needhelp!
02-04 07:10 PM
We have a law firm that helps us with IV: thawerlaw.com
The immigration attorney is Kimberly Kinser. She did a live Q&A session for our members. I don't have case experience from them, but I know they are good people. :)
The immigration attorney is Kimberly Kinser. She did a live Q&A session for our members. I don't have case experience from them, but I know they are good people. :)
wallpaper For your iPhone Wallpaper
ragz4u
05-30 08:28 AM
Thanks a ton to Prabir for helping us out with this article. Thanks also to Dave Williams for writing this excellent article.
Dave heard about us through our Washington Post article and had contacted us via email. Prabir, who is from that area, willingly agreed to speak to him about issues faced by Legal High-Skilled immigrants
http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=32&url_subchannel_id=&url_article_id=15537&change_well_id=2
Dave heard about us through our Washington Post article and had contacted us via email. Prabir, who is from that area, willingly agreed to speak to him about issues faced by Legal High-Skilled immigrants
http://www.gwinnettdailypost.com/index.php?s=&url_channel_id=32&url_subchannel_id=&url_article_id=15537&change_well_id=2
harsh
12-28 01:08 PM
This is good useful information. Thank you for sharing it with us.
2011 car wallpaper desktop. twoodcc
jay75
09-21 06:48 PM
NSC Received my AOS apps. on Aug 10th
I140 Approved 11/2006 from NSC
EB3 Ind with PD 10/2004
I140 Approved 11/2006 from NSC
EB3 Ind with PD 10/2004
more...
_resize.jpg "beautiful wallpapers desktop.")
kirupa
07-11 04:36 PM
Added!
pappu
12-07 09:06 PM
i did send the fax. Was reading news and thought i should make a post.
if you have sent the fax, pls start making phone calls. there are several lawmakers to call
if you have sent the fax, pls start making phone calls. there are several lawmakers to call
more...
Jason31586
07-08 12:01 PM
is it possible to do animations with people and stick figures like done in flash 5,
is there away to get lines to draw in swift 3d instead of stuff like spheres and cubes, please answer
is there away to get lines to draw in swift 3d instead of stuff like spheres and cubes, please answer
2010 APRIL 21: Target Field,
kirupa
02-14 04:48 AM
Program is the name of your main application's class itself. What I am doing is creating an instance of my application and using the two methods that live inside that class.
:)
:)
more...
Silvermanto
05-26 06:28 AM
Hi I'm a US citizen and have around 15k or less credit card debt. All government loans were paid off. Something happened three and a half years ago in my home town and I had to leave Washington state and took care of it. So my question is: it's has been 3 and a half year and I'm heading back to washington state for short visit.
1. I'm sure the debt did gall into collection agency. Will it go to court?
2. Since I had been gone since 2007 and will there be a warrant on me since I didn't appear to court (if there was one)
3. I will be entering Vancouver bc airport then to Seattle by driving. I'm afraid I will get caught for warrant at the border.
Hopefully someone can answer my questions and thanks for the help in advance.
1. I'm sure the debt did gall into collection agency. Will it go to court?
2. Since I had been gone since 2007 and will there be a warrant on me since I didn't appear to court (if there was one)
3. I will be entering Vancouver bc airport then to Seattle by driving. I'm afraid I will get caught for warrant at the border.
Hopefully someone can answer my questions and thanks for the help in advance.
hair nature wallpapers for desktop
ns33
10-23 05:37 PM
Hi,
I tried to search for this and could not find anything.
When dealing with 485 portability using EAD (with approved I140),
what happens if your underlying LC is a location/region/state bound and you end up moving to out of that specified region.
Job duties/job code can stay similar with probably salary increase.
Does the location violation get equated to unequal/dissimilar job duties resulting in 485 denial?
Chances are that should I have to invoke AC21 portability(due to layoff or something alike), I'll be facing this so I just want to be prepared for possibilities.
Thanks for insights.
NS
PS: In other words: What will be considered violation or conditions for Similar job duties if job title and responsibilities stay same but other factors - i.e employer, location, salary cap changes.
I tried to search for this and could not find anything.
When dealing with 485 portability using EAD (with approved I140),
what happens if your underlying LC is a location/region/state bound and you end up moving to out of that specified region.
Job duties/job code can stay similar with probably salary increase.
Does the location violation get equated to unequal/dissimilar job duties resulting in 485 denial?
Chances are that should I have to invoke AC21 portability(due to layoff or something alike), I'll be facing this so I just want to be prepared for possibilities.
Thanks for insights.
NS
PS: In other words: What will be considered violation or conditions for Similar job duties if job title and responsibilities stay same but other factors - i.e employer, location, salary cap changes.
more...
Macaca
08-05 07:42 AM
A Polarized, and Polarizing, Congress (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301949.html) By David S. Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com), August 5, 2007
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
hot beautiful wallpapers desktop.
steven25mus
07-17 11:49 PM
I have a question regarding H1 visa 6 year period.
I was interning on OPT (F1 visa) from Jun 2005-Jan 2006(OPT ended Jan 2006) with company A.During this time, I filed for H1 through Company B who got the H1 petition approved from Oct 2005-AUg 2008. However, I never worked with them and they never processed my payroll. In March 2006, I joined company C who did an H1 transfer from company B using paystubs of Company A.This time, the petition was approved from March 2006 - Feb 2009.
My question is:
Is my 6 year period on H1 counted from Oct 2005 or March 2006 ?
Thank you.
I was interning on OPT (F1 visa) from Jun 2005-Jan 2006(OPT ended Jan 2006) with company A.During this time, I filed for H1 through Company B who got the H1 petition approved from Oct 2005-AUg 2008. However, I never worked with them and they never processed my payroll. In March 2006, I joined company C who did an H1 transfer from company B using paystubs of Company A.This time, the petition was approved from March 2006 - Feb 2009.
My question is:
Is my 6 year period on H1 counted from Oct 2005 or March 2006 ?
Thank you.
more...
house Wallpaper Desktop Free 3d
skn
11-09 05:00 PM
My I 140 was filed recently online. I noticed that we missed out Part 4.2 where it ask for Permanent address abroad. Does anyone know if this will be an issue?
tattoo makeup Download This Wallpaper
yuvarajc
09-13 08:52 PM
Iam sure lot of people have asked this question.
Iam in my 6th yr of H1b.
I have my I140 approved and I received my 3 yrs extension.
Question is can i shift jobs now? What are my options?
Once I move to the new job and file for GC, can I claim the old PD date ?
Thanks
Iam in my 6th yr of H1b.
I have my I140 approved and I received my 3 yrs extension.
Question is can i shift jobs now? What are my options?
Once I move to the new job and file for GC, can I claim the old PD date ?
Thanks
more...
pictures new desktop wallpapers free
coopheal
04-06 09:32 AM
bump
dresses cool desktop backgrounds free.
Blog Feeds
08-25 07:10 PM
USCIS updated its count of FY2011 cap-subject H-1B petitions and advanced degree cap-exempt petitions receipted. As of 8/20/10, approximately 33,900 H-1B cap-subject petitions were receipted. USCIS has receipted 12,600 H-1B petitions for aliens with advanced degrees. This is a major jump from the last update of August 13, 2010 where only 29,700 filings were reported.
Is this trend likely to continue? We think so, expect visas to run out by the early weeks of December.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/08/h1b_visa_cap_august_25_2010_up.html)
Is this trend likely to continue? We think so, expect visas to run out by the early weeks of December.
More... (http://www.visalawyerblog.com/2010/08/h1b_visa_cap_august_25_2010_up.html)
more...
makeup dresses Target Field (From the Outside target field twins.
PraveenVadlam
02-23 08:52 AM
I have the following questions with respect to number of days I can stay out of the country for my situation.
I have been on green card since June 2010.
I have visited India from October 17' 2010 to Feb 4' 2011 (Total 111 Days).
Now I need to go back to India again for around 3 months (Approx 10th May - 10th Aug) which is about 93 Days.
My questions are:
1. As a GC holder can I make the above visits without resetting my 'Continuity of 5 Yeard of Residence' clock ? As in each calender year I will not be out of country for greater than 180 days. But, when you count from October 16 2010 - October 15 2011, I will be more than 180 days out of the country.
2. If answer to the above question is NO, do I need to file/apply for any exception to be out of country?
Thanks for your advise.
Praveen
I have been on green card since June 2010.
I have visited India from October 17' 2010 to Feb 4' 2011 (Total 111 Days).
Now I need to go back to India again for around 3 months (Approx 10th May - 10th Aug) which is about 93 Days.
My questions are:
1. As a GC holder can I make the above visits without resetting my 'Continuity of 5 Yeard of Residence' clock ? As in each calender year I will not be out of country for greater than 180 days. But, when you count from October 16 2010 - October 15 2011, I will be more than 180 days out of the country.
2. If answer to the above question is NO, do I need to file/apply for any exception to be out of country?
Thanks for your advise.
Praveen
girlfriend funny wallpaper desktop.
lobstars
05-04 02:57 PM
is this what you meant? it might be helpful anyway:)
board.flashkit.com/board/...did=274366 (http://board.flashkit.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=274366)
board.flashkit.com/board/...did=274366 (http://board.flashkit.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=274366)
hairstyles free desktop wallpaper love.
fedupofgc
02-24 11:09 AM
Guys,
I feel that I am in serious trouble.
I am an employee of a company which was recently raided by uscis. My 6th h1 expires April 2009 and we applied for 7th year h1 extension based on
the approved labor (labor filed in March 2008).
I am not sure at this stage, that my h1 will get approved since the company is under the scanner.(I checked the LCA and It shows the work location where I am working and not from IOWA which is good)
So..what are my options now
1) Can any other employer file for extension based on this company's approved labor?.
2) If I join the other company, what documents do I need to show to USCIS that the labor is approved from my old company(the company under scanner)?
Please let me know..what you guys think...Any help will be greatly appreciated
I feel that I am in serious trouble.
I am an employee of a company which was recently raided by uscis. My 6th h1 expires April 2009 and we applied for 7th year h1 extension based on
the approved labor (labor filed in March 2008).
I am not sure at this stage, that my h1 will get approved since the company is under the scanner.(I checked the LCA and It shows the work location where I am working and not from IOWA which is good)
So..what are my options now
1) Can any other employer file for extension based on this company's approved labor?.
2) If I join the other company, what documents do I need to show to USCIS that the labor is approved from my old company(the company under scanner)?
Please let me know..what you guys think...Any help will be greatly appreciated
rizwan39
09-22 05:49 PM
My company is offering my retention contract for 3 years. As I told them that my GC can take long and I haven't filed for I-485 to use AC-21, I will be in trouble if a loose my job. Based on that they are making a written promose that I will have a same job for the next 3 years with all benifits and the only reason I can loose my job is through a decipline action (bad performance, fight, harrasment, etc).
I want to ask the attorney's and gurus if there is such a contract exist and does it have any value ?
I want to ask the attorney's and gurus if there is such a contract exist and does it have any value ?
kkartikeya
06-21 03:43 PM
Hi,
I have an EB2 I-140 approved with priority date of July 2006, but also recently got EB3 I-140 approved with priority date of May 2003.
Even though the dates are current, but it may retrograte in coming months, so Can I file I-485 using my approved EB2 with the priority date of EB3.
Please advice.
Thanks
KK
I have an EB2 I-140 approved with priority date of July 2006, but also recently got EB3 I-140 approved with priority date of May 2003.
Even though the dates are current, but it may retrograte in coming months, so Can I file I-485 using my approved EB2 with the priority date of EB3.
Please advice.
Thanks
KK
No comments:
Post a Comment