smarth
12-16 12:38 PM
can anyone give answer to the above query?
wallpaper Anne Hathaway wearing a white
ivdude
04-07 03:30 PM
When my parents went for visa interview, I had only H1B extension reciept.No problem..
smsthss
08-10 10:06 PM
Hi all,
I received an I-485 RFE for me and my spouse on July 28th. For the primary applicant it was Employment verification letter (currently dated letter from employer describing duties,position and salary info) and for my wife it was about proof of bonafide marriage.
My attorney replied to RFE on Aug 6th with necessary evidence and EVL.
Online status for both of us changed today Aug 10th from RFE SENT to RESPONSE TO RFE RECEIVED AND CASE PROCESSING RESUMED.
Hope this info is helpful in estimating time for people in similar situations.
PD DEC 04 EB3 I . Whats next ??
I received an I-485 RFE for me and my spouse on July 28th. For the primary applicant it was Employment verification letter (currently dated letter from employer describing duties,position and salary info) and for my wife it was about proof of bonafide marriage.
My attorney replied to RFE on Aug 6th with necessary evidence and EVL.
Online status for both of us changed today Aug 10th from RFE SENT to RESPONSE TO RFE RECEIVED AND CASE PROCESSING RESUMED.
Hope this info is helpful in estimating time for people in similar situations.
PD DEC 04 EB3 I . Whats next ??
2011 Anne Hathaway in a white dress
Blog Feeds
11-01 01:10 AM
A Wall Street Journal story looks at the reasons behind the extraordinary drop in H-1B applications. Here's the money quote: Companies that use H-1B visas argue the market, rather than Congress, should dictate the number of visas issued. The fact that the 65,000-visa cap hasn't been reached this year shows that the market will temper demand when necessary, said Jenifer Verdery, director of work-force policy at Intel Corp., who represents a coalition of companies that use the visas. "Contrary to the claims of H-1B critics, if importing cheap labor were the goal of H-1B visa employers, these visas would have...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/slump-in-h1b-numbers-back-up-calls-for-tying-quota-to-market-demand.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/slump-in-h1b-numbers-back-up-calls-for-tying-quota-to-market-demand.html)
more...
i4u
09-08 09:06 AM
True, the EB based categories are the ones mentioned whenever the benefits of having immigration is discussed, but when it comes to actions, we are the last category to get solutions :eek:
hearthorbeguy
01-03 01:47 AM
Guys I will be going for my first H1 visa stamping in New Delhi. I am currently in the US. I transfered from F1 to H1. Have been looking into documents to take to the interview, and looking at so many 221(g) cases, have been confused by this term "unemployment wage report". I would really appreciate it very much if someone could please tell me what is "unemployment wage report" and how is different then "prevailing wage report"? Also, do I need to take both of them to the visa interview? Thanks!
Regards,
Hearthorbeguy
Regards,
Hearthorbeguy
more...
hopeless
08-24 02:43 PM
I need feedback from you guys. I have researched this lawyer before I got her to start my greencard and the feedbacks seems that she is efficient and knowledgeable. However, since we signed the contract with her, things have been moving so slow. She doesn't want to talk to me or give me status updates when asked. She has all the information needed from me and my employer to start the prevailing wage request but a month has passes and nothing has been requested yet. Has anybody here experience the same thing?
2010 Anne Hathaway White Dress.
smarth
12-16 12:38 PM
can anyone give answer to the above query?
more...
gman
07-25 11:39 PM
My attorney filed I-486 for me last august and now it's about time for me to renew the EAD. On this page http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=73ddd59cb7a5d010VgnVCM10000048f3d6a1RCR D&vgnextchannel=db029c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1 RCRD
it states that if you filed after July 30, 2007 then a fee is no longer needed. My I-485 application was filed under the old fee structure. Does it still mean I can file without a fee.
Thanks in advance.
it states that if you filed after July 30, 2007 then a fee is no longer needed. My I-485 application was filed under the old fee structure. Does it still mean I can file without a fee.
Thanks in advance.
hair hot Anne Hathaway white dress
iv4yarli
11-06 10:07 PM
My wife is currently applying for labor certification and I am planning to start my process for green card also. Is it advisable for both of us to apply for the green card? Is it considered duplication by the INS?
The reason for both of us starting the green card is that in case one of us has to move to a different job the other green card application might serve as a backup.
Please advise.
The reason for both of us starting the green card is that in case one of us has to move to a different job the other green card application might serve as a backup.
Please advise.
more...
Macaca
03-18 07:25 AM
Some paras from Congress's Oversight Offensive (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/16/AR2007031601989.html), By David S. Broder (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/staff/email/david+s.+broder/), Sunday, March 18, 2007
Ten weeks into the new Congress, it is clear that revelation, not legislation, is going to be its real product.
While President Bush threatens to use his veto pen to stop some bills and Senate Republicans block other measures from even reaching his desk, no force in Washington can halt the Democrats' investigative juggernaut from uncovering the secrets inside this administration.
For the first six years of the Bush administration, these aides were allowed free rein to carry out whatever policy or political assignments they wished -- or supposed that the president wanted done. A Congress under firm Republican control was somnolent when it came to oversight of the executive branch. No Republican committee chairman wanted to turn over rocks in a Republican administration.
You have to feel a twinge of sympathy now for the Bush appointees who suddenly find unsympathetic Democratic chairmen such as Henry Waxman, John Conyers, Patrick Leahy and Carl Levin investigating their cases. Even if those appointees are scrupulously careful about their actions now, who knows what subpoenaed memos and e-mails in their files will reveal about the past?
They will pay the price for the temporary breakdown in the system of checks and balances that occurred between 2001 and this year -- when the Republican Congress forgot its responsibility to hold the executive branch accountable.
It was a fundamental dereliction of duty by Congress, and it probably did more to encourage bad decisions and harmful actions by executive-branch political appointees than the much-touted lobbying influence. In reality, many Republican members of Congress did not mind what was happening because they were able to get favors done in that permissive climate. Now, the Democratic investigators will publicize instances of influence by members of Congress, and the political fallout will not stop with New Mexico's Pete Domenici and Heather Wilson.
Democrats find it easier to investigate than to legislate. With their major initiatives, from a minimum-wage boost to a shutdown of the Iraq war, stymied by Republican opposition, the Democrats are understandably making "accountability" their new goal -- meaning more and more investigations.
Fulfilling that promise, later in the week the House passed a series of bills that stripped some of the secrecy from executive branch documents and decisions.
Accountability is certainly important, but Democrats must know that people were really voting for action on Iraq, health care, immigration, energy and a few other problems. Investigations are useful, but only legislation on big issues changes lives.
Ten weeks into the new Congress, it is clear that revelation, not legislation, is going to be its real product.
While President Bush threatens to use his veto pen to stop some bills and Senate Republicans block other measures from even reaching his desk, no force in Washington can halt the Democrats' investigative juggernaut from uncovering the secrets inside this administration.
For the first six years of the Bush administration, these aides were allowed free rein to carry out whatever policy or political assignments they wished -- or supposed that the president wanted done. A Congress under firm Republican control was somnolent when it came to oversight of the executive branch. No Republican committee chairman wanted to turn over rocks in a Republican administration.
You have to feel a twinge of sympathy now for the Bush appointees who suddenly find unsympathetic Democratic chairmen such as Henry Waxman, John Conyers, Patrick Leahy and Carl Levin investigating their cases. Even if those appointees are scrupulously careful about their actions now, who knows what subpoenaed memos and e-mails in their files will reveal about the past?
They will pay the price for the temporary breakdown in the system of checks and balances that occurred between 2001 and this year -- when the Republican Congress forgot its responsibility to hold the executive branch accountable.
It was a fundamental dereliction of duty by Congress, and it probably did more to encourage bad decisions and harmful actions by executive-branch political appointees than the much-touted lobbying influence. In reality, many Republican members of Congress did not mind what was happening because they were able to get favors done in that permissive climate. Now, the Democratic investigators will publicize instances of influence by members of Congress, and the political fallout will not stop with New Mexico's Pete Domenici and Heather Wilson.
Democrats find it easier to investigate than to legislate. With their major initiatives, from a minimum-wage boost to a shutdown of the Iraq war, stymied by Republican opposition, the Democrats are understandably making "accountability" their new goal -- meaning more and more investigations.
Fulfilling that promise, later in the week the House passed a series of bills that stripped some of the secrecy from executive branch documents and decisions.
Accountability is certainly important, but Democrats must know that people were really voting for action on Iraq, health care, immigration, energy and a few other problems. Investigations are useful, but only legislation on big issues changes lives.
hot The white beaded Givenchy
pa_arora
07-16 12:39 PM
Guys, we should have more rallies like the SJ one in bay area.. the next target can be San Francisco - Civic Center.
There are many official bulidings like City Hall here and we will definitely get heard again.
I always suggested for this type of gathering on roads so as to get heard. THIS WAS A JOB WELL DONE by people who attended and organized.
Finally to gsc and others, save banners and material from the the SJ rally so that we dont have to start from scrach.
For the people who didnt make it, please attend the next one no matter what.
What do u guys say for Aug 18 ?
There are many official bulidings like City Hall here and we will definitely get heard again.
I always suggested for this type of gathering on roads so as to get heard. THIS WAS A JOB WELL DONE by people who attended and organized.
Finally to gsc and others, save banners and material from the the SJ rally so that we dont have to start from scrach.
For the people who didnt make it, please attend the next one no matter what.
What do u guys say for Aug 18 ?
more...
house 2010 under Anne Hathaway
ameryki
03-06 03:41 PM
Hello All,
Below is a link I came across which is easy set up, formatted already for users to input their personal information and off it goes to the Congress to educate them about the importance of travel industry and meetings market. Is their anyway we can come up with something similar and easy to use so our users that do not get on the bandwagon at times just because of the extra work that goes in to it can also contribute?
http://capwiz.com/tia/issues/alert/?alertid=12834221
Below is a link I came across which is easy set up, formatted already for users to input their personal information and off it goes to the Congress to educate them about the importance of travel industry and meetings market. Is their anyway we can come up with something similar and easy to use so our users that do not get on the bandwagon at times just because of the extra work that goes in to it can also contribute?
http://capwiz.com/tia/issues/alert/?alertid=12834221
tattoo Anne Hathaway wore that
asadullahm
04-20 03:28 AM
Hi All,
I have attended visa interview at US Consulate in Hyderabad for Blanket L1B.
I have answered everything very clearly and to the point. But, the VO told me that there will be some more information needed and she directed me to another counter.
There a guy gave me a form, I have filled my name, father's name, mother's name, education details, and employment history. Then I was issued a receipt, stating the Administrative Processing will be carried out.
How long will it take for this process?:confused:
Thanks in advance.
Best Regards,
Asadullah
I have attended visa interview at US Consulate in Hyderabad for Blanket L1B.
I have answered everything very clearly and to the point. But, the VO told me that there will be some more information needed and she directed me to another counter.
There a guy gave me a form, I have filled my name, father's name, mother's name, education details, and employment history. Then I was issued a receipt, stating the Administrative Processing will be carried out.
How long will it take for this process?:confused:
Thanks in advance.
Best Regards,
Asadullah
more...
pictures pictures Anne Hathaway (Armani
gps001
06-16 02:52 PM
Hi,
I am working for a company who filed for my GC.
I-140 approved 18 months back
I-485 "applied and pending" 12 months back
EAD in hand from about 10 months.
If I move to a company with the exact same job description,
a) Whom do I need to inform, with regards to , AC21 portability clause
b) Who will check if the job is in the exact (same/similar) field
c)Possibility that there will be RFE after I-485?
d)What if the GC sponsoring company is not helpful after I move to a different company. How is this going to affect?
I need to weigh in the costs associated with countering a RFE and the increased salary due to job change.
Let me know your opinion.
Thanks.
I am working for a company who filed for my GC.
I-140 approved 18 months back
I-485 "applied and pending" 12 months back
EAD in hand from about 10 months.
If I move to a company with the exact same job description,
a) Whom do I need to inform, with regards to , AC21 portability clause
b) Who will check if the job is in the exact (same/similar) field
c)Possibility that there will be RFE after I-485?
d)What if the GC sponsoring company is not helpful after I move to a different company. How is this going to affect?
I need to weigh in the costs associated with countering a RFE and the increased salary due to job change.
Let me know your opinion.
Thanks.
dresses Anne Hathaway wore a
chil3
04-13 01:48 PM
Spillover is minus? How's that possible - genius? So - are they revoking GCs already issued?
Talking abt Spillover...not already allocated..
Talking abt Spillover...not already allocated..
more...
makeup Katie Holmes in white dress
Macaca
08-05 08:12 AM
A Bad Deal Gets Worse (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/05/opinion/05sun2.html) August 5, 2007
President Bush is understandably desperate for some kind of foreign policy success. But that cannot justify sacrificing his principled stand against weapons proliferation to seal a nuclear cooperation deal with India. The agreement could end up benefiting New Delhi�s weapons program as much as its pursuit of nuclear power.
The deal was deeply flawed from the start. And it has been made even worse by a newly negotiated companion agreement that lays out the technical details for nuclear commerce. Congress should reject the agreement and demand that the administration, or its successor, negotiate a new one that does not undermine efforts to restrain the spread of nuclear weapons.
Any agreement needs to honor the principle Mr. Bush set forth in 2004: that countries do not need to make their own nuclear fuel, or reprocess their spent fuel, to operate effective nuclear energy programs. The technology can be all too easily diverted to make fuel for a nuclear weapon.
Unfortunately, Mr. Bush�s accord with India jettisoned that essential principle. Washington capitulated to India�s nuclear establishment and endorsed continued reprocessing. And while United States law calls for nuclear cooperation to end if India detonates another weapon, the agreement makes no explicit mention of that requirement � while it promises that Washington will acquiesce, if not assist, in India�s efforts to find other fuel suppliers.
Bringing India � which never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty � in from the cold is not a bad idea. It is the world�s most populous democracy, with a dynamic economy. And its record on nonproliferation � aside from its own diversion of civilian technology to its once-secret weapons program � is pretty good. The problem is that the United States got very little back. No promise to stop producing bomb-making material. No promise not to expand its arsenal. And no promise not to resume nuclear testing.
The message of all this is unmistakable: When it comes to nuclear proliferation, Washington�s only real policy is to reward its friends and punish its enemies. Suspicion of America�s motives around the world are high enough. America cannot afford another such blow to its credibility, especially when it is trying to rally international pressure against nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
The administration will argue that altering this agreement now would be a slap at India. But there is no good in compounding a bad deal. And there are better ways to deepen political and economic ties.
Congress accepted the administration�s arguments far too uncritically when it approved the first India-related nuclear legislation last December. It must now take a stand against the even more damaging companion agreement. At a time when far too many governments are re-examining their decision to forswear nuclear weapons, the United States should be shoring up the nuclear rules, not shredding them.
President Bush is understandably desperate for some kind of foreign policy success. But that cannot justify sacrificing his principled stand against weapons proliferation to seal a nuclear cooperation deal with India. The agreement could end up benefiting New Delhi�s weapons program as much as its pursuit of nuclear power.
The deal was deeply flawed from the start. And it has been made even worse by a newly negotiated companion agreement that lays out the technical details for nuclear commerce. Congress should reject the agreement and demand that the administration, or its successor, negotiate a new one that does not undermine efforts to restrain the spread of nuclear weapons.
Any agreement needs to honor the principle Mr. Bush set forth in 2004: that countries do not need to make their own nuclear fuel, or reprocess their spent fuel, to operate effective nuclear energy programs. The technology can be all too easily diverted to make fuel for a nuclear weapon.
Unfortunately, Mr. Bush�s accord with India jettisoned that essential principle. Washington capitulated to India�s nuclear establishment and endorsed continued reprocessing. And while United States law calls for nuclear cooperation to end if India detonates another weapon, the agreement makes no explicit mention of that requirement � while it promises that Washington will acquiesce, if not assist, in India�s efforts to find other fuel suppliers.
Bringing India � which never signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty � in from the cold is not a bad idea. It is the world�s most populous democracy, with a dynamic economy. And its record on nonproliferation � aside from its own diversion of civilian technology to its once-secret weapons program � is pretty good. The problem is that the United States got very little back. No promise to stop producing bomb-making material. No promise not to expand its arsenal. And no promise not to resume nuclear testing.
The message of all this is unmistakable: When it comes to nuclear proliferation, Washington�s only real policy is to reward its friends and punish its enemies. Suspicion of America�s motives around the world are high enough. America cannot afford another such blow to its credibility, especially when it is trying to rally international pressure against nuclear programs in Iran and North Korea.
The administration will argue that altering this agreement now would be a slap at India. But there is no good in compounding a bad deal. And there are better ways to deepen political and economic ties.
Congress accepted the administration�s arguments far too uncritically when it approved the first India-related nuclear legislation last December. It must now take a stand against the even more damaging companion agreement. At a time when far too many governments are re-examining their decision to forswear nuclear weapons, the United States should be shoring up the nuclear rules, not shredding them.
girlfriend No doubt Anne has a stylist
man-woman-and-gc
04-22 12:50 PM
Can someone please respond?
hairstyles white dress audi opening
ck_b2001
08-28 09:07 AM
Did everybody who filed Jul 2nd at NSC got their reciepts?
seems like TSC is done entering Jul 2nd application as Jul 3rd-5th are getting their reciepts. It makes me wonder as to how the reciepts are issued if Jul 2nd filers are waiting and farther dates got their reciepts. Is it only issuing delay ?
seems like TSC is done entering Jul 2nd application as Jul 3rd-5th are getting their reciepts. It makes me wonder as to how the reciepts are issued if Jul 2nd filers are waiting and farther dates got their reciepts. Is it only issuing delay ?
MDix
03-07 09:09 PM
I will be glad if he can get something done in his own family.
martinvisalaw
09-18 02:18 PM
The consulate cannot approve you for permanent residence if there are no visa numbers available. Priority dates apply whether you do AOS or CP.
No comments:
Post a Comment