cantonsale10@gmail.com
09-29 09:01 PM
Hi,
My priority date is August 2004 EB-3-India.
In USCIS Website, my 485 case status and Ead status got updated dated september 4 2010.
What does this mean by anyway with respect to mygreencard process.Plz help.
Thanks.
My priority date is August 2004 EB-3-India.
In USCIS Website, my 485 case status and Ead status got updated dated september 4 2010.
What does this mean by anyway with respect to mygreencard process.Plz help.
Thanks.
wallpaper sad rabbit, Kozo character
Blog Feeds
05-27 12:40 PM
As everybody knows by now, recently Arizona's Governor signed a law requiring local law enforcement officials to take into custody persons when they have a "reasonable suspicion" that they are present in the U.S. illegally. The person would be turned over to the Immigration Service, and be released from jail if they could demonstrate their legal status. Last Monday, the ACLU and various other groups sued Arizona officials in Federal Court to void the law on a number of grounds including violation of the Constitutional rights of equal protection of the law and free speech. President Obama has questioned the...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/05/liberty-and-justice-for-all.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/carlshusterman/2010/05/liberty-and-justice-for-all.html)
borrows123
05-25 04:27 AM
You have to inform the university management..
So you can get a new copy of that ....
So you can get a new copy of that ....
2011 Sad Cartoon versus Technology
H1extension
11-11 06:11 AM
Hello Forum Members -
My company has applied for my 8th year extension (3 years) based on my LC and I-140 that was applied in CA. (My LC and I-140 have been approved). But during my 7th year, I moved to NC state with the same company/department. The LCA for the extension includes both CA nad NC work locations and NC residence address.
Will there be a problem with extending the H1 using the I-140 that has been approved for CA? Will USCIS question why I am in NC when the I-140 shows a CA Address?
Please let me know your opinion.
Thanks,
My company has applied for my 8th year extension (3 years) based on my LC and I-140 that was applied in CA. (My LC and I-140 have been approved). But during my 7th year, I moved to NC state with the same company/department. The LCA for the extension includes both CA nad NC work locations and NC residence address.
Will there be a problem with extending the H1 using the I-140 that has been approved for CA? Will USCIS question why I am in NC when the I-140 shows a CA Address?
Please let me know your opinion.
Thanks,
more...
michellezbb
04-18 10:31 PM
I saw a thread creatted by IV about how to open a company when 485 pending yesterday, but I couldn't find it now. Anyone can help? tons of thanks
Macaca
08-01 08:03 PM
The Speaker In Charge (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/31/AR2007073101628.html?hpid=opinionsbox1) By Harold Meyerson (meyersonh@washpost.com), August 1, 2007
This is one of those odd weeks when Congress may actually work. Both houses are likely to pass Democratic bills to expand SCHIP, the children's health coverage program. Yesterday, the House enacted lobbying reform, and the Senate may follow suit tomorrow. Also yesterday, the House passed a bill restoring the right of victims of pay discrimination to sue their employers.
In short, it's one of those weeks when Nancy Pelosi has no doubts about the wisdom of her decision to become speaker of the House.
"What's it like?" she asked herself, beaming, at the conclusion of a breakfast meeting with roughly 20 liberal journalists yesterday morning.
"It's fabulous! Absolutely fabulous!"
It can't always be thus. Her biggest frustration, of course, is Congress's inability to end the war in Iraq, which she terms "a huge moral catastrophe for the country." It is the public's biggest frustration as well, she says, and the main reason that popular support for Congress has plummeted.
In September, Iraq will once again be Congress's chief item of business, when Gen. David Petraeus delivers his state-of-the-war report.
Pelosi (understandably, given the administration's mountain of misrepresentation on all war-related matters) is wary. "The plural of anecdote is not data," she said. "I'm very concerned they'll pass off anecdotal successes as progress in Iraq."
The question in September will be whether congressional Republicans continue to support President Bush's open-ended commitment to keeping U.S. forces in Iraq while a civil war rages around them. To date, the Republicans' strategy, and not just on the war, has been to thwart the Democrats at every turn and to use the Senate's 60-vote supermajority requirement both to create a "do-nothing" Congress against which they can run and to spare their president from having to veto popular legislation. (Why they care about sparing Bush -- he will never face voters again; they will -- plunges us into the murk of abnormal psychology.)
The GOP strategy is not without its pitfalls. Republicans have succeeded in tanking Congress's approval ratings, but polls consistently show the public, most importantly in swing districts, preferring Democrats to Republicans. With this week's vote on expanding SCHIP, though, Democrats are convinced that the price of blocking health care for uninsured children is more than many Republicans are willing to pay. Bush has vowed to veto the legislation; Pelosi, noting with an almost incredulous glee that the administration will stand athwart children's health care on the grounds of opposing a higher tobacco tax, says, simply, "Welcome to this discussion."
Not all discussions, even in a good week, are so pleasurable to anticipate. Asked about the resolution that her congressional colleague Jay Inslee of Washington has introduced to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Pelosi put her hands to her temples as if to ward off a headache. For the past year, Pelosi has made clear to her colleagues and the public alike that she has no interest in pursuing the impeachment option, though Gonzales is certainly doing his damnedest to change her mind. She remains unpersuaded, believing that impeachment would fail and in the process would make weeks such as this one -- a week in which the public's business is at last getting done -- far more uncommon than they already are.
Pelosi understands the gravity of the damage that the administration has done to the Constitution and why that has impelled some of her colleagues to advocate impeachment. "If I were not the speaker and I were not in Congress," she said, very quietly, as she concluded her answer, "I would probably be advocating for impeachment." But the consequences she foresees from stopping the nation's business for an unwinnable fight outweighs those considerations.
Pelosi deserves considerable credit for holding her party together on a range of divisive issues, but she plainly views the coming fight among House Democrats on fuel efficiency standards as irrepressible.
The energy bill the House will pass this week contains no provisions that would raise those standards; such provisions, if any, await the outcome of a battle between Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, the Democrat who has represented Detroit and the auto industry in Congress since 1955 (that is, before tailfins).
"I respect all our chairmen," Pelosi said. But the legislation, she continued, isn't about them. "It's about our children's ability to breathe clean air. Nothing less than the planet is at stake. I love him [Dingell] dearly, but we have to prevail. . . . The forces at work here [against stricter standards] are rich and entrenched," she concluded, "and it takes just a few [votes] to prevent us from unleashing the future."
Thus, the most elegant of happy warriors, in a week when it's fun to be speaker.
This is one of those odd weeks when Congress may actually work. Both houses are likely to pass Democratic bills to expand SCHIP, the children's health coverage program. Yesterday, the House enacted lobbying reform, and the Senate may follow suit tomorrow. Also yesterday, the House passed a bill restoring the right of victims of pay discrimination to sue their employers.
In short, it's one of those weeks when Nancy Pelosi has no doubts about the wisdom of her decision to become speaker of the House.
"What's it like?" she asked herself, beaming, at the conclusion of a breakfast meeting with roughly 20 liberal journalists yesterday morning.
"It's fabulous! Absolutely fabulous!"
It can't always be thus. Her biggest frustration, of course, is Congress's inability to end the war in Iraq, which she terms "a huge moral catastrophe for the country." It is the public's biggest frustration as well, she says, and the main reason that popular support for Congress has plummeted.
In September, Iraq will once again be Congress's chief item of business, when Gen. David Petraeus delivers his state-of-the-war report.
Pelosi (understandably, given the administration's mountain of misrepresentation on all war-related matters) is wary. "The plural of anecdote is not data," she said. "I'm very concerned they'll pass off anecdotal successes as progress in Iraq."
The question in September will be whether congressional Republicans continue to support President Bush's open-ended commitment to keeping U.S. forces in Iraq while a civil war rages around them. To date, the Republicans' strategy, and not just on the war, has been to thwart the Democrats at every turn and to use the Senate's 60-vote supermajority requirement both to create a "do-nothing" Congress against which they can run and to spare their president from having to veto popular legislation. (Why they care about sparing Bush -- he will never face voters again; they will -- plunges us into the murk of abnormal psychology.)
The GOP strategy is not without its pitfalls. Republicans have succeeded in tanking Congress's approval ratings, but polls consistently show the public, most importantly in swing districts, preferring Democrats to Republicans. With this week's vote on expanding SCHIP, though, Democrats are convinced that the price of blocking health care for uninsured children is more than many Republicans are willing to pay. Bush has vowed to veto the legislation; Pelosi, noting with an almost incredulous glee that the administration will stand athwart children's health care on the grounds of opposing a higher tobacco tax, says, simply, "Welcome to this discussion."
Not all discussions, even in a good week, are so pleasurable to anticipate. Asked about the resolution that her congressional colleague Jay Inslee of Washington has introduced to impeach Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Pelosi put her hands to her temples as if to ward off a headache. For the past year, Pelosi has made clear to her colleagues and the public alike that she has no interest in pursuing the impeachment option, though Gonzales is certainly doing his damnedest to change her mind. She remains unpersuaded, believing that impeachment would fail and in the process would make weeks such as this one -- a week in which the public's business is at last getting done -- far more uncommon than they already are.
Pelosi understands the gravity of the damage that the administration has done to the Constitution and why that has impelled some of her colleagues to advocate impeachment. "If I were not the speaker and I were not in Congress," she said, very quietly, as she concluded her answer, "I would probably be advocating for impeachment." But the consequences she foresees from stopping the nation's business for an unwinnable fight outweighs those considerations.
Pelosi deserves considerable credit for holding her party together on a range of divisive issues, but she plainly views the coming fight among House Democrats on fuel efficiency standards as irrepressible.
The energy bill the House will pass this week contains no provisions that would raise those standards; such provisions, if any, await the outcome of a battle between Pelosi and Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman John Dingell, the Democrat who has represented Detroit and the auto industry in Congress since 1955 (that is, before tailfins).
"I respect all our chairmen," Pelosi said. But the legislation, she continued, isn't about them. "It's about our children's ability to breathe clean air. Nothing less than the planet is at stake. I love him [Dingell] dearly, but we have to prevail. . . . The forces at work here [against stricter standards] are rich and entrenched," she concluded, "and it takes just a few [votes] to prevent us from unleashing the future."
Thus, the most elegant of happy warriors, in a week when it's fun to be speaker.
more...
mustang29
01-31 11:13 AM
does anyone know how I can put the items of a combobox into a listbox?
thx
thx
2010 Mascot Cartoon Character
Raj3
12-14 03:30 PM
HI,
My company is processing my Green card and recently applied my I-140. My wife is applying for residency this year. Most of hospitals are saying that they can sponsor only a J-1 visa. Can you please suggest if this would be a problem for my Green Card processing and/or her visa stamping (Since applying for G.C means that we wants to stay and J-1 means the other way round)?
Thanks,
-Raj.
My company is processing my Green card and recently applied my I-140. My wife is applying for residency this year. Most of hospitals are saying that they can sponsor only a J-1 visa. Can you please suggest if this would be a problem for my Green Card processing and/or her visa stamping (Since applying for G.C means that we wants to stay and J-1 means the other way round)?
Thanks,
-Raj.
more...
drirshad
07-23 03:55 AM
As long as she was ni status should be fine, not sure if they look into tax returns and u guys didnt show much ....
hair a cartoon character named
thecuriousguy
04-10 12:37 PM
My wife will be relocating to Toronto,Canada for work and I will be traveling between the US and Canada. My employer is fine with me telecommuting 50% of the time which means I will be working 2 weeks remote and 2 in the USA for the next one year. I will continue to be a US FTE [Software Development] and also pay US taxes. Will I be able to continue being on H1B status while I travel or do I have to explore other visa options? Since I will be returning to the US every 20 days [and by road] will I be able to use the automatic I94 revalidation?
Thanks in Advance!
Thanks in Advance!
more...
Blog Feeds
01-12 07:40 AM
The annual Consumer Electronics Show kicks off this week in Las Vegas. This is the gadget wonderland I've attended for the last several years. Due to my father's illness, I decided to skip this year's show. But I'm avidly watching online for announcements of the year's best new innovations. The show is put on by the Consumer Electronics Association and they've recently launched "The Innovation Movement" which seeks to encourage public policies that foster innovation and promote prosperity. The movement embraces a lot of issues and I'm pleased to see liberalizing immigration policies in the technology sector among the issues...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/consumer-electronic-association-warns-against-restricting-the-movement-of-global-talent.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/01/consumer-electronic-association-warns-against-restricting-the-movement-of-global-talent.html)
hot love cartoon characters.
Edison99
01-15 07:55 AM
Anyone?
AP for one year only!
AP for one year only!
more...
house Sad they stopped making new
subikarthik
09-16 03:07 PM
Hi, I on H4..now 485 filed/pending...H1B also filed...so should I send a cancellation for my H1B ?
tattoo a cartoon cute character
IN2US
07-10 06:25 PM
We are posting media coverage on this thread. Just posted an article from Reuters there!
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6305
-- I got that, I'm talking about TV Broadcast since this morning???
lets hope we get some PrimeTime in major channels.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6305
-- I got that, I'm talking about TV Broadcast since this morning???
lets hope we get some PrimeTime in major channels.
more...
pictures If Cartoon Characters came to
askreddy
06-25 10:19 PM
Thank You for the info.
dresses Sad Cartoon versus Technology
addsf345
11-19 12:50 AM
push and pull, and i finally decided to exercise my AC21 rights.....
AC21 pioneers, any recommendations on picking lawyers around NYC? specifically those that are fairly responsive and charge a fair price on all the procedures / docs that come with maintaining AOS, including a possible AC21 notification letter, renewing EAD/APs....
thank you for any guidances.
Bro, checkout this Thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22261).
AC21 pioneers, any recommendations on picking lawyers around NYC? specifically those that are fairly responsive and charge a fair price on all the procedures / docs that come with maintaining AOS, including a possible AC21 notification letter, renewing EAD/APs....
thank you for any guidances.
Bro, checkout this Thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22261).
more...
makeup two cartoon characters,
greatzolin
08-06 11:43 AM
What happends if we don't get our checks cashed and no receipt after aug 17th, but the documents get returned.
Can we refile or are we out of luck? :confused:
Thanks.
PD: Aug, 05
LC Approved: april '06
I-485 Filed: 29rd June 07
At USCI Office July 02, 07
Can we refile or are we out of luck? :confused:
Thanks.
PD: Aug, 05
LC Approved: april '06
I-485 Filed: 29rd June 07
At USCI Office July 02, 07
girlfriend cartoon, character, hegdehog
need_info
01-23 12:37 PM
Hi,
I have my L1 Visa from X Company and I traveled to US for 2 months.
I also have my H1B Visa from Y Company stamped in my passport.
I am planning to enter US with my L1 Visa and then change my status to H1B after a month.
1) If I get a job, can I change my status from L1 to H1 within a month? Is there any minimum period to work on L1 for change of status?
2) Do I need the consent of my X Company for having the change of status to H1B done?
3) What documents are required for the change of status? I will not have my pay stubs during my stay on L1 status, as I will be paid just the per diam.
4) If I enter US with my H1B Visa and if I am deported to my Home country (because I just have 7 months) validity of my H1B (or) due to employer-employee relationship issue), can I still use my L1 Visa of my X Company to revisit US?
Please advise.
I have my L1 Visa from X Company and I traveled to US for 2 months.
I also have my H1B Visa from Y Company stamped in my passport.
I am planning to enter US with my L1 Visa and then change my status to H1B after a month.
1) If I get a job, can I change my status from L1 to H1 within a month? Is there any minimum period to work on L1 for change of status?
2) Do I need the consent of my X Company for having the change of status to H1B done?
3) What documents are required for the change of status? I will not have my pay stubs during my stay on L1 status, as I will be paid just the per diam.
4) If I enter US with my H1B Visa and if I am deported to my Home country (because I just have 7 months) validity of my H1B (or) due to employer-employee relationship issue), can I still use my L1 Visa of my X Company to revisit US?
Please advise.
hairstyles cartoon cute character for
Macaca
08-05 07:16 AM
The Congress So Far (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/04/AR2007080401272.html) An ugly finish to a rocky start, August 5, 2007
FORGET ABOUT November's bipartisan promises of civility and cooperation in Congress. At the time they seemed overly optimistic. Nonetheless, it is hard to believe that relations could have deteriorated so far so fast -- both between the new Democratic majority and congressional Republicans and between Democratic lawmakers and President Bush.
Thursday's late-night rumble on the House floor, when a vote was gaveled to what Democrats acknowledge was a premature close, epitomized the ugliness that has overtaken the entire legislative process. In the end, the 110th Congress headed for its August recess with civility in shreds and achievements sparse. Indeed, the only thing that might make August look pleasant is September, when lawmakers will return to resume the acrimonious debate over Iraq policy and confront the looming end of the fiscal year with spending bills unpassed and presidential vetoes in the offing.
There have been scraps of good news from the first seven months. Lawmakers managed to see two of their priorities become law: an increase in the minimum wage and passage of the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission. Another major achievement, a lobbying and ethics reform bill that will make important changes in the way Washington does business, is awaiting Mr. Bush's signature. Both chambers passed versions of a measure to extend the health insurance program for children in low-income families.
But many other Democratic priorities -- and a big presidential one, immigration reform -- were snarled in the Senate. The 60-vote majority needed to overcome a filibuster proved to be as big an impediment for majority Democrats as the Democrats had made it when Republicans held power. The failure of immigration reform, of which there had been at least a hope of bipartisan achievement, was a particularly low note. Meanwhile, Democrats in both chambers chose to spend countless hours mired in a fruitless effort to compel an "end" to the war in Iraq.
One of the most disappointing recent developments has been the administration's apparent decision, in the aftermath of the immigration bill's failure, that there was not much to be gained from working with this Congress -- and something to gained by taking it on. This new belligerence has manifested itself in a blizzard of veto threats -- Democrats counted up 31 between May 1 and Aug. 1 -- the most regrettable of which involves the children's health insurance bill.
In the final hours before recess, it was hard to know which was more shameful: the administration's use of the looming vacation to bully Democrats into accepting its overbroad rewrite of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or Democrats' spinelessness in caving to this strong-arming.
On the House side, a major disappointment was the failure of Democrats to live up to their pledge to treat the new Republican minority better than Democrats were treated when Republicans held power. Democrats promised a new, more open House, with adequate time for members to digest complex legislation and ample opportunity for the minority to offer amendments on the floor; instead, they, too, often used the same hardball tactics to muscle through legislation that Republicans had employed. That might have been understandable in the Democrats' "first 100 hours" that the new Congress was in session, but it is unfortunate that it persisted until the recess. That's no way to do business, and Democrats know it.
FORGET ABOUT November's bipartisan promises of civility and cooperation in Congress. At the time they seemed overly optimistic. Nonetheless, it is hard to believe that relations could have deteriorated so far so fast -- both between the new Democratic majority and congressional Republicans and between Democratic lawmakers and President Bush.
Thursday's late-night rumble on the House floor, when a vote was gaveled to what Democrats acknowledge was a premature close, epitomized the ugliness that has overtaken the entire legislative process. In the end, the 110th Congress headed for its August recess with civility in shreds and achievements sparse. Indeed, the only thing that might make August look pleasant is September, when lawmakers will return to resume the acrimonious debate over Iraq policy and confront the looming end of the fiscal year with spending bills unpassed and presidential vetoes in the offing.
There have been scraps of good news from the first seven months. Lawmakers managed to see two of their priorities become law: an increase in the minimum wage and passage of the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission. Another major achievement, a lobbying and ethics reform bill that will make important changes in the way Washington does business, is awaiting Mr. Bush's signature. Both chambers passed versions of a measure to extend the health insurance program for children in low-income families.
But many other Democratic priorities -- and a big presidential one, immigration reform -- were snarled in the Senate. The 60-vote majority needed to overcome a filibuster proved to be as big an impediment for majority Democrats as the Democrats had made it when Republicans held power. The failure of immigration reform, of which there had been at least a hope of bipartisan achievement, was a particularly low note. Meanwhile, Democrats in both chambers chose to spend countless hours mired in a fruitless effort to compel an "end" to the war in Iraq.
One of the most disappointing recent developments has been the administration's apparent decision, in the aftermath of the immigration bill's failure, that there was not much to be gained from working with this Congress -- and something to gained by taking it on. This new belligerence has manifested itself in a blizzard of veto threats -- Democrats counted up 31 between May 1 and Aug. 1 -- the most regrettable of which involves the children's health insurance bill.
In the final hours before recess, it was hard to know which was more shameful: the administration's use of the looming vacation to bully Democrats into accepting its overbroad rewrite of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act or Democrats' spinelessness in caving to this strong-arming.
On the House side, a major disappointment was the failure of Democrats to live up to their pledge to treat the new Republican minority better than Democrats were treated when Republicans held power. Democrats promised a new, more open House, with adequate time for members to digest complex legislation and ample opportunity for the minority to offer amendments on the floor; instead, they, too, often used the same hardball tactics to muscle through legislation that Republicans had employed. That might have been understandable in the Democrats' "first 100 hours" that the new Congress was in session, but it is unfortunate that it persisted until the recess. That's no way to do business, and Democrats know it.
pappu
11-10 07:24 PM
no descriptive titles will mean closing of a thread. sorry but we need to enforce it. It will help browsing of our forums to be easy for our members.
auvrm
05-18 06:55 PM
We are applying for my husband's H4 extension now. ( My new H1b extension was approved only till Sept 25, 2009 based on the SOW( client contract) rather than 3 years)So he would be able to get his extention same as me Sept 25, 2009.
We have also applied for my husband's H1b this year. Hopefully, if his H1b is approved
1. Does he has to go outside US to get his visa stamped to start working from Oct 1, as there is no status for him from Sept 26 through Sept 30 ( 5 days)
2. If we apply for his H4 extension along with my H1b extension during early Sept and he will remain in status as the Case will be pending, Does it allow him to start working on H1b without needing to stamp?
We have also applied for my husband's H1b this year. Hopefully, if his H1b is approved
1. Does he has to go outside US to get his visa stamped to start working from Oct 1, as there is no status for him from Sept 26 through Sept 30 ( 5 days)
2. If we apply for his H4 extension along with my H1b extension during early Sept and he will remain in status as the Case will be pending, Does it allow him to start working on H1b without needing to stamp?
No comments:
Post a Comment