minimalist
04-12 10:40 PM
Do we really need to attach a copy of the front page of the passport for AP renewal, wouldn't a copy of the DL be sufficient enough?
No need for passport front page.
No need for passport front page.
wallpaper New Born Funny Baby,
CRAZYMONK
03-18 02:38 PM
Your exemployer is very clever. He took all steps to not leave any evidence behind. The 5 months you are talking about, he is not liable as you are outside the US. If you are here in US and he did'nt paid, then its a differnt story.
In the offer letter he gave, when you joined, is there any thing mentioned about vacation pay?
In the offer letter he gave, when you joined, is there any thing mentioned about vacation pay?
gcphul
12-14 09:37 AM
Munnabhai,
I have recevied I-140 RFE on all of the above u mentioned 1,2,3. i have 3 years degree.Labour doesnt match with edu.i am hpoing to get reject :).thats what attorney saying.
I have recevied I-140 RFE on all of the above u mentioned 1,2,3. i have 3 years degree.Labour doesnt match with edu.i am hpoing to get reject :).thats what attorney saying.
2011 quot;Baby!quot;
tnite
09-27 09:36 AM
Even i got the Section: UNKNOWN thing from NSC. My 140 approved on MAY 2007, But online case status is still showing case pending, Is it because of this?
Just to add to the pile, Mine says "UNKNOWN".
So what? Move on guys and if you're still worried take it with you to FP and ask the IO
Just to add to the pile, Mine says "UNKNOWN".
So what? Move on guys and if you're still worried take it with you to FP and ask the IO
more...
Libra
08-15 12:12 PM
Congrats and welcome to IV, hope you become an active member and contribute your efforts to IV.
I thought this will give some hope to you.
Mine reached USCIS on July-3rd around 6:00am. All 6 (2x485, 2xAP, 2xEAD) checks were cached today.
Hope yours on the way too...
I thought this will give some hope to you.
Mine reached USCIS on July-3rd around 6:00am. All 6 (2x485, 2xAP, 2xEAD) checks were cached today.
Hope yours on the way too...
small2006
07-21 10:21 AM
FYI:
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that’s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn’t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven’t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
I don't know if this is old news but thought of sharing it anyway.
I was in the same boat as many others here i.e, no FP notice even 1yr after filing for 485. With my PD becoming current in Aug 2008, I called my attorney to see if he can do anything to help me out. He told me that due to several complaints from people like us and a law suit threat (or an actual lawsuit, not sure) from AILA, the Texas center has sent has set up an exclusive fax line for such requests. This system came into existence only about 2-3 weeks ago.
He sent a fax on my behalf to that number last Tuesday 7/15/08. My wife and I both received FP notices on Sat 7/19/08! So looks like for a change, something that’s set up for our own good is actually working. Frankly, I hadn’t pinned any hopes on the fax having a positive impact but I was pleasantly surprised. Our appointments are for next week.
Hope this little tip will help others in the same boat if their attorneys are either not aware and/or haven’t told their clients about it.
The fax number is not made available to the general public. Only attorneys have access to it.
BTW: As a result of all this, I haven't seen any LUD changes (soft or hard) on my case status online....I thought that was strange.
more...
fromnaija
09-26 01:32 PM
Hi All,
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
Fiirst, I think you should have started a new thread with your question and not bury it under this discussion. Having said that, to get an extension after the six year H limit, you need to have labor certification application filed at least 365 days prior to your expiry date or alternatively have an immigrant petition approved on your behalf by that date.
My visa will expire (6 yrs completion) in the month of October 2007. What can I do next. Will I get an years extension based on the Green card filing. What is the standard procedure ?
CCC2006
Fiirst, I think you should have started a new thread with your question and not bury it under this discussion. Having said that, to get an extension after the six year H limit, you need to have labor certification application filed at least 365 days prior to your expiry date or alternatively have an immigrant petition approved on your behalf by that date.
2010 Funny babies faces
hebron
06-14 02:22 PM
Hello All,
My EB3 PD is September 2004 with no end in sight. I was promoted to Principal Software Engineer back in 2007 and would like to know if I can port my EB3 to EB2. I have a Masters degree with 13 years of experience. I have been working with the current employer since 2002 (8 years experience).
I asked my attorney for his advice and he responded with the following: "If you have been promoted to a position for which the company normally requires a Masters degree (or a Bachelors and five years of experience), and we can prove it, then we can certainly do the labor certification again as an EB-2 and we can upgrade the I-140 to an EB-2. The key is being able to prove that it is truly the company�s requirement for the job. Otherwise, we all end up with potential problems for fraud and you may NEVER get the permanent residence."
My question is if anything goes wrong with the porting process, can I fall back to my current EB3 without any issues? Has anybody ported from EB3 to EB2 working with the same employer? If so, could you provide some insight into this?
Thanks.
My EB3 PD is September 2004 with no end in sight. I was promoted to Principal Software Engineer back in 2007 and would like to know if I can port my EB3 to EB2. I have a Masters degree with 13 years of experience. I have been working with the current employer since 2002 (8 years experience).
I asked my attorney for his advice and he responded with the following: "If you have been promoted to a position for which the company normally requires a Masters degree (or a Bachelors and five years of experience), and we can prove it, then we can certainly do the labor certification again as an EB-2 and we can upgrade the I-140 to an EB-2. The key is being able to prove that it is truly the company�s requirement for the job. Otherwise, we all end up with potential problems for fraud and you may NEVER get the permanent residence."
My question is if anything goes wrong with the porting process, can I fall back to my current EB3 without any issues? Has anybody ported from EB3 to EB2 working with the same employer? If so, could you provide some insight into this?
Thanks.
more...
tejonidhi
11-27 01:20 PM
My friend is in India during the July 15 period. He is being told by the consulting firm that they have applied for Labor Substitution. All I know about labor substitution is that you have to apply for I 140 along with the approved labor sheet that company gets from DOL. The company Lawyer kept saying that they have sent it to DOL for substitution. I just want to clarify that there is no other way of substitution other than applying I 140.
Thank you
Thank you
hair 10 Funny Babies Making Faces
unseenguy
05-16 03:49 PM
How can you file concurrent I-140 and I-485 if PD is not current, meaning country is retrogressed? You can't file I-485. You can file I-140 only and wait PD to become current to file I-485.
CP requires police certificates, therefore one needs to go back to home country in advance of interview to get it. I think it also needs police certificates from all place resided since age ?? (16 or 18??). All CP but not all AOS gets interviewed.
There is nothing to be scared of in the interview. If you are skilled immigrant from any country and your case is genuine, what are you scared of in the consular interview? Attorneys here will always ask you for I485, sure it helps most people than those filing CP , but there is also economic advantage to attorneys suggesting this option.
As I said, those from non retrogressed countries can file concurrently, also those countries such as India which are experiencing wide swings in visa bulletins are able to file concurrently. If I140 is NOT approved and date is current, it makes sense to file I485 as it gives you additional protections by law.
CP requires police certificates, therefore one needs to go back to home country in advance of interview to get it. I think it also needs police certificates from all place resided since age ?? (16 or 18??). All CP but not all AOS gets interviewed.
There is nothing to be scared of in the interview. If you are skilled immigrant from any country and your case is genuine, what are you scared of in the consular interview? Attorneys here will always ask you for I485, sure it helps most people than those filing CP , but there is also economic advantage to attorneys suggesting this option.
As I said, those from non retrogressed countries can file concurrently, also those countries such as India which are experiencing wide swings in visa bulletins are able to file concurrently. If I140 is NOT approved and date is current, it makes sense to file I485 as it gives you additional protections by law.
more...
satishku_2000
05-24 10:07 AM
Here is my case:
MS (computer engg) in US
US IT experience more than 6 years
No TOEFEL ( what native english speaker??)
Worked in high growth technology/employer (I assume)
come under STEM
How many points will i get??
you may get 100 points it does not matter, We are still going to have country caps ...
MS (computer engg) in US
US IT experience more than 6 years
No TOEFEL ( what native english speaker??)
Worked in high growth technology/employer (I assume)
come under STEM
How many points will i get??
you may get 100 points it does not matter, We are still going to have country caps ...
hot marzipan abies 4
gg_ny
08-21 09:20 AM
Is there a chance to attach SKIL provisions towards higher degree GC retrogressed applicants to this appropriation efforts?
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/898
Congress Quietly Tries to Craft Bill To Maintain U.S. Lead in Science
Jeffrey Mervis
In the dog days of August, while most members of Congress are back home campaigning for reelection or on holiday, a small group of staffers is at work in Washington, D.C., on legislation that could influence science spending for years to come. Their goal is to craft a broad bill aimed at bolstering U.S. competitiveness that Congress could pass before the November elections.
They face long odds. The White House has already expressed reservations about some aspects of the legislation, and the congressional calendar is short and already very crowded. Although Senate leaders say they are committed to the goal, House leaders appear less enthusiastic. But a powerful coalition of forces, including business leaders who can bend a member's ear, is keen for Congress to act. "Legislation would show the public that our nation's leaders have a long-range plan of action on U.S. competitiveness," says Susan Traiman of the Business Roundtable, a consortium of 160 CEOs from across U.S. industry.
The legislation draws upon several efforts over the past year examining the status of U.S. science and technology, including the National Academies' Rising Above the Gathering Storm report and the National Summit on Competitiveness (Science, 21 October 2005, p. 423; 16 December 2005, p. 1752). In February, the Bush Administration proposed starting a 10-year doubling of basic research at the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Science, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology's (NIST) core labs (Science, 17 February, p. 929) as part of its 2007 budget request. And the initial funding for what the Administration has dubbed the American Competitiveness Initiative (ACI) is working its way through the legislative process.
Science advocates can't say enough about the importance of ACI. But they believe even more is needed to improve math and science education and enhance U.S. innovation. Taking their cue from Gathering Storm and other reports, legislators from both parties introduced a fistful of bills earlier this year that would expand existing research and education activities at several agencies and set up new programs (see table).
Unlike annual appropriations bills, which determine how much each federal agency can spend in a given year, these authorization bills set desired funding levels over several years. Although they don't provide the cash, they can build political support for ongoing spending increases. Notes one university lobbyist: "You want Congress on record and the key committees behind an authorization bill, so that they can bail out appropriators when they hit rough seas."
The goal of the quiet negotiations taking place this summer is a single bill. But the calls for increased spending are a sticking point for a Republican Party whose president, George W. Bush, has repeatedly pledged to reduce the federal deficit and whose congressional leaders hope to campaign this fall on their success in shrinking government. Several of the bills also expand NSF's role in science and math education, a position that clashes with the Administration's plans for the Department of Education to lead efforts to improve math and science education and manage all the ACI's education components.
Presidential science adviser Jack Marburger emphasized those points in hard-line letters this spring to the chairs of the committees as they prepared to vote out one of the Senate bills (S. 2802) and two House bills (HR 5356/5358). The Senate measure, Marburger warned Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) on 17 May, "would undermine and delay" ongoing research at the three agencies, "duplicate or complicate existing education and technology programs," and "compete with private investment" in both areas. The House bills, he told Representative Sherry Boehlert (R-NY) on 5 June, "would diminish the impact" of the requested increases for the three ACI agencies.
Boehlert says he was "quite disappointed" by Marburger's letter, noting the president's declaration in his January State of the Union address that the country "must continue to lead the world in human talent and creativity." Boehlert added, "I thought that we had been working with OSTP on these issues," referring to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy that Marburger heads.
Three weeks after the House committee passed both bills, �berstaffer Karl Rove, new domestic policy chief Karl Zinsmeister, and a score of high-tech industry and academic lobbyists met at the White House to discuss the pending legislation. Although nothing was resolved--some participants say Rove and Marburger scolded them for supporting the bills, whereas others say there was confusion over the various components--the White House told the lobbyists that its Office of Legislative Affairs, led by Candida Wolff, would be taking the lead in trying to craft an acceptable bill, pushing OSTP to the sidelines. In the Senate, lobbyists are heartened by the willingness of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) to negotiate with the three chairs whose panels must sign off on the legislation--Stevens, Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM), who leads the Energy and National Resources Committee, and Senator Mike Enzi (R-WY), who heads the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. Another important player, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), acknowledged when he introduced a trio of bills in January that some of his colleagues "may wince at the price tag" of the legislation. But he cautioned that "maintaining America's brainpower advantage will not come on the cheap."
Although none of the staffers involved would speak on the record, several confirmed that talks are taking place "on a regular basis." They say Frist is determined to cobble together a single bill--with lower authorization levels and fewer new programs than in any of the pending versions--that the Senate could adopt during a 4-week window in September. Prospects in the House are less certain, although Boehlert says, "Hope springs eternal that we'll get an opportunity to go to the floor in September."
Optimists, who hope that all sides will view a competitiveness bill as an asset heading into the November elections, dream of an Administration that accepts a competitiveness bill in return for getting its ACI education programs authorized. Pessimists worry that the House leadership will scuttle the effort by portraying the bills as a vehicle for "wasteful spending" and "a bloated bureaucracy." And although nobody's betting that Congress will act this year, nobody has thrown in the towel.
more...
house Cute Funny Babies Sleeping
tertip
03-11 04:02 PM
The answer to that question would be "no". Would the IO be satisfied with the job description of the new job? Would he ask if I filed AC21? I don't want to sound paranoid, but it would be great if there was anyone on these forums that was in a similar situation and was asked that question...
tattoo Funny Baby
sweet23guyin
05-16 12:35 AM
Left messages to all the listed folks.
Hope my voice messages won't end up in Junk category due to my odd hour calls!
Hope my voice messages won't end up in Junk category due to my odd hour calls!
more...
pictures Funny Babies Clothing
mytrix76
01-10 01:50 PM
She can continue to work with the same employer on H1 without any issue. I did traveled back thrice using AP and renewed by H1 with the same employer twice without any issues. Though I have my H1 valid till 2010, it is invalid after my GC approval :(.
Thanks
Thank you guys.
So you mean when you came back on AP some time ago, you continued working for the same employer without switching to EAD and then were able to extend that H1 at later point without any problem?
Thanks
Thank you guys.
So you mean when you came back on AP some time ago, you continued working for the same employer without switching to EAD and then were able to extend that H1 at later point without any problem?
dresses Beautiful Funny Babies
ramus
05-31 04:58 PM
Good going..
It makes you real team player.
Great..
Just post in drive fund thread when you done..
Thanks,
It makes you real team player.
Great..
Just post in drive fund thread when you done..
Thanks,
more...
makeup Sweet Little Babies
DesiTech
06-01 06:25 PM
hi viewers,
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
any help will be appreciate in this matter. MY PD is June/2003 and my i-140 approved few weeks back. When can I file my 485 ? do I need to wait till PD ?
Also can I transfer to other company maintaining my approved i-140 and PD ?
What are risks involved here.
Thanks U all in advance.
girlfriend Funny Babies Fail Pictures
chandra_mb
07-19 12:46 AM
Hi nlssubbu,
Thanks for the reply. We are in the US now, and already submitted all the papers etc.., to the lawyer. But the lawyer only applied for 485 on July 2nd. So we have to apply for EAD after we get the 485 receipt. Spouse might have to travel abroad due to a family issue, so was wondering if we can file the EAD without the dependents being here in the US. Thanks !.
Thanks for the reply. We are in the US now, and already submitted all the papers etc.., to the lawyer. But the lawyer only applied for 485 on July 2nd. So we have to apply for EAD after we get the 485 receipt. Spouse might have to travel abroad due to a family issue, so was wondering if we can file the EAD without the dependents being here in the US. Thanks !.
hairstyles funny babies. reply
H1B-GC
08-03 08:36 PM
Looks like they (TSC) are now processing July 3rd onwards. Any July 2nd filler , filled at TSC still waiting. Also do you know if your name check was cleared.
Yes. I'm July 2nd Filer at TSC and Still waiting. Any Examples that TSC is processing Apps. from July 3rd ... There might be 1000's still waiting who filed on July 2nd.
Yes. I'm July 2nd Filer at TSC and Still waiting. Any Examples that TSC is processing Apps. from July 3rd ... There might be 1000's still waiting who filed on July 2nd.
pd_recapturing
03-07 08:46 PM
I have a quick question on salary issue with 485. My EB2 I-140 states that my yearly salary 87k per annum. It got approved last year. I realized that my w-2 only reflects 64k for last year. I did not work for 2 months because of some personal reason. Is this less salary going to affect my 485 application? I thougt, GC is for future jobs so its okay. Can somebody please clarify this ?
arrarrgee
07-13 09:19 AM
I wouldn't be ....I think hez adding more value to the country then i do...i dont see any reason why he shouldnt get his green before mine:confused:
Damn I am going to be pissed off if he gets a green card before I do.
Damn I am going to be pissed off if he gets a green card before I do.
No comments:
Post a Comment