bkarnik
04-04 11:56 AM
Can you provide a link to the bulletin?
Any comments abt the dates?
Any comments abt the dates?
wallpaper design drawings that were
gcwait2007
06-30 12:37 AM
I am on EAD and I dont have any current employment, except a good faith future employment offer. I am already in bench more than 4 months and tired of it. I want to travel to India and come back after 2 months, using AP. What sort of questions being asked while entering USA and what documents I need to provide?
My friends are advising me not to leave the country. Please advise.
Thanks in advance
My friends are advising me not to leave the country. Please advise.
Thanks in advance
n1d1s1
08-31 06:57 PM
I got married last year in India and came with my husband on H4 visa.I have applied for MS in computer science and i got admission.My question is what is the procedure to change of my surname.Currently i am using my maiden name as my surname and it's on my passport and visa.As i am on H4 visa I don't have SSN.I don't have any idea about the procedure.Kindly help me regarding to this issue.....
Thanks in advance....
Thanks in advance....
2011 structural steel drawing,
joydiptac
05-16 04:28 PM
Family based green cards take a longish amount of time 5 yrs or so and your wife cannot enter US in that period. So if you plan to live with your wife in the US in the mean time here is an idea you can consider:
Give up your green card, then come back with H1 and your wife on H4 then reapply - you might get your green cards in 3-4 months because your 140 has an older priority date.
Just an idea... no legal basis. All the best!
Give up your green card, then come back with H1 and your wife on H4 then reapply - you might get your green cards in 3-4 months because your 140 has an older priority date.
Just an idea... no legal basis. All the best!
more...
fasterthanlight�
05-02 12:56 AM
Chris and Meg have yet to be made into stamps. However, here are these:
Macaca
06-25 07:21 AM
Democrats step up (http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-mileage25jun25,1,1445539.story) First on gun control, now on energy, the Democrats are pushing Congress in a new direction. June 25, 2007
FIRST GUN CONTROL, now fuel economy. Congressional Democrats still have a lot of work ahead to get their groundbreaking bills past both houses and the president's desk, but you can't say they're not leading a radical change in direction.
On June 13, the House passed what could become the first major gun-control law in a decade, a bill aimed at strengthening a federal database used in background checks for gun buyers. A week later, the Senate approved an energy bill that would improve mileage for the nation's automotive fleet for the first time in nearly 20 years. Democrats still haven't forced a troop reduction in Iraq or put their stamp on the nation's backward immigration policies, but their surprising success in other areas is worthy of praise.
Not that Democrats deserve all the credit. The gun bill was a bipartisan effort that passed by acclamation after it won the blessing of the National Rifle Assn., while 20 Republicans � nearly half the 43 who voted on the measure � backed the fuel economy bill. Still, these measures would have been inconceivable while Republicans controlled both houses during the first six years of the Bush administration, a period characterized by the disgraceful decision to allow a decade-old assault weapons ban to expire in 2004 and successive energy bills focused on maximizing fossil fuel production at the expense of the environment.
It would be nice to think that the broad Republican support for a progressive energy bill signaled a pro-environment change of heart. Unfortunately, it probably has more to do with the high price of oil; Republicans are feeling pressure to bring gas prices down. They also rightly see dependence on foreign oil as a national security issue. The fuel economy bill would increase the average mileage requirement for cars sold in the U.S. from 25 miles per gallon to 35 by 2020, expected to eventually save millions of barrels of oil a day.
Regardless of their motives, Republicans' support for the energy bill will increase pressure on President Bush to sign it, assuming it gets through the House. Bush favors better fuel economy but wants it to come at a slower pace, with loopholes to allow more gas guzzling by SUVs. The Senate energy bill has its own regrettable loophole: A strong mandate was watered down in committee, allowing federal regulators to cancel the improvements if they decide the tighter standards aren't "cost-effective." But senators beat back furious efforts by the auto industry to weaken the bill further.
There was one sour note to last week's passage of the energy bill: An amendment that would have required the nation to get 15% of its electricity from renewable sources was defeated. Senate leaders should revive it in the future.
FIRST GUN CONTROL, now fuel economy. Congressional Democrats still have a lot of work ahead to get their groundbreaking bills past both houses and the president's desk, but you can't say they're not leading a radical change in direction.
On June 13, the House passed what could become the first major gun-control law in a decade, a bill aimed at strengthening a federal database used in background checks for gun buyers. A week later, the Senate approved an energy bill that would improve mileage for the nation's automotive fleet for the first time in nearly 20 years. Democrats still haven't forced a troop reduction in Iraq or put their stamp on the nation's backward immigration policies, but their surprising success in other areas is worthy of praise.
Not that Democrats deserve all the credit. The gun bill was a bipartisan effort that passed by acclamation after it won the blessing of the National Rifle Assn., while 20 Republicans � nearly half the 43 who voted on the measure � backed the fuel economy bill. Still, these measures would have been inconceivable while Republicans controlled both houses during the first six years of the Bush administration, a period characterized by the disgraceful decision to allow a decade-old assault weapons ban to expire in 2004 and successive energy bills focused on maximizing fossil fuel production at the expense of the environment.
It would be nice to think that the broad Republican support for a progressive energy bill signaled a pro-environment change of heart. Unfortunately, it probably has more to do with the high price of oil; Republicans are feeling pressure to bring gas prices down. They also rightly see dependence on foreign oil as a national security issue. The fuel economy bill would increase the average mileage requirement for cars sold in the U.S. from 25 miles per gallon to 35 by 2020, expected to eventually save millions of barrels of oil a day.
Regardless of their motives, Republicans' support for the energy bill will increase pressure on President Bush to sign it, assuming it gets through the House. Bush favors better fuel economy but wants it to come at a slower pace, with loopholes to allow more gas guzzling by SUVs. The Senate energy bill has its own regrettable loophole: A strong mandate was watered down in committee, allowing federal regulators to cancel the improvements if they decide the tighter standards aren't "cost-effective." But senators beat back furious efforts by the auto industry to weaken the bill further.
There was one sour note to last week's passage of the energy bill: An amendment that would have required the nation to get 15% of its electricity from renewable sources was defeated. Senate leaders should revive it in the future.
more...
Macaca
07-22 05:39 PM
Empty Promises (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_8/editorial/19419-1.html), July 18, 2007
As Senate Democrats were preparing to go to the mattresses over Iraq voting procedures and as Republicans threatened to stop all activity over a judicial appointment, it's worth recalling what Senate leaders were promising at the outset of the 110th Congress.
On Jan. 4, incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) declared on the floor that "last November, the voters sent us a message - Democrats and Republicans. The voters are upset with Congress and the partisan gridlock. The voters want a government that focuses on their needs. The voters want change. Together, we must deliver that change."
Minutes later, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) observed that "the challenges ahead will not be met if we do nothing to overcome the partisanship that has come to characterize this body over the past several years. A culture of partisanship over principle represents a grave threat to the Senate's best tradition as a place of constructive cooperation. It undermines the spirit and the purpose of this institution. And we must do something to reverse its course."
Six months on, the Senate has devolved into a nonstop brawl. The House, where leaders made let's-work-together promises of their own, also is a cauldron of partisanship, but at least there the rules permit a majority to rule.
But together, they've been able to pass just three pieces of significant legislation - a hike in the minimum wage, expansion of stem-cell research funding and a supplemental appropriation to fund the Iraq War. Only the first was directly signed into law. The second was vetoed by President Bush. The third was vetoed then passed.
Partisan warfare and inaction on issues from health care to immigration to energy - even lobbying and ethics reform, once the top priority for this Congress - has reduced respect for the legislative branch to its lowest level ever. Respect for the presidency is not much higher.
Who's to blame? Senate Democrats accuse Senate Republicans of "obstructionism" - systematic refusal to grant unanimous consent so that bills can be voted upon. Senate Republicans blame Reid for invoking cloture to stifle full debate and the offering of amendments.
The level of rancor is escalating now because Democrats are frustrated that Republicans are insisting on a 60-vote threshold on Iraq War amendments - as though Democrats in the past have not used the 60-vote requirement when it suited them. Republicans are threatening to create procedural chaos and allow little or no action on the floor if Democrats block a single appellate court nominee.
In January, Senators of both parties gathered in the Old Senate Chamber in what McConnell described as "a small act of bipartisanship" that he hoped would lead to a restoration of the Senate's reputation. Now, perhaps, Senators should regather there and contemplate their current level of public esteem.
As Senate Democrats were preparing to go to the mattresses over Iraq voting procedures and as Republicans threatened to stop all activity over a judicial appointment, it's worth recalling what Senate leaders were promising at the outset of the 110th Congress.
On Jan. 4, incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) declared on the floor that "last November, the voters sent us a message - Democrats and Republicans. The voters are upset with Congress and the partisan gridlock. The voters want a government that focuses on their needs. The voters want change. Together, we must deliver that change."
Minutes later, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) observed that "the challenges ahead will not be met if we do nothing to overcome the partisanship that has come to characterize this body over the past several years. A culture of partisanship over principle represents a grave threat to the Senate's best tradition as a place of constructive cooperation. It undermines the spirit and the purpose of this institution. And we must do something to reverse its course."
Six months on, the Senate has devolved into a nonstop brawl. The House, where leaders made let's-work-together promises of their own, also is a cauldron of partisanship, but at least there the rules permit a majority to rule.
But together, they've been able to pass just three pieces of significant legislation - a hike in the minimum wage, expansion of stem-cell research funding and a supplemental appropriation to fund the Iraq War. Only the first was directly signed into law. The second was vetoed by President Bush. The third was vetoed then passed.
Partisan warfare and inaction on issues from health care to immigration to energy - even lobbying and ethics reform, once the top priority for this Congress - has reduced respect for the legislative branch to its lowest level ever. Respect for the presidency is not much higher.
Who's to blame? Senate Democrats accuse Senate Republicans of "obstructionism" - systematic refusal to grant unanimous consent so that bills can be voted upon. Senate Republicans blame Reid for invoking cloture to stifle full debate and the offering of amendments.
The level of rancor is escalating now because Democrats are frustrated that Republicans are insisting on a 60-vote threshold on Iraq War amendments - as though Democrats in the past have not used the 60-vote requirement when it suited them. Republicans are threatening to create procedural chaos and allow little or no action on the floor if Democrats block a single appellate court nominee.
In January, Senators of both parties gathered in the Old Senate Chamber in what McConnell described as "a small act of bipartisanship" that he hoped would lead to a restoration of the Senate's reputation. Now, perhaps, Senators should regather there and contemplate their current level of public esteem.
2010 uilding design drawing
Blog Feeds
04-11 03:40 PM
USCIS has released figures from the first week of the H-1B season and filings for the 65,000 H-1B "regular" cap slots for the fiscal year that begins in October were just 13,500. That is less than one third of the 42,000+ received during the same period last year and only about one-tenth of the number filed two years ago. Only 5,600 masters cap applications were filed against the 20,000 cap in that category.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/h1b-tally-for-first-week-just-onethird-of-last-years-numbers.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/h1b-tally-for-first-week-just-onethird-of-last-years-numbers.html)
more...
caiban1234
01-12 03:49 PM
Hi
I am in H1B visa (valid until 10/2011), my wife is in F1 student (valid until 8/2011). We just got married 1 month ago in US. currently, we are staying in US. Now, she would like to stop studying for some reasons. To keep her valid stay in US, I have to transfer her f1 to h4. Could you please let me know step by step what I should do, what form I should take…etc.
Does she need any visa interview after filing the transferring f1 to H4?
Can she inform the school that she will stop studying right after filing visa transferring? (the school will stop her f1 if they know that).
Thanks.
I am in H1B visa (valid until 10/2011), my wife is in F1 student (valid until 8/2011). We just got married 1 month ago in US. currently, we are staying in US. Now, she would like to stop studying for some reasons. To keep her valid stay in US, I have to transfer her f1 to h4. Could you please let me know step by step what I should do, what form I should take…etc.
Does she need any visa interview after filing the transferring f1 to H4?
Can she inform the school that she will stop studying right after filing visa transferring? (the school will stop her f1 if they know that).
Thanks.
hair Outsource Building Design
reddymjm
05-21 09:51 AM
1.Should I apply with his ID or I can create my seperate ID and apply through that.
Create your own.
2.For c9 Eligibility status which option should I select?.
Pedning i485 or AOS
a.family based.
b.Employment based .
If your husband filed in EB it Employment based.
.
Create your own.
2.For c9 Eligibility status which option should I select?.
Pedning i485 or AOS
a.family based.
b.Employment based .
If your husband filed in EB it Employment based.
.
more...
gk_2000
12-16 03:04 PM
EB5 might get a boost in Jan, according to this. Requirements may be relaxed to investing 100,000 and employing 5 in two years ..
Foreign Entrepreneurs Eye StartUp Visa Act - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704694004576020001550357580.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_sections_smallbusiness)
Foreign Entrepreneurs Eye StartUp Visa Act - WSJ.com (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704694004576020001550357580.html?m od=WSJ_hpp_sections_smallbusiness)
hot conceptually uilding a
test101
07-10 10:09 AM
or it's something not going to be done? we need to work on this
more...
house design drawing restaurants
GCBy3000
07-19 05:11 PM
Can you contriute $64,000 is exactly same as this one.
tattoo house design drawings and
TomPlate
07-11 02:38 PM
Somebody please start this. So that we can raise the concern to USCIS someway. Dont make it go away I need volunteers to start this thread. I am going to close the thread if no one is willing to give their thought.
one time
two time
three time
machi please participate.
one time
two time
three time
machi please participate.
more...
pictures of uilding design plans.
loudobbs
08-29 12:23 PM
My attorneys screwed up and filed my I140 under the wrong category. (EB3 instead of EB2). They refiled PP but without the original Labor cert attached. My PP application is not approved yet.
I called a couple of weeks ago and they told me they wont do PP because the original labor cert was not attached.
I Emailed them yesterday and this is their reply:
'This petition has been assigned to an officer,but no decision has been made.'
Does this mean anything? meaning is it close to being approved??
Thanks much!!
I called a couple of weeks ago and they told me they wont do PP because the original labor cert was not attached.
I Emailed them yesterday and this is their reply:
'This petition has been assigned to an officer,but no decision has been made.'
Does this mean anything? meaning is it close to being approved??
Thanks much!!
dresses design drawings prepared
Bingy81
11-09 09:25 PM
Hi,
I filed my GC on EB2 and current status is :
I140 approved on Sep 2008
I 485 in process - submitted RFE on Sep 10th
Right now i m on H1B. I recently got married and my husband is on H1B he didnt start his GC process yet. At this stage can i add him on my green card. If so pls explain me the process ...
tnx in advance ...
I filed my GC on EB2 and current status is :
I140 approved on Sep 2008
I 485 in process - submitted RFE on Sep 10th
Right now i m on H1B. I recently got married and my husband is on H1B he didnt start his GC process yet. At this stage can i add him on my green card. If so pls explain me the process ...
tnx in advance ...
more...
makeup uilding
amitjoey
05-06 12:09 PM
I believe it is Page 8
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-765instr.pdf
girlfriend Structural Steel design plans
sympa21
05-16 05:54 PM
Hi I'm a Moroccan citizen I was placed in removal proceedings (NY Buffalo) and took voluntary departure. once my wife's divorce was finalized we got married while on voluntary departure. we filed motion to reopen the case and it was reopened and transferred to Los Angeles, CA then the judge closed my case based on marriage with an I130 receipt without prejudice. The I130 was filed on june 2009 and was transferred to Los Angeles on November 12, 2009. I made an appointment with Info Pass but they just said you have to wait untill we call you. My lawyer said I can't file for the I485 untill the I130 is approved. My question is: How long will it take before we will be called for an interview?
An estimation will be much appreciated thank you very much.
An estimation will be much appreciated thank you very much.
hairstyles pioneer in green design.
greyhair
04-30 12:58 AM
Superman Renounces His U.S. Citizenship in 900th Issue of Action Comics - FoxNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2011/04/28/superman-renounces-citizenship-00th-issue/)
TheCanadian
05-14 07:54 PM
Could you post it in GIF?
Homemaker
08-24 11:37 PM
Hi there!
I was reading some info abt EAD on this site and have come to know that Once H4 visa holders get their EAD's can work after getting SSN.But I read that If H4 visa holders start working as soon as they got EAD's.Does this invalidate H1 visa status if wife starts working on EAD.Please clarify my doubt.
I was reading some info abt EAD on this site and have come to know that Once H4 visa holders get their EAD's can work after getting SSN.But I read that If H4 visa holders start working as soon as they got EAD's.Does this invalidate H1 visa status if wife starts working on EAD.Please clarify my doubt.
No comments:
Post a Comment