the_jaguar
09-29 05:44 PM
My I-485 receipt from USCIS does have my priority date listed. In fact, they even say on the receipt that the priority date listed might not reflect the oldest priority date that you might be eligible for.
wallpaper cartoon house with tree
sundarpn
06-21 11:05 PM
My spouse plans to start her Masters program on H4. I am told that she can, at anytime apply for Change of status to F-1. I am myself on H1b.
1. I would like her to continue studies on H4 and change to F-1 via COS only if needed. i.e. as a back up option, in case I loose my H1 status via layoffs etc..). Is this possible?
If her H4 to F-1 COS is filed, should my H1b remain valid till her COS to F-1 is approved? I am told COS can take several months. Thx.
1. I would like her to continue studies on H4 and change to F-1 via COS only if needed. i.e. as a back up option, in case I loose my H1 status via layoffs etc..). Is this possible?
If her H4 to F-1 COS is filed, should my H1b remain valid till her COS to F-1 is approved? I am told COS can take several months. Thx.
summerpolice
05-12 04:40 PM
Hi
Can someone clarify my issue.
I applied for H1-b in 2008(I was in L1 when i applied).My employer never gave me my recipt number and i didnt even knw the status for a while ( though he said he applied without COS).Later he told it was applied with COS.
Later after numberous calls and mail he gave me a recipt number ,but the
status on USCIS website was "Notice Undelivered as of June 2008".
I could never find ,whether it was RFE or Approved status.I called up USCIS they said employer has to call to confirm the status.My employer said he will follow up with USCIS but he never did and he is absconding now .I cant reach him ,no phone,no mails.So i continued on L1.
Since my extension is coming up.I wanted to make sure my status hasnt changed because of this issue.
Has anyone faced this situation? Had that notice (undelivered) been an approval letter ,would that change my status though it was never accepted (Its undelivered as of Jun 2008)
Thanks
Can someone clarify my issue.
I applied for H1-b in 2008(I was in L1 when i applied).My employer never gave me my recipt number and i didnt even knw the status for a while ( though he said he applied without COS).Later he told it was applied with COS.
Later after numberous calls and mail he gave me a recipt number ,but the
status on USCIS website was "Notice Undelivered as of June 2008".
I could never find ,whether it was RFE or Approved status.I called up USCIS they said employer has to call to confirm the status.My employer said he will follow up with USCIS but he never did and he is absconding now .I cant reach him ,no phone,no mails.So i continued on L1.
Since my extension is coming up.I wanted to make sure my status hasnt changed because of this issue.
Has anyone faced this situation? Had that notice (undelivered) been an approval letter ,would that change my status though it was never accepted (Its undelivered as of Jun 2008)
Thanks
2011 is this tree house.
cms01040
01-05 06:15 PM
My husband got into the country through the Mariel port
immigration from Cuba in 1980 hes been in this country since then. Im a
US citizen we are legally married. The problem was that 20 years ago
when he was about to get is residency he got incarcerated and the
process was can canceled by the immigration office. About 4 or 5 years
ago he lost all of his papers he has no ID or any document that proves
his legal status. Which I think is not going to be any help anyways
because he never got a Visa number he did got a an alien number but of course he doesnt remember it so basically he is in paper limbo, because you need an ID to get an ID. He recently got his Cuban passport but now we find out that is basically useless. I been trying to get someone to please explain to me in this case what can we do? It seems that because he is Cuban and enter the country as a refugee almost 30 years ago no one can tell me for sure what will be the procedure in his case.
Please if there anybody that can help I would really appreciated
cms
immigration from Cuba in 1980 hes been in this country since then. Im a
US citizen we are legally married. The problem was that 20 years ago
when he was about to get is residency he got incarcerated and the
process was can canceled by the immigration office. About 4 or 5 years
ago he lost all of his papers he has no ID or any document that proves
his legal status. Which I think is not going to be any help anyways
because he never got a Visa number he did got a an alien number but of course he doesnt remember it so basically he is in paper limbo, because you need an ID to get an ID. He recently got his Cuban passport but now we find out that is basically useless. I been trying to get someone to please explain to me in this case what can we do? It seems that because he is Cuban and enter the country as a refugee almost 30 years ago no one can tell me for sure what will be the procedure in his case.
Please if there anybody that can help I would really appreciated
cms
more...
smuggymba
03-03 10:00 AM
Thanks Kutti.
Digitalosophy
03-23 01:03 PM
Ha nice one
more...
anu_sek
10-13 10:20 PM
Hi, my husband was killed in a road accident. He was on J1 and had very good publications and this happened when we were just wanting to apply for our green card, as he had very good credentials we would have got it without any problems. We had dreams of sending our daughter to best school for her college. Now with life turning upside down, I am enrolled in grad school to work on my phd and will take a while, but with this tragedy being recent dont really know how long its going to take to complete it and how future would be.
I want to know if there is any possibility that I can apply for immigrant visa on humanitarian grounds as it would be very difficult for me to live in India my home country due to social reasons as a widow with a little daughter.
I want to know if there is any possibility that I can apply for immigrant visa on humanitarian grounds as it would be very difficult for me to live in India my home country due to social reasons as a widow with a little daughter.
2010 Pine tree cartoon
dohko
05-06 09:33 AM
If you're waiting for your OPT you're not out of status even if your F1 visa is expired
As long as you have a D/s I94 and a valid I20
As long as you have a D/s I94 and a valid I20
more...
ganeshsha
03-02 09:45 PM
Hi Friends,
I have a question, actually I worked with a for-profit company A for few years and then transferred my H1B to a not-for-profit company B last year. Now can I transfer my H1B to a for-profit company C?
Actually one of my friend told, it is not possible and I can transfer only to the not-for-profit companies as I am currently working with a not-for-profit company B. Is this true?
ganesh
I have a question, actually I worked with a for-profit company A for few years and then transferred my H1B to a not-for-profit company B last year. Now can I transfer my H1B to a for-profit company C?
Actually one of my friend told, it is not possible and I can transfer only to the not-for-profit companies as I am currently working with a not-for-profit company B. Is this true?
ganesh
hair house cartoon trees
sujit_help
02-01 01:16 PM
My PERM was filed in Dec, 2006 and was denied on April, 2007. As per my employer's lawyer it was erroneously denied by DOL. The lawer has received the denial letter but no reason was stated. He was keep on follwing up with DOL but no answers. On Aug 2007, lawyer was followed up again directly with the DOL office in Atlanta , with the liaison at the American Immigration Lawyer's Association and also it was sent to the congressional office. Through Senetor we came to know that there was typo in the date field. The lawer is persuing to get the denal letter again with reason so that we can appeal. But we have 10% chance to get the another deial letter. Now lawer is asking for filling a new PERM. In between I lost 8 months and now I'm running out time. My 6th year is expiring on Sept08. Just incase if we din't get denial letter and file the new PERM on Mrach can we get the 7th year extension ? (We will show all the documents etc for previos denail case and there was no reason in denail letter. PLEASE HELP
more...
ivgclive
10-15 02:35 PM
People who complain about embassys, consulates abroad are assured that despite what country it is, the foreign offices are working in the same way.
hot The Simpsons - Treehouse of
Flip5Media-Chad
03-22 05:26 PM
Here's some past designs-
www.dev.flip5media.com
www.vgmarket.com/site
www.vgmarket.com/pearl/pearl.html
I'll design you anything for $15. Just don't make it tooooo complex. And yes, it's the .psd only.
You can contact me via AIM if interested. Thanks!
www.dev.flip5media.com
www.vgmarket.com/site
www.vgmarket.com/pearl/pearl.html
I'll design you anything for $15. Just don't make it tooooo complex. And yes, it's the .psd only.
You can contact me via AIM if interested. Thanks!
more...
house quot;Iranian House of Cartoonquot;
gconmymind
08-23 01:18 PM
Should I be a little hopeful that my case is being pre-adjudicated?
tattoo living in a tree-house,
Blog Feeds
10-16 04:50 PM
I'm glad to see Immigration Voice weighing in on this one. Under some of the versions of health care reform proposals being considered by Congress, legal immigrants could be excluded for five years before they can access the Medicaid and insurance subsidies despite the fact that they pay taxes, are abiding by all of our laws and are often making critical contributions to the success of this country.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/10/legal-immigrants-could-be-in-limbo-under-health-care-reform-proposals.html)
more...
pictures wretched White House is in
lecter
February 29th, 2004, 09:24 PM
B53,000
300D B 44,000
so the D70's a bit more expensive.
1USD = 39B
300D B 44,000
so the D70's a bit more expensive.
1USD = 39B
dresses Magic Tree House Research
chanduv23
03-20 08:44 PM
I have got an offer from 2 companies for H1 . One is from INFOREEM (NJ based) and other is AFFUEL SYSTEMS (TAMPA/Atlanta based). Can anybody please has any reviews?
If they are consulting companies, you mujst visit sites like www.desicrunch.com and likes of it for more info
If they are consulting companies, you mujst visit sites like www.desicrunch.com and likes of it for more info
more...
makeup and even the tree house in
Bark
03-22 08:57 AM
Hi all. I'm looking for a little help with part 2 of I-485. I've sent off my I-140 and I am hoping to apply adjustment of status concurrently. I wondering which box to fill in part 2. A. looks the closest, it reads: 'an immigrant petition giving me an immediately available immigrant visa number has been approved. (Attach a copy of the approval notice......)' My trouble is this: If my I-140 is approved then my visa number is no problem, it is current for my category/country (outstanding professor/Canada). Since the I-140 is pending, this looks like the wrong box, however, none of the others look even remotely close. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Bark
girlfriend Video of Steve Forbes: Obama
Macaca
07-22 05:33 PM
For Real Drama, Senate Should Engage In a True Filibuster (http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_8/ornstein/19415-1.html) By Norman Ornstein, resident scholar at American Enterprise Institute, July 18, 2007
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
For many Senators, this week will take them back to their college years - they'll pull an all-nighter, but this time with no final exam to follow.
To dramatize Republican obstructionism, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has decided to hold a mini-version of a real, old-time filibuster. In the old days, i.e., the 1950s, a real filibuster meant the Senate would drop everything, bring the place to a screeching halt, haul cots into the corridors and go around the clock with debate until one side would crack - either the intense minority or the frustrated majority. The former would be under pressure from a public that took notice of the obstructionism thanks to the drama of the repeated round-the-clock sessions.
It is a reflection of our times that the most the Senate can stand of such drama is 24 hours, maybe stretched to 48. But it also is a reflection of the dynamic of the Senate this year that Reid feels compelled to try this kind of extraordinary tactic.
This is a very different year, one on a record-shattering pace for cloture votes, one where the threat of filibuster has become routinized in a way we have not seen before. As Congressional Quarterly pointed out last week, we already have had 40 cloture votes in six-plus months; the record for a whole two-year Congress is 61.
For Reid, the past six months have been especially frustrating because the minority Republicans have adopted a tactic of refusing to negotiate time agreements on a wide range of legislation, something normally done in the Senate via unanimous consent, with the two parties setting a structure for debate and amendments. Of course, many of the breakdowns have been on votes related to the Iraq War, the subject of the all-night debate and the overwhelming focus of the 110th Congress. On Iraq, the Republican leaders long ago decided to try to block the Democrats at every turn to negate any edge the majority might have to seize the agenda, force the issue and put President Bush on the defensive.
But the obstructionist tactics have gone well beyond Iraq, to include things such as the 9/11 commission recommendations and the increase in the minimum wage, intelligence authorization, prescription drugs and many other issues.
Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his deputy, Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.), have instead decided to create a very different standard in the Senate than we have seen before, with 60 votes now the norm for nearly all issues, instead of the exception. In our highly polarized environment, where finding the center is a desirable outcome, that is not necessarily a bad thing. But a closer examination of the way this process has worked so far suggests that more often than not, the goal of the Republican leaders is to kill legislation or delay it interminably, not find a middle and bipartisan ground.
If Bush were any stronger, and were genuinely determined to burnish his legacy by enacting legislation in areas such as health, education and the environment, we might see a different dynamic and different outcomes. But the president's embarrassing failure on immigration reform - securing only 12 of 49 Senators from his party for his top domestic priority - has pretty much put the kibosh on a presidentially led bipartisan approach to policy action.
Republican leaders have responded to any criticism of their tactics by accusing Reid and his deputy, Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), of trying to squelch debate and kill off their amendments by filing premature cloture motions, designed to pre-empt the process and foreclose many amendments. There is some truth to this; early on, especially, Reid wanted to get the Senate jump-started and pushed sometimes prematurely to resolve issues.
But the fact is that on many of the issues mentioned above, Reid has been quite willing to allow Republican amendments and quite willing to negotiate a deal with McConnell to move business along. That has not been enough. As Roll Call noted last week, on both the intelligence bill and the Medicare prescription drug measure, Republicans were fundamentally opposed to the underlying bills and wanted simply to kill them.
The problem actually goes beyond the sustained effort to raise the bar routinely to 60 votes. The fact is that obstructionist tactics have been applied successfully to many bills that have far more than 60 Senators supporting them. The most visible issue in this category has been the lobbying and ethics reform bill that passed the Senate early in the year by overwhelming margins.
Every time Reid has moved to appoint conferees to get to the final stages on the issue, a Republican Senator has objected. After months of dispute over who was really behind the blockage, Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina emerged as the bte noire. But Republican leaders have been more than willing to carry DeMint's water to keep that bill from coming up.
The problem Reid faces on this issue is that to supersede the unanimous consent denial, he would have to go through three separate cloture fights, each one allowing substantial sustained debate, including 30 hours worth after cloture is invoked. In the meantime, a badly needed reform is blocked, and the minority can blame the majority for failing to fulfill its promise to reform the culture of corruption. It may work politically, but the institution and the country both suffer along the way.
Is this obstructionism? Yes, indeed - according to none other than Lott. The Minority Whip told Roll Call, "The strategy of being obstructionist can work or fail. For [former Senate Minority Leader Tom] Daschle, it failed. For Reid it succeeded, and so far it's working for us." Lott's point was that a minority party can push as far as it wants until the public blames them for the problem, and so far that has not happened.
The war is a different issue from any other. McConnell's offer to Reid to set the bar at 60 for all amendments related to Iraq, thereby avoiding many of the time-consuming procedural hurdles, is actually a fair one - nothing is going to be done, realistically, to change policy on the war without a bipartisan, 60-vote-plus coalition. But other issues should not be routinely subject to a supermajority hurdle.
What can Reid do? An all-nighter might help a little. But the then-majority Republicans tried the faux-filibuster approach a couple of years ago when they wanted to stop minority Democrats from blocking Bush's judicial nominees, and it went nowhere. The real answer here is probably one Senate Democrats don't want to face: longer hours, fewer recesses and a couple of real filibusters - days and nights and maybe weeks of nonstop, round-the-clock debate, bringing back the cots and bringing the rest of the agenda to a halt to show the implications of the new tactics.
At the moment, I don't see enough battle-hardened veterans in the Senate willing to take on that pain.
hairstyles house cartoon earth, hand,
vinay.shah73
10-24 02:55 AM
I filed I-485 in Jan 2007 under EB-1 in Nebraska Service Center. Got finger-print, EAD, AP in April. No other status update after that. Online case registration shows LUD for April.
- Online processing dates show "Dec 19, 2006" for EB-1 I-485. Any idea when I should expect any updates ? What will be the next steps involved ?
- Any way to find out whether my application is sent to name-check ?
- Anyone else in the same boat ? If you filed around Jan/Feb 2007, please do reply back to this thread, or my email vinay.shah73@gmail.com
Thanks!
- Online processing dates show "Dec 19, 2006" for EB-1 I-485. Any idea when I should expect any updates ? What will be the next steps involved ?
- Any way to find out whether my application is sent to name-check ?
- Anyone else in the same boat ? If you filed around Jan/Feb 2007, please do reply back to this thread, or my email vinay.shah73@gmail.com
Thanks!
Blog Feeds
07-10 08:40 AM
Conservatives for Comprehensive Immigration Reform (yes, there is such a group and, yes, it makes perfect sense for true, small government conservatives), had a strategy call this week. Here's a key comment from the call: Congressman Lincoln Diaz Balart stated, �We�re ready in the House�There is a variety of thinking in both parties on this issue. Republicans have backed off in the Senate. They have not backed off in the House.� His brother, Congressman Mario Diaz Balart continued, �This issue is, how do we get it done? Where we are today. Obama said that in his first 12 months he...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/republican-house-members-were-ready-to-pass-immigration-reform.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/07/republican-house-members-were-ready-to-pass-immigration-reform.html)
rpatel
12-27 02:38 PM
Check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owK5tHjL0aE
I really enjoyed it..its pretty funny and a very nice effort..I am sure the Indian members will especially like it..
And for the record please dont start any tirades against me. My only intention is to share some humour and lighten the mood...I am not after any referral credit or anything like that..and if the admins thinks its inappropriate they are free to delete the thread.
Happy Holidays
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owK5tHjL0aE
I really enjoyed it..its pretty funny and a very nice effort..I am sure the Indian members will especially like it..
And for the record please dont start any tirades against me. My only intention is to share some humour and lighten the mood...I am not after any referral credit or anything like that..and if the admins thinks its inappropriate they are free to delete the thread.
Happy Holidays
No comments:
Post a Comment