved by an increase in the visa numbers. This will require legislation. Ombudsman has no role in this. Every one knows the current problems are due to shortage of visa numbers. Unfortunately, it is looking highly unlikely that congress will do anything until after the presidential elections. I don't know if you noticed it, as the democratic campaigns are going on, Hilary was being attacked for supporting no licenses for illegals in New York State. These people will avoid any immigration legislation. Whereas employment based immigration is non controversial, democrats know if they pass any such legislation, no republican will vote for the legalization. So the stalemate will continue until after next year's house and presidential election. Even republicans such as Cornyn are tiring out for legal immigration bills, where as the democrats are as enthusiastic as ever about solving illegal immigration problems only. Note the frequent atttempts at gettting the Dream act passed every few weeks.
....
one thing what we can do is start writing emails to the ombudsman cisombudsman@dhs.gov
i think everybody shall start telling their stories and give the ombudsman a bulleted list about what needs to happen to fix the broken system...just a thought...it may have a chance of better visibility.
i may be too naive but nevertheless why miss the opportunity to spread the word around...
....
one thing what we can do is start writing emails to the ombudsman cisombudsman@dhs.gov
i think everybody shall start telling their stories and give the ombudsman a bulleted list about what needs to happen to fix the broken system...just a thought...it may have a chance of better visibility.
i may be too naive but nevertheless why miss the opportunity to spread the word around...
more...
austingc
09-01 10:21 AM
Thank you for your help in this regard. My attorney submitted
1. Expert Opinion Letter
2. University Letter
and the I-140 RFE was cleared in 2 days and got the approval today (per USCIS case status).
Mine was PP.
That’s great news. Congratulations.
1. Expert Opinion Letter
2. University Letter
and the I-140 RFE was cleared in 2 days and got the approval today (per USCIS case status).
Mine was PP.
That’s great news. Congratulations.
beppenyc
03-20 08:15 PM
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/03-20-2006/0004323801&EDATE=
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
Q Okay. My question is, since 9/11, one of the key things that we need
is immigration reform, including comprehensive immigration reform that is
right now in front of Senator Specter's committee in the Judiciary. There are
two principles I'm hoping that you would support: One, the good people, the
engineers, the PhDs, the doctors, the nurses, the people in the system who
have followed the rules, will go to the head of the line in any form of
immigration reform. That's Title IVz of the bill.
Secondly, the illegals who have not followed the rules -- I understand the
debate, I appreciate your statements about immigration reform, but isn't it
better that we know who they are, have them finger-printed and photographed,
and allow some form of 245I to come back so --
THE PRESIDENT: Tell people what that is. Tell people what 245I is.
Q Okay -- 245I is a partial amnesty program that expired back in 2001,
in fact, was going to be voted on on 9/11, unfortunately. But those -- it was
a small segment of the illegal population where they would pay the $1,000 fine
and, for example, coming in illegally, then marrying an American citizen,
could somehow legalize their status.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Let me give you some broad principles on
immigration reform as I see them. First of all, we do need to know who's
coming into our country and whether they're coming in illegally, or not
legally -- legally or not legally -- and whether they're coming in or going
out. And part of reforms after September the 11th was a better system of
finding out who's coming here.
Secondly, we have a big border between Texas and Mexico that's really hard
to enforce. We got to do everything we can to enforce the border,
particularly in the south. I mean, it's the place where people are pouring
across in order to find work. We have a situation in our own neighborhood
where there are way -- disparities are huge, and there are jobs in America
that people won't do. That's just a fact. I met an onion grower today at the
airport when I arrived, and he said, you got to help me find people that will
grow onions -- pluck them, or whatever you do with them, you know.
(Laughter.) There are jobs that just simply aren't getting done because
Americans won't do them. And yet, if you're making 50 cents an hour in
Mexico, and you can make a lot more in America, and you got mouths to feed,
you're going to come and try to find the work. It's a big border, of which --
across which people are coming to provide a living for their families.
Step one of any immigration policy is to enforce our border in practical
ways. We are spending additional resources to be able to use different
detection devices, unmanned UAVs, to help -- and expand Border Patrol, by the
way, expand the number of agents on the border, to make sure we're getting
them the tools necessary to stop people from coming across in the first place.
Secondly, part of the issue we've had in the past is we've had -- for lack
of a better word -- catch and release; the Border Patrol would find people
sneaking in; they would then hold them for a period of time; they'd say, come
back and check in with us 45 days later, and then they wouldn't check in 45
days later. And they would disappear in society to do the work that some
Americans will not do.
And so we're changing catch and release. We're particularly focusing on
those from Central America who are coming across Mexico's southern border,
ending up in our own -- it's a long answer, but it's an important question:
How do we protect our borders, and at the same time, be a humane society?
Anyway, step one, focus on enforcing border; when we find people, send
them home, so that the work of our Border Patrol is productive work.
Secondly, it seems like to me that part of having a border security
program is to say to people who are hiring people here illegally, we're going
to hold you to account. The problem is our employers don't know whether
they're hiring people illegally because there's a whole forgery industry
around people being smuggled into the United States. There's a smuggling
industry and a forgery industry. And it's hard to ask our employers, the
onion guy out there, whether or not he's got -- whether or not the documents
that he's being shown that look real are real.
And so here's a better proposal than what we're doing today, which is to
say, if you're going to come to do a job an American won't do, you ought to be
given a foolproof card that says you can come for a limited period of time and
do work in a job an American won't do. That's border security because it
means that people will be willing to come in legally with a card to do work on
a limited basis, and then go home. And so the agents won't be chasing people
being smuggled in 18-wheelers or across the Arizona desert. They'll be able
to focus on drugs and terrorists and guns.
The fundamental question that he is referring to is, what do we do about -
- there's two questions -- one, should we have amnesty? And the answer, in my
judgment, is, no, we shouldn't have amnesty. In my judgment, granting
amnesty, automatic citizenship -- that's what amnesty means -- would cause
another 11 million people, or however many are here, to come in the hopes of
becoming a United States citizen. We shouldn't have amnesty. We ought to
have a program that says, you get in line like everybody else gets in line;
and that if the Congress feels like there needs to be higher quotas on certain
nationalities, raise the quotas. But don't let people get in front of the
line for somebody who has been playing by the rules. (Applause.)
And so, anyway, that's my ideas on good immigration policy. Obviously,
there's going to be some questions we have to answer: What about the person
who's been here since 1987 -- '86 was the last attempt at coming up with
immigration reform -- been here for a long period of time. They've raised a
family here. And my only advice for the Congress and for people in the debate
is understand what made America. We're a land of immigrants. This guy is
from Hungary, you know. (Applause.) And we got to treat people fairly.
We've got to have a system of law that is respectful for people.
I mean, the idea of having a program that causes people to get stuck in
the back of 18-wheelers, to risk their lives to sneak into America to do work
that some people won't do is just not American, in my judgment. And so I
would hope the debate would be civil and uphold the honor of this country.
And remember, we've been through these periods before, where the immigration
debate can get harsh. And it should not be harsh. And I hope -- my call for
people is to be rational about the debate and thoughtful about what words can
mean during this debate.
Final question, sir. You're paying me a lot of money and I got to go back
to work. (Laughter.)
PS I did not know about the story of I-245 on 9/11....
more...
upuaut
08-10 06:59 AM
Yeah.. I was going for that sort of effect (being a big fan of "Indiana Jones" movies, and "Big trouble in Little China"; and having more than a passing interest in Egyptology). Really this dial is the production that finaly got me thinking that I might have some tallent with Flash. It looks good, loads fast, and is almost immediately understood for what it is.
Thanks for the koodoes..
Thanks for the koodoes..
2010 the face tattoo club. Wiz
vmetla
07-31 12:37 AM
Thank you very much for your response.
more...
brasil
07-29 08:55 PM
Quoting what reason did the DMV confiscated your driver's license?
Standard procedure and license was about to expire.
This does not apply for address change if the expiration date is long...
Standard procedure and license was about to expire.
This does not apply for address change if the expiration date is long...
hair wiz khalifa tattoos on face. Wiz Khalifa gets another
hobbyaddict
December 3rd, 2008, 04:32 PM
[quote=Britsabroad;56879]Hey Ed - I chickened out on the Abes deal after reading the reviews - sounds like they make you work hard for your discount. If you went for it, let me know the outcome.
I read quite a few reviews beforehand... All over the board, I am happy to say my experience was fine.
Here is how the purchase went...
They called before sending it out, asked if I was interested in a battery and mentioned about purchasing the extended warranty. I told them that I may be interested in the warranty however I will read the information on line and call them back. I was sure to call back, I did not want to delay the order... I declined the extended warranty, since the one offered was not Nikon's. He did ask why and mentioned "everyone" gets it. That was the extent of the warranty discussion.
After looking over the site, they also have an extended warranty through Nikon (2 year) That can be purchased before a 10 days lapse of owning the camera.
-Ed
I read quite a few reviews beforehand... All over the board, I am happy to say my experience was fine.
Here is how the purchase went...
They called before sending it out, asked if I was interested in a battery and mentioned about purchasing the extended warranty. I told them that I may be interested in the warranty however I will read the information on line and call them back. I was sure to call back, I did not want to delay the order... I declined the extended warranty, since the one offered was not Nikon's. He did ask why and mentioned "everyone" gets it. That was the extent of the warranty discussion.
After looking over the site, they also have an extended warranty through Nikon (2 year) That can be purchased before a 10 days lapse of owning the camera.
-Ed
more...
JunRN
12-17 06:25 PM
Please state your case such as PD, I-140 approval, previous visas such as H1, F1, etc before we can comment.
hot wiz khalifa amber rose tattoo
joydiptac
06-02 07:52 PM
You cannot be a partner in LLC and work for the same company on H1B.
But my guess is nothing stops you from not be a founding member and work for the same company. Your other two partners can be owners and they will have the right to give you as many shares as they want. This is a guess, so please confirm with a Lawyer. Explore the same option with C Corp/S Corp as well.
Do share with us what you find out. :)
And BTW if you are just three people and making a million you guys are making a killing. What business you guys in?
But my guess is nothing stops you from not be a founding member and work for the same company. Your other two partners can be owners and they will have the right to give you as many shares as they want. This is a guess, so please confirm with a Lawyer. Explore the same option with C Corp/S Corp as well.
Do share with us what you find out. :)
And BTW if you are just three people and making a million you guys are making a killing. What business you guys in?
more...
house wiz khalifa tattoos on face.
GreenCard4US
03-20 04:57 PM
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200903210312.htm
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Washington (PTI): In a blow to Indian professionals, the U.S. on Friday announced additional measures for hiring of foreign specialists under the H-1B visa work programme making it more difficult for the companies receiving federal aid money to hire overseas workers.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced the measures to enforce the provisions of the new Employ American Workers Act (EAWA) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which prohibits hiring of H-1B visa holders by American companies who receive the federal aid money. Indian nationals account for bulk of the coveted H-1B visas.
These measures come about ten days before the USCIS starts accepting petitions for new H-1B visas for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
"Under this legislation any company that has received covered funding and seeks to hire new H-1B workers is considered an 'H-1B dependent employer'.
All H-1B dependent employers must make additional attestations to the U.S. Department of Labour (DOL) when filing the Labour Condition Application (LCA)," the USCIS said.
"USCIS reminds petitioners that a valid LCA must be on file with DOL at the time the H-1B petition is filed with USCIS," it said.
This means that if the petitioner indicates on its petition that it is subject to the EAWA, but the Labour Condition Application does not contain the proper attestations relating to H-1B dependent employers, USCIS will deny the H-1B petition, the statement said.
Besides, the USCIS is revising Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker, to include a question asking whether the petitioner has received covered funding.
USCIS is expected to post this revised form on its web site in time for the next cap subject to H-1B filing period that begins on April l.
While USCIS encourages petitioners, whenever possible, to use the most up-to-date form, USCIS will not require use of the revised form in time for the start of the filing period for fiscal year 2010, it said.
At the same time, USCIS urged H-1B petitioners who have already prepared packages for mailing using the previous Form I-129 (January 2009 version) to complete only the page in the revised version of the Form I-129 (March 2009) which has the new question on EAWA attestation requirements and to file this single page with the prepared package.
USCIS said EAWA applies to any Labour Condition Application (LCA) and/or H-1B petition filed on or after February 17, involving any employment by a new employer, including concurrent employment and regardless of whether the beneficiary is already in H-1B status.
The EAWA also applies to new hires based on a petition approved before February 17, 2009, if the H-1B employee had not actually commenced employment before that date.
However, EAWA does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking to change the status of a beneficiary already working for the employer in another work-authorised category. It also does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an extension of stay for a current employee with the same employer.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Washington (PTI): In a blow to Indian professionals, the U.S. on Friday announced additional measures for hiring of foreign specialists under the H-1B visa work programme making it more difficult for the companies receiving federal aid money to hire overseas workers.
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced the measures to enforce the provisions of the new Employ American Workers Act (EAWA) of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, which prohibits hiring of H-1B visa holders by American companies who receive the federal aid money. Indian nationals account for bulk of the coveted H-1B visas.
These measures come about ten days before the USCIS starts accepting petitions for new H-1B visas for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 2009.
"Under this legislation any company that has received covered funding and seeks to hire new H-1B workers is considered an 'H-1B dependent employer'.
All H-1B dependent employers must make additional attestations to the U.S. Department of Labour (DOL) when filing the Labour Condition Application (LCA)," the USCIS said.
"USCIS reminds petitioners that a valid LCA must be on file with DOL at the time the H-1B petition is filed with USCIS," it said.
This means that if the petitioner indicates on its petition that it is subject to the EAWA, but the Labour Condition Application does not contain the proper attestations relating to H-1B dependent employers, USCIS will deny the H-1B petition, the statement said.
Besides, the USCIS is revising Form I-129, Petition for Nonimmigrant Worker, to include a question asking whether the petitioner has received covered funding.
USCIS is expected to post this revised form on its web site in time for the next cap subject to H-1B filing period that begins on April l.
While USCIS encourages petitioners, whenever possible, to use the most up-to-date form, USCIS will not require use of the revised form in time for the start of the filing period for fiscal year 2010, it said.
At the same time, USCIS urged H-1B petitioners who have already prepared packages for mailing using the previous Form I-129 (January 2009 version) to complete only the page in the revised version of the Form I-129 (March 2009) which has the new question on EAWA attestation requirements and to file this single page with the prepared package.
USCIS said EAWA applies to any Labour Condition Application (LCA) and/or H-1B petition filed on or after February 17, involving any employment by a new employer, including concurrent employment and regardless of whether the beneficiary is already in H-1B status.
The EAWA also applies to new hires based on a petition approved before February 17, 2009, if the H-1B employee had not actually commenced employment before that date.
However, EAWA does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking to change the status of a beneficiary already working for the employer in another work-authorised category. It also does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an extension of stay for a current employee with the same employer.
tattoo wiz khalifa amber rose tattoo
agesilaus
September 1st, 2006, 06:36 PM
Nice HDR work
more...
pictures Placing a Tattoo of your
lostinbeta
11-18 02:38 AM
Damn that Bob.... if he keeps getting votes he is going to beat me!!!
Oh wait... Bob is beating me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CRAP!!!!
:beam:
Oh wait... Bob is beating me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
CRAP!!!!
:beam:
dresses Face tattoo? 71 ♥ 04.03.11
vparam
10-05 10:25 AM
Need some advice from you all. I concurrently filed for me and my wife's I-485 along with EAD, AP and I-140 for each on Jan, 2007. At the time, I was on my H-1B, however, my wife's H-4 was expired as of Dec. 6, 2006. The reason for this is because I had changed jobs earlier, and the lawyers never filed for her H4 transfer. Only my H1 was transferred to the new company, and she was still on her old H-4.
She received her EAD and AP approvals on April, 2007. I have got my I-140 approved as well. Is there going to be any problem with my wife's I-485?
So, here's the timeline:
June, 2004 - Me and wife on H1 and H4 resp., expiring on Dec., 2006
Jan, 2006 - I changed jobs, got my H1 transferred, which now expired on Oct., 2007. Wife never got her H4 transferred
Jan, 2007 - We filed concurrently for EAD, AP, 140 and 485 (Wife's H4 is already expired as of Dec. 6, 2006)
Apr, 2007 - Both me and my wife got our EAD and AP approved
July, 2007 - I got my 140 approved
Currently - waiting on our I-485
Question - Would their be a problem with my wife's 485 as she was out of status (but not illegal), when she filed for 485?
Thanks a lot.
H4 visa could be expired but was she having a valid I-94? I-94 is the one which validates her stay, if she had a valid I-94 then it should not be an issue...
She received her EAD and AP approvals on April, 2007. I have got my I-140 approved as well. Is there going to be any problem with my wife's I-485?
So, here's the timeline:
June, 2004 - Me and wife on H1 and H4 resp., expiring on Dec., 2006
Jan, 2006 - I changed jobs, got my H1 transferred, which now expired on Oct., 2007. Wife never got her H4 transferred
Jan, 2007 - We filed concurrently for EAD, AP, 140 and 485 (Wife's H4 is already expired as of Dec. 6, 2006)
Apr, 2007 - Both me and my wife got our EAD and AP approved
July, 2007 - I got my 140 approved
Currently - waiting on our I-485
Question - Would their be a problem with my wife's 485 as she was out of status (but not illegal), when she filed for 485?
Thanks a lot.
H4 visa could be expired but was she having a valid I-94? I-94 is the one which validates her stay, if she had a valid I-94 then it should not be an issue...
more...
makeup favorites are Wiz Khalifa,
grupak
02-06 05:48 PM
Job duties and same/similar job functions will be deciding factor. If your GC is for Programmer Analyst and if you become manager as Assets Manager, it will be an issue. If you are promoted as IT manager having significant overlap of job functions, you should be fine.
if you are like my manager, who forgot how to open IDE and always works on some obsolete excel sheets/ project plans/ outlook, you will have trouble...
Bottomline, dont leave development even if you become manager.
Good advice vamsi_poondla. Changing job is always a problem in I-485 stage. Making this more flexible is one of the administrative fixes IV is proposing in the letter to the President. One more reason for everyone to mail that letter, if not mailed already.
if you are like my manager, who forgot how to open IDE and always works on some obsolete excel sheets/ project plans/ outlook, you will have trouble...
Bottomline, dont leave development even if you become manager.
Good advice vamsi_poondla. Changing job is always a problem in I-485 stage. Making this more flexible is one of the administrative fixes IV is proposing in the letter to the President. One more reason for everyone to mail that letter, if not mailed already.
girlfriend wiz khalifa tattoos amber rose
vjmjaan
08-29 12:29 AM
Guys,
http://shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/UpdateDirectFiling062107.pdf
As per the Direct filing update on 21st June you can file your 485 at any center regardless of your place of employment or residence or 140 approval.
So dont worry, your case will be appropriately transferred to the correct service center.
Let us concentrate more on the DC rally.
http://shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/UpdateDirectFiling062107.pdf
As per the Direct filing update on 21st June you can file your 485 at any center regardless of your place of employment or residence or 140 approval.
So dont worry, your case will be appropriately transferred to the correct service center.
Let us concentrate more on the DC rally.
hairstyles Full Tribal Face Tattoo
gondalguru
07-06 12:01 PM
As part of Class action lawsuit can we ask for recapturing of all unused visa numbers? I believe the number is at least 300K, it covers the green cards for 2003, 2004 and 2005. 2006 can go with 2008 quota. So everyone will be happy.
I believe this is the provision we should fight for instead of CIRcus.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks
Sree
Since 2000, a total of 182,694 work-based visas have not been given out because the immigration agency had fallen behind in processing applications, according to the 2007 report of the immigration agency�s ombudsman.
as per ny times report...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
I believe this is the provision we should fight for instead of CIRcus.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks
Sree
Since 2000, a total of 182,694 work-based visas have not been given out because the immigration agency had fallen behind in processing applications, according to the 2007 report of the immigration agency�s ombudsman.
as per ny times report...
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/us/06visa.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
nashorn
12-17 08:57 PM
Hi friends!
I have applied for my I-485 in June 2007.
This is what i got on 29 Nov-2007
On November 29, 2007, we mailed you a decision on your I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
and on Dec 11th my status changed to
On December 11, 2007, the post office returned our last written notice on this case as undeliverable
My attorney got letters that my wife and daughter got denied as mine was denied..i am runing out of time and still do not know why it was denied..
we are at the same address where we got our EAD's and AP's and we have been checking the mail box every day to find out the reason.
if somebody who knows or gone through the same please share with me what you did and what happened.
thanks a lot.
Ramana.
If your atterney got letters of your wife and kid, yours should had been sent to him too. It is possible that the address on your 485 has some mistake. Ask your atterney to check that with USCIS, and ask the decision be sent again. Your atterney probeblely has done this already.
People normally got a RFE or Intent to deny befor final decision. If the address on the 485 was wrong, your atterney wouldn't get those either. His not responding could result in abandenonment denial. It looks like there is a good chance that is what happened.
I have applied for my I-485 in June 2007.
This is what i got on 29 Nov-2007
On November 29, 2007, we mailed you a decision on your I485, APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
and on Dec 11th my status changed to
On December 11, 2007, the post office returned our last written notice on this case as undeliverable
My attorney got letters that my wife and daughter got denied as mine was denied..i am runing out of time and still do not know why it was denied..
we are at the same address where we got our EAD's and AP's and we have been checking the mail box every day to find out the reason.
if somebody who knows or gone through the same please share with me what you did and what happened.
thanks a lot.
Ramana.
If your atterney got letters of your wife and kid, yours should had been sent to him too. It is possible that the address on your 485 has some mistake. Ask your atterney to check that with USCIS, and ask the decision be sent again. Your atterney probeblely has done this already.
People normally got a RFE or Intent to deny befor final decision. If the address on the 485 was wrong, your atterney wouldn't get those either. His not responding could result in abandenonment denial. It looks like there is a good chance that is what happened.
Narend
10-27 09:17 AM
Hello,
Couple of things here.
You did not tell that even when she got her H1, does she still have valid H4?
I dont think she got her h1 stamped on her visa. So technically it is not a problem if she has not been working and has no pay stubs.
She could go for stamping h4 if you people want, and YES that seems to be the best thing cause you want to keep you h1 valid.
Remember, Either you are her use the EAD, your h1 status might not hold good anymore. Likewise with the AP I suppose. Getting the point?
Cheers,
Couple of things here.
You did not tell that even when she got her H1, does she still have valid H4?
I dont think she got her h1 stamped on her visa. So technically it is not a problem if she has not been working and has no pay stubs.
She could go for stamping h4 if you people want, and YES that seems to be the best thing cause you want to keep you h1 valid.
Remember, Either you are her use the EAD, your h1 status might not hold good anymore. Likewise with the AP I suppose. Getting the point?
Cheers,