godspeed
06-28 01:33 PM
hmm, not sure why this is not displayed
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
balram79
03-26 02:02 PM
I resigned my job last year on Dec 15th 2006 by giving my employer a 2 weeks notice (dec 29th was supposed to be the last working day). A week later, i informed my employer that i won't be leaving them at which time, he suggested that i continue working as normal and that he would take care of un-doing the paper work. They had sent out a letter to INS to revoke my 797 even before my last working day with them. The HR contact has failed to follow-up and inform the INS of this development and am told last week that i have been out of status for 10 days now (March 10 was the day INS revoked my H1b). The company has accepted responsibility for this mess and are filing an accelerated H1b (premium) application this week. I had continued employment this whole time and never had any break in my payments. Are there any chances the INS won't put be back on H1 status with my company ?.
Experts .. please advice.
Experts .. please advice.
kirupa
03-24 03:38 AM
Added :)
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
anjans
08-23 01:45 PM
Seems like USCIS is cranking...
more...
leoindiano
08-01 08:47 AM
bump
H1B-GC-NY
04-14 05:16 PM
Hello Guys,
I need urgent help please.
I am on 8th year of my H-1B, expiring on July-2008.
I am on EB3 Nebraska, PD 07/2003.
I-140 pending � RFE on Education (3 years degree) replied on December-2007
EAD approved on September-2007.
I485 aplied on july-2-2007
Just got an email from Cris that my I485 was denied. I don�t know the reason.
My I140 is still pending � almost 4 months after my attorney replied the I140 RFE.
Today I am writing this in order to understand my available options and strategy to this situation.
I have less than 2 months on H-1(b).
What are my options?
Anybody in the same situation?
I need urgent help please.
I am on 8th year of my H-1B, expiring on July-2008.
I am on EB3 Nebraska, PD 07/2003.
I-140 pending � RFE on Education (3 years degree) replied on December-2007
EAD approved on September-2007.
I485 aplied on july-2-2007
Just got an email from Cris that my I485 was denied. I don�t know the reason.
My I140 is still pending � almost 4 months after my attorney replied the I140 RFE.
Today I am writing this in order to understand my available options and strategy to this situation.
I have less than 2 months on H-1(b).
What are my options?
Anybody in the same situation?
more...
newuser
11-09 03:52 PM
Thanks for the link
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
anilsal
06-14 11:39 PM
I have seen references that if there are different I-140 apps approved per family, there is a possibility of going for the 485 stage separately. Also I have seen posts stating that one can go for AOS and the other for CP.
How do you communicate to USCIS that for one you are doing AOS and the other you are doing CP, with reference to the 485 stage? When does this really happen?
Additional info:
http://www.hooyou.com/consularprocess/cp-as.html
http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/485_memo.htm
I think the following report nails it
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_revdeb.html
The answer is that you chose AOS/CP at the time of 140 filing.
How do you communicate to USCIS that for one you are doing AOS and the other you are doing CP, with reference to the 485 stage? When does this really happen?
Additional info:
http://www.hooyou.com/consularprocess/cp-as.html
http://www.hammondlawfirm.com/485_memo.htm
I think the following report nails it
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_revdeb.html
The answer is that you chose AOS/CP at the time of 140 filing.
more...
ramus
05-31 10:01 PM
Can you please close one of your thread.. Seems like we have dulicate thred.
I think they will consider PD of perm labor which was approved and not the one you filed in 2005...
other can give their view..
If you get chance could you please send web-fax and contribute small amount if you can...
Thanks a lot
I think they will consider PD of perm labor which was approved and not the one you filed in 2005...
other can give their view..
If you get chance could you please send web-fax and contribute small amount if you can...
Thanks a lot
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
Macaca
09-06 05:22 PM
Leaders Look to Protect Freshmen (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_22/news/19853-1.html) By Jennifer Yachnin | ROLL CALL STAFF, September 6, 2007 Thursday
In an attempt to dissuade the Republican minority from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to the hot-button issues such as immigration, Democratic leaders are discussing how to give their lawmakers a vote that would inoculate them against such pressure in the future.
The discussion comes as a new House select committee prepares to investigate an Aug. 2 vote that Republican leaders allege the Democratic majority mishandled, resulting in the defeat of a GOP-authored procedural measure that would have amended the fiscal 2008 Agriculture spending bill by prohibiting illegal immigrants from accessing certain federally funded programs.
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said he has discussed the issue with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), and leadership staff from both offices are working on a proposal.
"I'm particularly concerned that these motions to recommit are tinged with a bit of ... let's just say this whole issue of immigration, it's too serious an issue for us to ... have it used as a wedge issue," Clyburn said, and later added: "We ought not be using this very serious issue in this way."
Neither Clyburn nor Hoyer would provide details for any potential proposal, including whether the measure would be new law or a nonbinding resolution.
"We're talking about a lot of options and I don't want to prejudge what options we're going to choose," Hoyer said.
The Maryland lawmaker added that because the Republican amendment at the heart of the August incident would have restated existing law - a point the GOP refutes - Democrats could opt to ask the executive branch to enforce statutes already on the books.
"We may just reiterate the law," Hoyer said. Democrats also have pre-emptively discussed expanding the new effort to other hot-button legislative areas targeted by the GOP.
One Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the plan has been presented to some Members as a blanket measure that would prohibit the use of taxpayer-funded programs, such as food stamps, by immigrants in the country illegally.
"The idea is to reject them out of hand because they'll be clearly redundant," the Democrat said. "They'll come up with some other ridiculous avenue to use, but hopefully this takes that off the table."
But House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) spokesman Brian Kennedy immediately dismissed the Democrats' new plan, saying, "It's certainly a very clear indication of just how effective Republicans have been in using the motion to recommit to affect legislation."
The procedural motion is one of the few options available to the minority party that allows it to offer legislative alternatives when a bill reaches the House floor, and it is used immediately before a final vote on legislation takes place.
During the first half of the 110th Congress, the Republican minority has offered numerous motions - winning on 11 to date - that present difficult political decisions for Democrats, particularly the large number of freshman lawmakers in competitive districts.
The National Republican Congressional Committee also targeted five Democratic freshmen in their districts Wednesday over the controversial August vote, more than six weeks after the incident. In press releases, the NRCC accused Democratic Reps. Jerry McNerney (Calif.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Zack Space (Ohio), Harry Mitchell (Ariz.) and Nick Lampson (Texas) of helping to steal "a vote in the dead of night," citing the lawmakers' decision to change their votes and oppose the Republican procedural measure after initially voting in favor of it.
During the vote, three Florida GOP lawmakers, Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Mario Diaz-Balart, similarly switched their ballots to support the measure.
House Democrats have thus far opted against issuing a blanket edict to rank-and-file Members to oppose the Republican motions, instead instructing lawmakers in April to object only to "killer" amendments that would shelve legislation.
Despite the failure of nearly 20 Democrats to initially abide by those guidelines in early August - prompting some of the last-minute vote changes that contributed to the apparent disagreement on the House floor - Clyburn indicated that Democrats have no immediate plans to otherwise change their strategy on such motions.
"I don't think anybody on our side confuses the issue - we know these are procedural issues," he added.
But at his weekly press conference, Hoyer said he would speak with those Democrats who voted in favor of the Republican motion.
"It presented a big problem. We are working on it. I am going to continue to work on it," Hoyer said, and later added: "In terms of the Members, the consequences are [that] I'm going to talk to them."
In the meantime, the new House select committee established to investigate the disputed August vote is expected to soon hold its first meeting, following the appointment of its three Republican members Wednesday.
Republican Reps. Mike Pence (Ind.), Steven LaTourette (Ohio) and Kenny Hulshof (Mo.) will work along with Democratic Reps. Bill Delahunt (Mass.), Artur Davis (Ala.) and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.). No meeting date was set Wednesday, but the committee is required to file an interim report Sept. 30, with a final report due in mid-September 2008.
"I'm confident we're going to be able to put our heads together and follow the facts, be judicious and take an impartial and thorough look at what happened that night," said Pence, the panel's ranking member.
Davis, noting that members of the committee have worked across the aisle, said: "The House voted for the committee and the committee will diligently do its work."
In an attempt to dissuade the Republican minority from offering contentious procedural amendments tied to the hot-button issues such as immigration, Democratic leaders are discussing how to give their lawmakers a vote that would inoculate them against such pressure in the future.
The discussion comes as a new House select committee prepares to investigate an Aug. 2 vote that Republican leaders allege the Democratic majority mishandled, resulting in the defeat of a GOP-authored procedural measure that would have amended the fiscal 2008 Agriculture spending bill by prohibiting illegal immigrants from accessing certain federally funded programs.
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said he has discussed the issue with House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), and leadership staff from both offices are working on a proposal.
"I'm particularly concerned that these motions to recommit are tinged with a bit of ... let's just say this whole issue of immigration, it's too serious an issue for us to ... have it used as a wedge issue," Clyburn said, and later added: "We ought not be using this very serious issue in this way."
Neither Clyburn nor Hoyer would provide details for any potential proposal, including whether the measure would be new law or a nonbinding resolution.
"We're talking about a lot of options and I don't want to prejudge what options we're going to choose," Hoyer said.
The Maryland lawmaker added that because the Republican amendment at the heart of the August incident would have restated existing law - a point the GOP refutes - Democrats could opt to ask the executive branch to enforce statutes already on the books.
"We may just reiterate the law," Hoyer said. Democrats also have pre-emptively discussed expanding the new effort to other hot-button legislative areas targeted by the GOP.
One Democratic lawmaker, who asked not to be identified, said the plan has been presented to some Members as a blanket measure that would prohibit the use of taxpayer-funded programs, such as food stamps, by immigrants in the country illegally.
"The idea is to reject them out of hand because they'll be clearly redundant," the Democrat said. "They'll come up with some other ridiculous avenue to use, but hopefully this takes that off the table."
But House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) spokesman Brian Kennedy immediately dismissed the Democrats' new plan, saying, "It's certainly a very clear indication of just how effective Republicans have been in using the motion to recommit to affect legislation."
The procedural motion is one of the few options available to the minority party that allows it to offer legislative alternatives when a bill reaches the House floor, and it is used immediately before a final vote on legislation takes place.
During the first half of the 110th Congress, the Republican minority has offered numerous motions - winning on 11 to date - that present difficult political decisions for Democrats, particularly the large number of freshman lawmakers in competitive districts.
The National Republican Congressional Committee also targeted five Democratic freshmen in their districts Wednesday over the controversial August vote, more than six weeks after the incident. In press releases, the NRCC accused Democratic Reps. Jerry McNerney (Calif.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Zack Space (Ohio), Harry Mitchell (Ariz.) and Nick Lampson (Texas) of helping to steal "a vote in the dead of night," citing the lawmakers' decision to change their votes and oppose the Republican procedural measure after initially voting in favor of it.
During the vote, three Florida GOP lawmakers, Reps. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Lincoln Diaz-Balart and Mario Diaz-Balart, similarly switched their ballots to support the measure.
House Democrats have thus far opted against issuing a blanket edict to rank-and-file Members to oppose the Republican motions, instead instructing lawmakers in April to object only to "killer" amendments that would shelve legislation.
Despite the failure of nearly 20 Democrats to initially abide by those guidelines in early August - prompting some of the last-minute vote changes that contributed to the apparent disagreement on the House floor - Clyburn indicated that Democrats have no immediate plans to otherwise change their strategy on such motions.
"I don't think anybody on our side confuses the issue - we know these are procedural issues," he added.
But at his weekly press conference, Hoyer said he would speak with those Democrats who voted in favor of the Republican motion.
"It presented a big problem. We are working on it. I am going to continue to work on it," Hoyer said, and later added: "In terms of the Members, the consequences are [that] I'm going to talk to them."
In the meantime, the new House select committee established to investigate the disputed August vote is expected to soon hold its first meeting, following the appointment of its three Republican members Wednesday.
Republican Reps. Mike Pence (Ind.), Steven LaTourette (Ohio) and Kenny Hulshof (Mo.) will work along with Democratic Reps. Bill Delahunt (Mass.), Artur Davis (Ala.) and Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (S.D.). No meeting date was set Wednesday, but the committee is required to file an interim report Sept. 30, with a final report due in mid-September 2008.
"I'm confident we're going to be able to put our heads together and follow the facts, be judicious and take an impartial and thorough look at what happened that night," said Pence, the panel's ranking member.
Davis, noting that members of the committee have worked across the aisle, said: "The House voted for the committee and the committee will diligently do its work."
more...
extra_mint
04-11 05:57 PM
Came across this nice video
Listen if you have 10-15 minutes of spare time....Vivek Wadhwa gives interesting analysis on why india is taking over US and what can Guru (US) learn from disciple (india)
Link
-----
http://thetrajectory.com/blogs/?p=406
Above link is for the blog
Video to watch is a little below...scroll down a little to reach the video.
Listen if you have 10-15 minutes of spare time....Vivek Wadhwa gives interesting analysis on why india is taking over US and what can Guru (US) learn from disciple (india)
Link
-----
http://thetrajectory.com/blogs/?p=406
Above link is for the blog
Video to watch is a little below...scroll down a little to reach the video.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
ameryki
10-15 11:22 PM
Wife need to go to India for emergency. Advance Parole expired. Can she already leave while I apply AP now ? Or does she have to be in country until we get it ? Can i apply now and send it to her once i get it here ?
How much time normally it takes if we apply now ?
she has to be in country until she gets it
How much time normally it takes if we apply now ?
she has to be in country until she gets it
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
webm
04-17 04:29 PM
Nope,nothing as such going on for EAD new/renewals...
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
kalinga_sena
08-20 07:34 PM
If your parents never overstayed beyond their I-94 date then I do not think there is any issue at all. POE off. can ask why you are coming again in 3 months then they can tell that they want to be here in new year time etc.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
korient
09-11 02:15 PM
I'm a July 2nd eb3 filer. Never thougt I could file 485 on July just like many people. I started an eb2 Perm early this year with a new position same company. A month later after filed eb3 based 485, my Eb2 Perm got approved, then filed eb2 140.
The problem is my eb2 LC and pending 140 says that I'm holding a position. What can I do? should I withdraw eb2 140? Can I still take advantage of the pending eb2 140, or better leave it along?
Thank you very much for your help.
Eb3 RIR filed June 2004, approved 01/07.
Eb3 140 Filed Jan 2007, approved 7/30/07
Eb3 based 485 filed 7/2/07, Reciepted 8/27/07, EAD approved 9/7/07
Eb2 Perm filed 04/2007, approved 7/30/07
Eb2 140 filed 8/25/07 Status pending.
Thank you very much.
The problem is my eb2 LC and pending 140 says that I'm holding a position. What can I do? should I withdraw eb2 140? Can I still take advantage of the pending eb2 140, or better leave it along?
Thank you very much for your help.
Eb3 RIR filed June 2004, approved 01/07.
Eb3 140 Filed Jan 2007, approved 7/30/07
Eb3 based 485 filed 7/2/07, Reciepted 8/27/07, EAD approved 9/7/07
Eb2 Perm filed 04/2007, approved 7/30/07
Eb2 140 filed 8/25/07 Status pending.
Thank you very much.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
immigration.matters10
07-18 07:50 AM
I work for company A. I am on a project actively with an end client from last one year. My company A stopped paying me from past 5 months in spite of them getting paid from the vendor. I have requested my company to release all my payments pending from last 5 months repeatedly. But they don't seem to bother. I am planning to change my employer now.
My question is Am i out of status since I am not getting paid from last 5 months? I have luckily all the copies of pay stubs till a month ago. Only thing is that I haven;t received them yet. Please let me know
My question is Am i out of status since I am not getting paid from last 5 months? I have luckily all the copies of pay stubs till a month ago. Only thing is that I haven;t received them yet. Please let me know
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
mzdial
February 12th, 2004, 11:41 PM
i just can't buy into the digital lens system.. Lenses are such an investment and I'd hate to go to a system like that, then a few years later have them offer their new "higher end" camera with a full frame.
I'll pass..
I'll pass..