Ramba
10-08 08:14 PM
Once a person accepts employment using EAD, he/she gives up non-immigrant status. Next time, when he/she applies EAD renewal he/she must write the present "immigration status" in the renewal from. That time he/she can not write "H4", while working on EAD.
Similarly, when working on EAD, you can not apply for H4 extension. All your" A" number indicates what status you are in to USCIS.
Similarly, when working on EAD, you can not apply for H4 extension. All your" A" number indicates what status you are in to USCIS.
wallpaper 2009 Mercedes-Benz CLS-Class
hopefulgc
05-12 11:10 PM
newuser,
If you are ever in florida.. jacksonville area... give me a shout.
For this kinda support, i totally owe you a drink at buffalo wild wings.
I am in for it. I am ready to put 2K if members are going to come forward
If you are ever in florida.. jacksonville area... give me a shout.
For this kinda support, i totally owe you a drink at buffalo wild wings.
I am in for it. I am ready to put 2K if members are going to come forward
a1b2c3
07-24 11:13 PM
wtf!
2011 The CLS offers optional heated
voldemar
03-19 09:33 AM
I-140 withdrawal is not mandatory but it's good for both - employer and employee. Check other threads when approved I-140 was revoked on Ability to Pay issue when USCIS added together all pending I-485 for the company. If you use AC21 to change employer and previous employer withdraw approved I-140 you are safe to go.
more...
raydon
09-17 09:50 AM
If CNN drops Lou that will not pass CIR or recapture. There are so much Lou Dobbs are there in USA. It is a waste of time.
Exactly. I was of the same opinion. CNN dumping a pathetic whiny loser like Lou Dobbs might give temporary satisfaction, but it has no positive effect on EB immigration. Plus there are a dozen other idiots who might be ready to replace him as the crazy-in-chief on that stupid talk show. Why even bother?
Forget worrying about about CNN and Lou Dobbs. They are NOBODY and of no significance for the quest for immigration reform.
Exactly. I was of the same opinion. CNN dumping a pathetic whiny loser like Lou Dobbs might give temporary satisfaction, but it has no positive effect on EB immigration. Plus there are a dozen other idiots who might be ready to replace him as the crazy-in-chief on that stupid talk show. Why even bother?
Forget worrying about about CNN and Lou Dobbs. They are NOBODY and of no significance for the quest for immigration reform.
sush
10-03 06:46 PM
The latest one I see is 07/28/2007
more...
purplehazea
06-11 01:42 PM
sorry to burst your bubble sands. I am just repeating what NPR, NYT, Washington Post and any reputed national newspaper has said about the Prez.
2010 Used 2009 Mercedes-Benz CLS
pkv
01-07 06:13 PM
Thanks Sanjay02.
Another follow-up question.. I'm planning to file for EAD, which passport number should I use in this form ?
If I use new one(which is valid), isn't it in contra with AOS application?
Has anyone faced this situation ?
Another follow-up question.. I'm planning to file for EAD, which passport number should I use in this form ?
If I use new one(which is valid), isn't it in contra with AOS application?
Has anyone faced this situation ?
more...
sanjay02
01-07 06:03 PM
You dont need to inform USCIS about new passport, but make sure you carry your old as well as new passport, dont discard the old passport as yet.
hair 2009 Mercedes Benz CLS Grand
ryan
02-03 05:33 PM
Hi Ryan,
Do you know anyone have done that? Like you personally or anyone you know? Have they got I-140? I read that its possible to get PERM Labor done under EB-2, but USCIS gives real hard time at I-140 stage.
Appreciate your help!
Thank you
The lawyers had the Ozzie degree, as well as the US CPA evaluated via an accredited foreign degree evaluator. This was back in the summer of �06. Again, invest a few extra $$ and hire a good lawyer. They can best explain the process / prerequisites to you.
Do you know anyone have done that? Like you personally or anyone you know? Have they got I-140? I read that its possible to get PERM Labor done under EB-2, but USCIS gives real hard time at I-140 stage.
Appreciate your help!
Thank you
The lawyers had the Ozzie degree, as well as the US CPA evaluated via an accredited foreign degree evaluator. This was back in the summer of �06. Again, invest a few extra $$ and hire a good lawyer. They can best explain the process / prerequisites to you.
more...
chanduv23
06-29 08:08 PM
Follow directions in your interview letter with list of things to take. Have all the originals and photocopies. If your case is straight forward , I dont think you need an attorney or else if you think you need an attorney find a local person in your area who can accompany you.
I had an interview last Feb 2009, my case was pre-adjucated. My PD is 2005.
Did you get the interview letter after preadjudication or was it a part of pre adjudication process?
I had an interview last Feb 2009, my case was pre-adjucated. My PD is 2005.
Did you get the interview letter after preadjudication or was it a part of pre adjudication process?
hot 2009 Mercedes Benz Cls Grand
yagw
01-26 12:57 AM
Laurie A. Bonilla
Address: Suite 180
800 El Camino Real West
Mountain View, CA 94040-2567
Phone: (650)903-2232
Fax: (650)903-2239
Address: Suite 180
800 El Camino Real West
Mountain View, CA 94040-2567
Phone: (650)903-2232
Fax: (650)903-2239
more...
house 2009 Mercedes-Benz CLS
chanduv23
08-01 09:49 AM
Please note the reponse I got from service center to a query sent by the senators office
""
The scheduling of the biometrics is not based on the FBI fingerprints or name check being clearedfirst. ""
All waiting for FP leave no stone unturned, call, take infopass, etc
Thanks
I took infopass last week in NYC and the officer told me she will contact the TSC office and get it going and gave us a document signed by her stating the same. She asked us to come back in 45 days if nothing happens.
I doubt anything will happen, I am sure I will go back in 45 days and at that time they will say, you are not current anymore or some other reason.
""
The scheduling of the biometrics is not based on the FBI fingerprints or name check being clearedfirst. ""
All waiting for FP leave no stone unturned, call, take infopass, etc
Thanks
I took infopass last week in NYC and the officer told me she will contact the TSC office and get it going and gave us a document signed by her stating the same. She asked us to come back in 45 days if nothing happens.
I doubt anything will happen, I am sure I will go back in 45 days and at that time they will say, you are not current anymore or some other reason.
tattoo 2009 Mercedes-Benz CLS Grand
Jaime
09-04 10:46 AM
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&taxonomyName=outsourcing&articleId=9033819&taxonomyId=72&intsrc=kc_feat
more...
pictures Mercedes-Benz CLS 350, 280
ItIsNotFunny
12-04 04:39 PM
Hope all is well there - I fly in there in 2 days.
It was more scare than reality. Security forces are searching....
It was more scare than reality. Security forces are searching....
dresses на новия Mercedes-Benz CLS
eb3_nepa
10-13 03:18 PM
Just Kidding - as long as you are wearing decent clothes no one should reject your visa (which otherwise should have been approved) for wearing a jeans or for not wearing formal dress.
But when someone created a thread for this - let me share "one dress" people shouldn't wear.- this is something you would want to avoid, this was told to me 9yrs back when i first came to this country and appeared for Interview first time.
That dress is - "Red Shirt"
Hope this helps !
Are you serious or kidding?
But when someone created a thread for this - let me share "one dress" people shouldn't wear.- this is something you would want to avoid, this was told to me 9yrs back when i first came to this country and appeared for Interview first time.
That dress is - "Red Shirt"
Hope this helps !
Are you serious or kidding?
more...
makeup 2009 Mercedes Benz CLS63 AMG
vinzak
01-20 04:14 PM
I have observed that typically after becoming great, have a tendency to hide his/her EB3 roots. I mean, who'll hire you as a CEO or rocket scientist if they knew you used to be an EB3.
Obama's father was a Kenyan EB3, but Obama insists his father was an EB2. The labor certification that the white house has put out for Barack Obama is clearly a fake.
It's sad but true, America still judges you not by the content of your character but the color of your labor certification.
I propose that EB3s append "EB3" to their name (like Ganesh Teesravarg ME(Comp Sci.), EB3) so that they get more visibility, and ppl realize they live among us, and with some help can actually be productive members of society.
Obama's father was a Kenyan EB3, but Obama insists his father was an EB2. The labor certification that the white house has put out for Barack Obama is clearly a fake.
It's sad but true, America still judges you not by the content of your character but the color of your labor certification.
I propose that EB3s append "EB3" to their name (like Ganesh Teesravarg ME(Comp Sci.), EB3) so that they get more visibility, and ppl realize they live among us, and with some help can actually be productive members of society.
girlfriend The 2009 Mercedes-Benz CLS
purgan
11-09 11:09 AM
Now that the restrictionists blew the election for the Republicans, they're desperately trying to rally their remaining troops and keep up their morale using immigration scare tactics....
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
If the Dems could vote against HR 4437 and for S 2611 in an election year and still win the majority, whose going to care for this piece of S#*t?
Another interesting observation: Its back to being called a Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty....not the Reid-Kennedy Amnesty...
========
National Review
"Interesting Opportunities"
Are amnesty and open borders in our future?
By Mark Krikorian
Before election night was even over, White House spokesman Tony Snow said the Democratic takeover of the House presented “interesting opportunities,” including a chance to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” — i.e., the president’s plan for an illegal-alien amnesty and enormous increases in legal immigration, which failed only because of House Republican opposition..
At his press conference Wednesday, the president repeated this sentiment, citing immigration as “vital issue … where I believe we can find some common ground with the Democrats.”
Will the president and the Democrats get their way with the new lineup next year?
Nope.
That’s not to say the amnesty crowd isn’t hoping for it. Tamar Jacoby, the tireless amnesty supporter at the otherwise conservative Manhattan Institute, in a recent piece in Foreign Affairs eagerly anticipated a Republican defeat, “The political stars will realign, perhaps sooner than anyone expects, and when they do, Congress will return to the task it has been wrestling with: how to translate the emerging consensus into legislation to repair the nation's broken immigration system.”
In Newsweek, Fareed Zakaria shares Jacoby’s cluelessness about Flyover Land: “The great obstacle to immigration reform has been a noisy minority. … Come Tuesday, the party will be over. CNN’s Lou Dobbs and his angry band of xenophobes will continue to rail, but a new Congress, with fewer Republicans and no impending primary elections, would make the climate much less vulnerable to the tyranny of the minority.”
And fellow immigration enthusiast Fred Barnes earlier this week blamed the coming Republican defeat in part on the failure to pass an amnesty and increase legal immigration: “But imagine if Republicans had agreed on a compromise and enacted a ‘comprehensive’ — Mr. Bush’s word — immigration bill, dealing with both legal and illegal immigrants. They’d be justifiably basking in their accomplishment. The American public, except for nativist diehards, would be thrilled.”
“Emerging consensus”? “Nativist diehards”? Jacoby and her fellow-travelers seem to actually believe the results from her hilariously skewed polling questions, and those of the mainstream media, all larded with pro-amnesty codewords like “comprehensive reform” and “earned legalization,” and offering respondents the false choice of mass deportations or amnesty.
More responsible polling employing neutral language (avoiding accurate but potentially provocative terminology like “amnesty” and “illegal alien”) finds something very different. In a recent national survey by Kellyanne Conway, when told the level of immigration, 68 percent of likely voters said it was too high and only 2 percent said it was too low. Also, when offered the full range of choices of what to do about the existing illegal population, voters rejected both the extremes of legalization (“amnesty” to you and me) and mass deportations; instead, they preferred the approach of this year’s House bill, which sought attrition of the illegal population through consistent immigration law enforcement. Finally, three fourths of likely voters agreed that we have an illegal immigration problem because past enforcement efforts have been “grossly inadequate,” as opposed to the open-borders crowd’s contention that illegal immigration is caused by overly restrictive immigration rules.
Nor do the results of Tuesday’s balloting bear out the enthusiasts’ claims of a mandate for amnesty. “The test,” Fred Barnes writes, “was in Arizona, where two of the noisiest border hawks, Representatives J.D. Hayworth and Randy Graf, lost House seats.” But while these two somewhat strident voices were defeated (Hayworth voted against the House immigration-enforcement bill because it wasn’t tough enough), the very same voters approved four immigration-related ballot measures by huge margins, to deny bail to illegal aliens, bar illegals from winning punitive damages, bar illegals from receiving state subsidies for education and child care, and declare English the state’s official language.
More broadly, this was obviously a very bad year for Republicans, leading to the defeat of both enforcement supporters — like John Hostettler (career grade of A- from the pro-control lobbying group Americans for Better Immigration) and Charles Taylor (A) — as well as amnesty promoters, like Mike DeWine (D) and Lincoln Chafee (F). Likewise, the winners included both prominent hawks — Tancredo (A) and Bilbray (A+) — and doves — Lugar (D-), for instance, and probably Heather Wilson (D).
What’s more, if legalizing illegals is so widely supported by the electorate, how come no Democrats campaigned on it? Not all were as tough as Brad Ellsworth, the Indiana sheriff who defeated House Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Hostettler, or John Spratt of South Carolina, whose immigration web pages might as well have been written by Tom Tancredo. But even those nominally committed to “comprehensive” reform stressed enforcement as job one. And the national party’s “Six for 06” rip-off of the Contract with America said not a word about immigration reform, “comprehensive” or otherwise.
The only exception to this “Whatever you do, don’t mention the amnesty” approach appears to have been Jim Pederson, the Democrat who challenged Sen. Jon Kyl (a grade of B) by touting a Bush-McCain-Kennedy-style amnesty and foreign-worker program and even praised the 1986 amnesty, which pretty much everyone now agrees was a catastrophe.
Pederson lost.
Speaker Pelosi has a single mission for the next two years — to get her majority reelected in 2008. She may be a loony leftist (F- on immigration), but she and Rahm Emanuel (F) seem to be serious about trying to create a bigger tent in order to keep power, and adopting the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty would torpedo those efforts. Sure, it’s likely that they’ll try to move piecemeal amnesties like the DREAM Act (HR 5131 in the current Congress), or increase H-1B visas (the indentured-servitude program for low-wage Indian computer programmers). They might also push the AgJobs bill, which is a sizable amnesty limited to illegal-alien farmworkers. None of these measures is a good idea, and Republicans might still be able to delay or kill them, but they aren’t the “comprehensive” disaster the president and the Democrats really want.
Any mass-amnesty and worker-importation scheme would take a while to get started, and its effects would begin showing up in the newspapers and in people’s workplaces right about the time the next election season gets under way. And despite the sophistries of open-borders lobbyists, Nancy Pelosi knows perfectly well that this would be bad news for those who supported it.
—* Mark Krikorian is executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies and an NRO contributor.
hairstyles на новия Mercedes-Benz CLS
ryan
02-03 05:33 PM
Hi Ryan,
Do you know anyone have done that? Like you personally or anyone you know? Have they got I-140? I read that its possible to get PERM Labor done under EB-2, but USCIS gives real hard time at I-140 stage.
Appreciate your help!
Thank you
The lawyers had the Ozzie degree, as well as the US CPA evaluated via an accredited foreign degree evaluator. This was back in the summer of �06. Again, invest a few extra $$ and hire a good lawyer. They can best explain the process / prerequisites to you.
Do you know anyone have done that? Like you personally or anyone you know? Have they got I-140? I read that its possible to get PERM Labor done under EB-2, but USCIS gives real hard time at I-140 stage.
Appreciate your help!
Thank you
The lawyers had the Ozzie degree, as well as the US CPA evaluated via an accredited foreign degree evaluator. This was back in the summer of �06. Again, invest a few extra $$ and hire a good lawyer. They can best explain the process / prerequisites to you.
Ann Ruben
05-13 11:56 AM
The US branch of your employer should consider filing an H-1B for you. The quota has not yet been used up for this fiscal year, and if it is approved, you would have the certainty that you could begin work in the US on October 1, 2009.
It is very possible that the appeal would not be decided before Oct. 1st, and the odds of the AAO reversing the denial are generally not good.
You might also want to consider whether you might be elligible for L-1A status.
It is very possible that the appeal would not be decided before Oct. 1st, and the odds of the AAO reversing the denial are generally not good.
You might also want to consider whether you might be elligible for L-1A status.
basav
08-03 03:20 PM
I came to US in March 2007 on L1B, mean time applied for H1b during April 2008 which got approved with COS effective from Oct 1 2008,
I could not work on H1b for some reasons, continued work on L1 until end of may 09 , went back to india during last week of May 2009 and returned in a month time (last week of June 09) with same L1 visa,
Now I have a valid I94 fo L1 until Feb 2010, also H1B I94 says valid until 2011 which I assume is no more valid due to re-entry on L1 n offcourse never having worked on H1b till date.
Now I would like to take up H1B in a month time, following are my questions
1. I assume that my employer need to apply for COS from L1-H1 now (form I-539) correct me if iam wrong,also is it legal to work while COS approval is in progress?
2. Is there a premium processing for COS? to make sure I get approval first and then start working,how long does it take to process premium and what is the typical time frame for normal one?
3. My family is back in India, are they legal to travel during my COS being in progress with necessary stamping ? This is in case iam legal to work while COS is in progress, or
you recommend me getting them before COS is initiated with there L2 visa n then apply COS for them too ? Risk here is if COS is not approved for some reasons everyone have to leave !
I could not work on H1b for some reasons, continued work on L1 until end of may 09 , went back to india during last week of May 2009 and returned in a month time (last week of June 09) with same L1 visa,
Now I have a valid I94 fo L1 until Feb 2010, also H1B I94 says valid until 2011 which I assume is no more valid due to re-entry on L1 n offcourse never having worked on H1b till date.
Now I would like to take up H1B in a month time, following are my questions
1. I assume that my employer need to apply for COS from L1-H1 now (form I-539) correct me if iam wrong,also is it legal to work while COS approval is in progress?
2. Is there a premium processing for COS? to make sure I get approval first and then start working,how long does it take to process premium and what is the typical time frame for normal one?
3. My family is back in India, are they legal to travel during my COS being in progress with necessary stamping ? This is in case iam legal to work while COS is in progress, or
you recommend me getting them before COS is initiated with there L2 visa n then apply COS for them too ? Risk here is if COS is not approved for some reasons everyone have to leave !
No comments:
Post a Comment