eb2_mumbai
10-15 07:55 PM
This is what I can speculate from logical point of view. There can be an 2nd RFE which is basically seeking more clarification on an earlier RFE. These kind of RFE will be pretty much immediate to the preceeding RFE (within 1 -2 months)
After that hopefully there should not be any unrelated RFE with the assumption that IO has taken a complete look at the file before issuing a RFE. We do not want a RFE for BC and when that is replied IO sending another one for Medical or Marriage Certificate. We should reasonably assume that IO has taken a good look at the application before sending RFE.
But we can expect RFE for cases that are current. The reason being most of these cases might be lying with CIS for over 2-3 years before getting current and considering the current state of economy they might issue a RFE for updated EVL to check if the person is still working. That is again just a pure guess no one knows how CIS works in reality
After that hopefully there should not be any unrelated RFE with the assumption that IO has taken a complete look at the file before issuing a RFE. We do not want a RFE for BC and when that is replied IO sending another one for Medical or Marriage Certificate. We should reasonably assume that IO has taken a good look at the application before sending RFE.
But we can expect RFE for cases that are current. The reason being most of these cases might be lying with CIS for over 2-3 years before getting current and considering the current state of economy they might issue a RFE for updated EVL to check if the person is still working. That is again just a pure guess no one knows how CIS works in reality
wallpaper pictures Selena Gomez says her New Song selena gomez who says dress designer
chandra_mb
03-10 12:55 PM
H1-B is all sponser based. You just can't go to USCIS and say that give my wife H1-B. You need an employer who is willing to hire her, show how much he is willing to pay and many more things. You say for a license she needs SSN, so there is your answer
"NO"
Nurses come under schedule A which is completely different
Main point---
Nurses is completely a different cap and category.
Thanks for your reply, I do understand the process - sponsor-LCA etc..,
I just want to know if a sponsor can apply for H1 Dentist for a canditate who does not have a dental license yet.
Its hard to believe that a H4 cannot convert to H1 on a dentist job for the lack of SSN - I am sure there must be many people who passed/going through such situation (H4 to H1 dentist) - just looking for someone to share their experience.
"NO"
Nurses come under schedule A which is completely different
Main point---
Nurses is completely a different cap and category.
Thanks for your reply, I do understand the process - sponsor-LCA etc..,
I just want to know if a sponsor can apply for H1 Dentist for a canditate who does not have a dental license yet.
Its hard to believe that a H4 cannot convert to H1 on a dentist job for the lack of SSN - I am sure there must be many people who passed/going through such situation (H4 to H1 dentist) - just looking for someone to share their experience.
logiclife
11-18 12:18 PM
The problem with premium processing of 485 is that there a procedures in 485, like the FBI namecheck, the Fingerprinting etc, that is perfect recipe for bureaucratic nightmare.
USCIS is in the Department of Homeland security. That's where I485 starts. Then comes FBI namecheck. That's US dept of Justice. After that, comes the issue of alloting visa numbers. That is US State Department.
So you have 3 big bodies of US government who have to all work at premium speed IN SYNC with each other, without passing the buck to each other, to make premium processing possible for 485 filing.
As we all know, USCIS that alone handles I140 petitions took years to implement premium I140. Now if 3 entirely different Departments of US govt were to be asked to harmoniously streamline another procedure, then I guess its wish very less likely to come true, EVEN IF they want it as much as we do.
USCIS is in the Department of Homeland security. That's where I485 starts. Then comes FBI namecheck. That's US dept of Justice. After that, comes the issue of alloting visa numbers. That is US State Department.
So you have 3 big bodies of US government who have to all work at premium speed IN SYNC with each other, without passing the buck to each other, to make premium processing possible for 485 filing.
As we all know, USCIS that alone handles I140 petitions took years to implement premium I140. Now if 3 entirely different Departments of US govt were to be asked to harmoniously streamline another procedure, then I guess its wish very less likely to come true, EVEN IF they want it as much as we do.
2011 tattoo selena gomez who says
gccovet
10-31 12:15 PM
I am planning to shift employers and I have a question:
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
I am sorry, I don't have answer for your question, but the AC21 cases getting denial will certainly effect you as you are planning to use AC21.
Please get the IV action item done whenever you get a chance. This won't take more then 5-10 minutes of your time. Thank you.
check out http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22182
We request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...d.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=21716
GCCovet
Company A applied for my green card and I have an approved I-140, passed the 6 month mark and now planning to shift jobs on EAD. I have an offer from Company B with a condition that my offer would be permanent upon approval of my green card. I cannot work for company B till I physically have my GC. In the mean time can I work for Company C ( in a completely different field) till my GC gets approved without any issues?
I am sorry, I don't have answer for your question, but the AC21 cases getting denial will certainly effect you as you are planning to use AC21.
Please get the IV action item done whenever you get a chance. This won't take more then 5-10 minutes of your time. Thank you.
check out http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=22182
We request all the members to start sending the following 4 letters. For your convenience the letters have been completely written including addresses to be sent � all you have to do is download following 4 google documents � add the date, your name and address � and send it to the address provided on each letter.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_1d3mzhr6c
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_2fp3nrhvb
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_3d8h2x7dr
http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcqssdt7_4fxnvq9tw
To reiterate: You have to send 4 letters � these letters can be downloaded at the above URL�s. Edit the document to add current date, name, address etc. and mail it (regular mail). After doing that, please update the poll so we know how many letters are being sent.
To get more background on this issue and see what has been done so far, please see these two threads:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...d.php?t=22052;
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=21716
GCCovet
more...
waitnwatch
05-25 07:40 PM
Here is my reading of the amendment.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
If you look at the original bill (S2611) Section 508 reads
SEC. 508. VISAS FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.
(a) Aliens With Certain Advanced Degrees Not Subject to Numerical Limitations on Employment Based Immigrants-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 201(b)(1) (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)), as amended by section 505, is amended by adding at the end the following:
`(G) Aliens who have earned an advanced degree in science, technology, engineering, or math and have been working in a related field in the United States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year period preceding their application for an immigrant visa under section 203(b).
`(H) Aliens described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 203(b)(1)(A) or who have received a national interest waiver under section 203(b)(2)(B).
`(I) The spouse and minor children of an alien who is admitted as an employment-based immigrant under section 203(b).'.
**************************************************
Bingaman Amendment 4181 and 4182 on the other hand state
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this act the language in Title V Sec. 501 under the heading ``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN'' is null and void and the following shall be applicable in lien thereof.
``(2) VISAS FOR SPOUSES AND CHILDREN.--
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), immigrant visas issued on or after October 1, 2004, to spouses and children of employment-based immigrants shall not be counted against the numerical limitation set forth in paragraph (1).
``(B) NUMERICAL LIMITATION.--The total number of visas issued under paragraph (1)(A) and paragraph (2), excluding such visas issued to aliens pursuant to section 245B or section 245C of the Immigration and Nationality Act, may not exceed 650,000 during any fiscal year.
************************************************** ****
Reading S2611 Section 508 in conjunction with SA4811 and SA4812 specifically shows that STEM + 3 applicants as well as their spouses and children are not subject to any caps. On the other had the troubling part is that those not covered by STEM+3 will have 450,000 principal applicant slots and therefore only 200,000 spouse and children slots. This discrepancy arises from the fact that Bingaman multiplied 290,000 by 1.2 to arrive at his figure while S2611 allows for 450,000 principal applicants in the 1st 10 years to remove backlog.
SA 4188 is not currently available for reading and it will be interesting to see what change has been made to the language in 508(a)(1)(G) to allow all STEM +3 to be exempt. It would also be interesting to see whether language in Sec 508(b)(3)(III) has been changed to reflect the changes in 508(a)(1)(G)
Note that if both these sections are changed to allow all STEM+3 then labor certification too becomes easier. Hopefully changes here can provide some relief from Bingaman's torpedo.
I would appreciate comments as my analysis may be wrong.
GC4US
08-29 12:36 PM
USCIS had issued a Direct Filing Update which stated that if the application was filed after July 30, it would have to be filed at the center which has jurisdiction over the state the applicant lives in, which in your case is Massachusetts.
USCIS has been transfering a lot of applications between the various service centers lately due to the July fiasco. Based on reports from the Ombudsman, USCIS is trying to avoid any unnecessary rejections, and take a more 'customer service' based approach, so hopefully you will be ok, and they'll just transfer the case to the appropriate service center.
I'm not a lawyer by any means, so please use this advice at your own discretion.
Good luck!
Thank you so much nefrateedi,
I feel a little bit relieved now.
I read now about Direct Filing....and I understood that if you apply after july 30...you can send the application either to Nebraska or Texas. Hopefully I'm right in this matter.
Thanks again
USCIS has been transfering a lot of applications between the various service centers lately due to the July fiasco. Based on reports from the Ombudsman, USCIS is trying to avoid any unnecessary rejections, and take a more 'customer service' based approach, so hopefully you will be ok, and they'll just transfer the case to the appropriate service center.
I'm not a lawyer by any means, so please use this advice at your own discretion.
Good luck!
Thank you so much nefrateedi,
I feel a little bit relieved now.
I read now about Direct Filing....and I understood that if you apply after july 30...you can send the application either to Nebraska or Texas. Hopefully I'm right in this matter.
Thanks again
more...
logiclife
09-25 12:07 PM
Your rights as a participant of a bulletin board or online forum like Immigration Voice forums:
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
The rights of bloggers (site admin, site owner or site moderators), their liability and section 230. Section 230 refers to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC � 230) (http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/47/230.html). To learn the plain English language explanation of this section, go here: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php)
What this means is that whenever someone posts anything against anyone, Immigration Voice is immune from libel suits or defamation lawsuits, with couple of exceptions (discussed in item 2). Therefore, any anonymous poster saying bad things about their lawyers, employers, or anyone else DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DELETED. Other than couple of exceptional scenarios (see point # 2), we are not liable for content posted by users of message boards, forums, discussion boards etc. Section 230 protects Immigration Voice website administrator and moderator against libel suits or other lawsuits caused by participants who post messages against their lawyers, employers or anyone else. A recent example of such a case is illustrated in 22 page opinion of a federal judge in DiMeo V Max (http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1149152717145).
Immigration Voice is not going to delete, edit or moderate the posts and threads posted by our members no matter how defamatory or criticizing they are. That�s because A) Immigration Voice is not liable for what our members do or not do per section 230 and B) Immigration Voice needs to give freedom to members to vent out against the incompetent immigration lawyers and/or dishonest employers because that is what makes us unique and different from censored forums and it is the ESSENCE of this bulletin board.
The exceptions when Section 230 protections won�t work.Section 230 will not protect Immigration Voice if site moderators and administrators themselves post content that causes damages to others. We (site admin and moderators) will not edit or delete posts that say bad things about other orgs or persons - no matter how derogatory or defamatory they are against some lawyers, employers etc. We are not liable or responsible for them and legally it�s best and safest for moderators/site admins to leave those posts alone. Besides, that is one reason why people come to this site � freedom to vent out without any censorship, sometimes even against the Immigration Voice leadership and core group.
The other scenario when the section 230 wont protects us is in case of intellectual property. So don�t post any patented information or technology details on this website. However the laws give us a lot of latitude when we post some news articles or other content created by other sources. More details of intellectual property are here on this link. http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php (http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-ip.php).
Are we obligated to provide information to plaintiffs about our anonymous posters?First of all, most of the time, we ourselves don�t know the anonymous posters and who they are. The most we can do is provide IP address. Those IP addresses too are not easy to pin down in certain kinds of network environments. However, we will not give any information about our members to anyone unless and until we are subpoenaed for it. Subpoenas are either issued by law enforcement or by plaintiffs who file the lawsuit. Unless we are subpoenaed, we don�t have to give away any information like IP or email of any anonymous poster. Immigration Voice will never make the IP address or any information available to anyone unless it is ordered by court. Immigration Voice will use all possible legal avenues to protect the privacy and anonymity of its members and online discussion participants.
What if someone with deep pockets sues Immigration Voice with the objective of shutting us down, even though they know they don�t have a case, but want to sue us just to drag us into expensive court battle and make us bankrupt?There is nothing that protects Immigration Voice (or any such website with discussion boards and forums) from frivolous lawsuits. Anyone can sue anyone else, whether he or she lose or win is a different matter. Section 230 protects immigration voice from libel lawsuits resulting from anonymous participants posting messages that cause damages to organizations or individuals. They are even more counterproductive for the plaintiff if that state has ANTI-SLAAP laws.
SLAAP means �Strategic lawsuit against active participation�. If someone sues us just to make us bankrupt and shut us down without caring for outcome of the case, then it�s a SLAAP lawsuit. The objective is such lawsuit is not to win but to drag the other party into expensive court battle and make them bankrupt. Some states have laws against SLAAP lawsuits called ANTI-SLAAP laws. They are different in every state. What those laws do in general is make the plaintiff of SLAAP lawsuit pay the defendant for the cost of litigation and defense if they lose. So if someone from state that has ANTI-SLAAP laws sues us, then the money we spend on litigation would have to be paid by plaintiffs if they lose. Therefore there is good chance of finding a pro-bono lawyer because if they win, they get paid from the other party. What this means is that it�s difficult to drive someone to bankruptcy with frivolous lawsuits if the state has good ANTI-SLAAP laws. California is one example. Therefore the chances of us getting sued by someone in CA are lesser than other states.
Should any party sue Immigration Voice for libel based on posted messages on online forums, Immigration Voice will fight back to the fullest extent and will not remove posts or threads against those organizations.
What should one do if they have been badly hurt due to incompetence or malfeasance on the part of employer or lawyers?Immigration Voice will neither encourage nor discourage members to post messages against their employers or lawyers or any other party. Members and participants are free to post whatever they want to post. If you lawyer�s actions have hurt you and if you think it�s due to malpractice then you can file a complaint against that lawyer in a state bar. If your employer�s action has hurt you and if you think his actions are illegal, then you can file a complaint against your employer at the department of labor (for wages issues) or other departments for other issues.
2010 selena gomez who says dress
h1techSlave
03-17 04:22 PM
Some lenders do not lend to H1/EAD. So if the cheapest lender happens to not accept H1/EAD, then you did not get the cheapest rate.
In your case Wells Fargo happened to have the cheapest rate and they were also accepting H1.
I am on the look out for a loan currently. The guy with the cheapest rate (around 4.8%) does not give loans to H1/EAD folks. So I am forced to go with a guy who is accepting H1/EAD, but the rate is 5%.
When you shop around ask for rate quote and that time they won't ask your immigration status. If bank changes the rate based on your immi status, do not go with them.
I bought the house while I was on H1 4 years back (I am still using my H1 and I have an EAD now) and nobody asked me my imm status. I submitted the document at the time of doing paperwork but it did not change my rate. I got the best rate based on my credit from wells fargo.
good luck
In your case Wells Fargo happened to have the cheapest rate and they were also accepting H1.
I am on the look out for a loan currently. The guy with the cheapest rate (around 4.8%) does not give loans to H1/EAD folks. So I am forced to go with a guy who is accepting H1/EAD, but the rate is 5%.
When you shop around ask for rate quote and that time they won't ask your immigration status. If bank changes the rate based on your immi status, do not go with them.
I bought the house while I was on H1 4 years back (I am still using my H1 and I have an EAD now) and nobody asked me my imm status. I submitted the document at the time of doing paperwork but it did not change my rate. I got the best rate based on my credit from wells fargo.
good luck
more...
amitga
04-28 03:21 PM
Eco Factory - Reid: "The Energy Bill is Ready... I don't have an Immigration Bill." (http://www.ecofactory.com/news/reid-energy-bill-ready-i-dont-have-immigration-bill-042810)
hair selena gomez who says dress
Libra
07-15 04:10 PM
Its very simple, they are anti-immigrant channels, dont you know lou dobbs, o'rielly anti-immigrant shows have more ratings, so there is no way they want their viewer change their mind on immigration system. they are surviving on anti-immigrant programs.
All we can do is exposing their lies, and make atleast few of them know most trusted new channels are not so trustable.
I have the same question. If somebody knows please let us know
All we can do is exposing their lies, and make atleast few of them know most trusted new channels are not so trustable.
I have the same question. If somebody knows please let us know
more...
WaitingYaar
01-18 08:54 PM
which category?
hot Selena Gomez at the moment is
paitel
08-14 08:21 PM
My wife completed her BS while on H4.
In Florida person on H4 is regarded as US resident for tuition purposes so, if you attend state university, you will pay (much) lower tuition. I don't know if this applies to other states.
In Florida person on H4 is regarded as US resident for tuition purposes so, if you attend state university, you will pay (much) lower tuition. I don't know if this applies to other states.
more...
house selena gomez kmart clothing
vxg
11-02 02:16 PM
Sent the all the existing I 94's and Passport.
Guys,
my RFE response reached VSC on Oct 31st and online status says
Current Status: Response to request for evidence received, and case processing has resumed.
Anyone with idea on how long approx it will take to get approval. Have to travel by end of Nov and USCIS delay is resulting in really expensive air fare.
Let's keep all of us updated on these RFE on AP.
Guys,
my RFE response reached VSC on Oct 31st and online status says
Current Status: Response to request for evidence received, and case processing has resumed.
Anyone with idea on how long approx it will take to get approval. Have to travel by end of Nov and USCIS delay is resulting in really expensive air fare.
Let's keep all of us updated on these RFE on AP.
tattoo Romance fashion make a
aranya
01-15 10:40 AM
Two things
1] H1b application may not be filed by the beneficiary i.e. you cannot file it. Your employer or his representative (lawyer) has to apply.
2] The lawyer fees may be paid by either the employer or the employee - no USCIS requirments/laws.
1] H1b application may not be filed by the beneficiary i.e. you cannot file it. Your employer or his representative (lawyer) has to apply.
2] The lawyer fees may be paid by either the employer or the employee - no USCIS requirments/laws.
more...
pictures selena gomez who says dress
belmontboy
04-09 05:26 PM
i'll kick start this thread myself :D
i am planning to buy a house, i would appreciate if anybody can suggest some good realtors in socal?
i am planning to buy a house, i would appreciate if anybody can suggest some good realtors in socal?
dresses hair selena gomez dress who says selena gomez who says video dress.
vijayam
09-15 05:34 PM
Thank you for the reply.
I did my Master's here.
And I will also make sure to check if we need a BS or MS for my Job. I sure applied for my job on my Master's basis.
---Vijaya.
I did my Master's here.
And I will also make sure to check if we need a BS or MS for my Job. I sure applied for my job on my Master's basis.
---Vijaya.
more...
makeup Selena Gomez, the adorable
dpp
07-24 01:31 PM
There is no 180 days wait period for derivatives. For you to change jobs, you need to wait 180 days to use AC21, but for the dependents, they can do whatever they want and whenever they want after they receive EAD card. It is like GC for them, but only difference is they need to renew EAD every year unlike GC. Otherthan that it is all fine as long you maintain your AOS status properly.
I just applied I-485 with EAD/AP on July 2nd. my wife also has H1. I am the primary to 485.
Question:
My wants to go for permanent position on EAD. When she will eligible for permanent position? After 180 days or can before?
Please seniors advice on this. because she is going to get contract-to-hire position.
I just applied I-485 with EAD/AP on July 2nd. my wife also has H1. I am the primary to 485.
Question:
My wants to go for permanent position on EAD. When she will eligible for permanent position? After 180 days or can before?
Please seniors advice on this. because she is going to get contract-to-hire position.
girlfriend selena-fashion-zara-designer
apnair2002
05-25 06:25 AM
fax sent
hairstyles Last night Selena Gomez
Jaime
01-30 04:43 PM
Would love any help!! Thanks!!!
walking_dude
01-18 03:25 PM
Having 3 years EAD/AP and ability to refile AOS (in the worst case) is the best workable solution to an economic turndown and lay-off. Having a recapture done will also help many
IV already has this as part of the letters campaign. Everyone worried about recession, lay-off etc. must support IV campaign with full vigor.
IV already has this as part of the letters campaign. Everyone worried about recession, lay-off etc. must support IV campaign with full vigor.
shinjisakaru
05-25 01:26 PM
Fax sent
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario