aries
12-27 11:01 AM
Hi All,
if the dependent is planning to come back on AP and then start working on EAD, does it mean the primary applicant has to work on EAD or the primary applicant can still continue on H1.
Thanks!
if the dependent is planning to come back on AP and then start working on EAD, does it mean the primary applicant has to work on EAD or the primary applicant can still continue on H1.
Thanks!
wallpaper Quote 17/07
kshitijnt
07-09 01:25 PM
Please advice when to file AC21
1) prior to joining new company
OR
2) Soon after joinng the new company?
Thanks in advance!
If you have resigned from your present job and the employer will cancel I140 or H1. file ASAP
1) prior to joining new company
OR
2) Soon after joinng the new company?
Thanks in advance!
If you have resigned from your present job and the employer will cancel I140 or H1. file ASAP
sands_14
10-17 11:21 AM
I dont remember the docs,it varies with the country u going to.
But yes,its one and same thing if u travel on OPT or on H1,so no worries.Enjoy your trip!
But yes,its one and same thing if u travel on OPT or on H1,so no worries.Enjoy your trip!
2011 hot sad quotes about pain.
frostrated
09-01 03:41 PM
Is it having any advantage towards applying I-485 if getting married in US (H1B and other is on F1).
Has no advantage where you get married.
Has no advantage where you get married.
more...
smehta1
06-05 11:37 PM
http://www.time.com/time/cartoonsoftheweek/0,29489,1625658_1371878,00.html
fromnaija
04-10 10:18 PM
It depends on which service you require at TSC but I know the following fax numbers:
RFE response - 214-962-5428
Expedite EAD - 214-962-2632
RFE response - 214-962-5428
Expedite EAD - 214-962-2632
more...
Macaca
02-17 04:52 PM
Resources
Senators of the 110th Congress (http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm)
Organizational Chart (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/e_one_section_no_teasers/org_chart.htm)
Committees (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committees/d_three_sections_with_teasers/committees_home.htm)
Committee Assignments for the 110th Congress (http://www.senate.gov/general/committee_assignments/assignments.htm)
Legislation & Records (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/g_three_sections_with_teasers/legislative_home.htm)
Active Legislation (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm)
THOMAS (http://thomas.loc.gov/)
Last Major Action (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bssQuery?&Db=110&stepID=S*&stepD=o&stepD1=20070227)
Bills Introduced (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/R?d110:FLD010:+@eq+20070227)
Daily Digest (http://thomas.loc.gov/r110/r110d27fe7.html)
Roll Call Votes (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_110_1.htm)
Legislative Calendar (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/one_item_and_teasers/Senate_leg_calendar_page.htm)
Senate in Session (http://www.senate.gov/visiting/common/generic/Senate_in_session.htm)
Senators of the 110th Congress (http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm)
Organizational Chart (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/e_one_section_no_teasers/org_chart.htm)
Committees (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/committees/d_three_sections_with_teasers/committees_home.htm)
Committee Assignments for the 110th Congress (http://www.senate.gov/general/committee_assignments/assignments.htm)
Legislation & Records (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/g_three_sections_with_teasers/legislative_home.htm)
Active Legislation (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/b_three_sections_with_teasers/active_leg_page.htm)
THOMAS (http://thomas.loc.gov/)
Last Major Action (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bssQuery?&Db=110&stepID=S*&stepD=o&stepD1=20070227)
Bills Introduced (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/R?d110:FLD010:+@eq+20070227)
Daily Digest (http://thomas.loc.gov/r110/r110d27fe7.html)
Roll Call Votes (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/vote_menu_110_1.htm)
Legislative Calendar (http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/one_item_and_teasers/Senate_leg_calendar_page.htm)
Senate in Session (http://www.senate.gov/visiting/common/generic/Senate_in_session.htm)
2010 Posted in: Quotes,The
TexDBoy
09-05 05:12 PM
Where is your I-140 approved from?
more...
Refugee_New
08-21 01:14 PM
I see thread for all other years (2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007). So its my turn to open thread for my year.
Mine is EB2, Feb 2002. Still waiting. I was told that my NC is cleared.
3 SR, 2 letters to Ombudsman, letters to 3 senators, letters to 2 representatives, 2 fax to NSC, 2 letters to NSC Director, 1 infopass, numerous calls to NSC
Recently sent a letter to first lady. Looks like all of them are working together. Nobody wanted to respond.
Please feel free to write your experience if you are 2002 filer.
Mine is EB2, Feb 2002. Still waiting. I was told that my NC is cleared.
3 SR, 2 letters to Ombudsman, letters to 3 senators, letters to 2 representatives, 2 fax to NSC, 2 letters to NSC Director, 1 infopass, numerous calls to NSC
Recently sent a letter to first lady. Looks like all of them are working together. Nobody wanted to respond.
Please feel free to write your experience if you are 2002 filer.
hair ocean quotes
toprasad
03-09 08:02 PM
Background - My wife's immigration timeline
H1-B 01/2000 to 8/2001
Moved to O-3 as dependent due to old 6 yr H1-B rule.
O-3 9/2001 to 5/2006
Stepped out of the US in May 2006
The intention was to get a full 6 yr H1-B (decoupling didn't exist)
Questions while applying for H1-B to reclaim reminder of 6 yrs in H1-B
1) Can she apply for H1-B while she is in India?
2) Can she enter the country as my dependant and work on approved H1-B?
H1-B 01/2000 to 8/2001
Moved to O-3 as dependent due to old 6 yr H1-B rule.
O-3 9/2001 to 5/2006
Stepped out of the US in May 2006
The intention was to get a full 6 yr H1-B (decoupling didn't exist)
Questions while applying for H1-B to reclaim reminder of 6 yrs in H1-B
1) Can she apply for H1-B while she is in India?
2) Can she enter the country as my dependant and work on approved H1-B?
more...
softcrowd
04-09 10:06 PM
Please reply if you have any info.....
hot Quote Comments myspace
Blog Feeds
07-27 03:40 PM
US Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke, the former Governor of Washington state, was recently speaking to the Washington International Trade Association in his home state had some frank words about the impact visa denials and delays are having on US commerce: As we seek to open up markets for American companies abroad, the United States must also acknowledge that she has room to improve when it comes to increasing the secure flow of goods, services and people across our own borders. In particular, the United States often makes it too difficult for foreign company executives to enter here to do...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/secretary-of-commerce-admits-visa-processing-at-consulates-is-hurting-the-country.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/07/secretary-of-commerce-admits-visa-processing-at-consulates-is-hurting-the-country.html)
more...
house From the stars: Quotes for
kirupa
03-24 12:02 AM
Added!
tattoo /457173605/via-quote-book
kosars
09-12 02:36 PM
Hi,
I have applied for I-140 in Oct 2006 and hvn't recd I-140 yet (Nebraska)
My 485/EAD checks got encashed today. My questions is do I need I-140 before FP or EAD card.
thanx
RJ
I donot think you need I140 approved for FP or EAD
I have applied for I-140 in Oct 2006 and hvn't recd I-140 yet (Nebraska)
My 485/EAD checks got encashed today. My questions is do I need I-140 before FP or EAD card.
thanx
RJ
I donot think you need I140 approved for FP or EAD
more...
pictures Love is like the ocean waves,
nitkad
03-15 02:25 PM
Its absolutely useless as it does think that within 60 months the people will get the GC after applying for the I485. I am sure, ut will much more than that.
dresses Quotes~~~~~ 118 - Ocean
SDdesi
04-13 02:20 PM
http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/10/immigration-can-speed-economic-recovery
Mr. Obama might want to consider transferring the authority of setting quotas from Congress to the Labor Department
May be good or bad, depending on how you look at it....we will then be at the mercy of PERM...
If the Labor Department determines that a foreign worker would not displace Americans, that worker should not be barred from entering the country due to an arbitrary quota
This should definitely be high on the agenda.....although its very doubtful if this can ever be implemented.
Mr. Obama might want to consider transferring the authority of setting quotas from Congress to the Labor Department
May be good or bad, depending on how you look at it....we will then be at the mercy of PERM...
If the Labor Department determines that a foreign worker would not displace Americans, that worker should not be barred from entering the country due to an arbitrary quota
This should definitely be high on the agenda.....although its very doubtful if this can ever be implemented.
more...
makeup From Beyond the Blue Ocean,
Macaca
08-05 07:42 AM
A Polarized, and Polarizing, Congress (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/03/AR2007080301949.html) By David S. Broder (davidbroder@washpost.com), August 5, 2007
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
The distinguishing characteristic of this Congress was on vivid display the other day when the House debated a bill to expand the federal program that provides health insurance for children of the working poor.
Even when it is performing a useful service, this Congress manages to look ugly and mean-spirited. So much blood has been spilled, so much bile stockpiled on Capitol Hill, that no good deed goes untarnished.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) is a 10-year-old proven success. Originally a product of bipartisan consensus, passed by a Republican Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, it was one of the last domestic achievements before Monica and impeachment fever seized control.
It is up for renewal this year and suddenly has become a bone of contention. President Bush underfunded it in his budget; the $4.8 billion extra he proposed spending in the next five years would not finance insurance even for all those who are currently being served.
But when the Senate Finance Committee proposed boosting the funding to $35 billion -- financed by a hefty hike in tobacco taxes -- Bush threatened a veto, and he raised the rhetorical stakes by claiming that the measure was a step toward "government health insurance."
That was surprising news to Republican Sens. Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Orrin Hatch of Utah, two staunch conservatives who had joined in sponsoring the Senate bill, which the Senate Finance Committee supported 17 to 4.
But rather than meet the president's unwise challenge with a strong bipartisan alternative, the House Democratic leadership decided to raise the partisan stakes even higher by bringing out a $50 billion bill that not only would expand SCHIP but would also curtail the private Medicare benefit delivery system that Bush favors.
To add insult to injury, House Democratic leaders then took a leaf from the old Republican playbook and brought the swollen bill to the floor with minimal time for debate and denied Republicans any opportunity to offer amendments.
The result was undisguised fury -- and some really ugly exchanges on the floor. The worst, given voice by former speaker Dennis Hastert, a Republican from Illinois, among others, was the charge that the Democrats were opening the program to illegal immigrants. The National Republican Congressional Committee distributed that distortion wholesale across the country in a flurry of news releases playing to the same kind of nativist prejudice that sank the immigration reform bill. In fact, governors of both parties support the certification system included in the bill for assuring that families meet citizenship requirements; the governors know that too many legal residents have been wrongly disqualified because they could not locate their birth certificates.
In the end, the House bill passed on a near-party-line vote, 225 to 204, far short of the margin that would be needed to override the promised Bush veto. That means the program will probably have to be given a temporary renewal before the Sept. 30 deadline, and eventually Democrats and the White House will negotiate an agreement.
So it will go down as one more example of unnecessary conflict. No rational human being could explain why a program that both parties support and both want to continue could ignite such a fight.
But that is Washington in this era of polarized politics. As Congress heads out for its August recess, it has accomplished about as much as is usually the case at this stage. It passed an overdue increase in the minimum wage and an overdue but healthy package of ethics reforms. It moved some routine legislation.
But what the public has seen and heard is mainly the ugly sound of partisan warfare. The Senate let a handful of dissident Republicans highjack the immigration bill. Its Democratic leadership marched up the hill and back down on repeated futile efforts to circumscribe American involvement in Iraq, then shamefully pulled back from a final vote when a constructive Republican alternative to the Bush policy was on offer.
The less-than-vital issue of the firing of eight U.S. attorneys has occupied more time and attention than the threat of a terrorist enclave in Pakistan -- or the unchecked growth of long-term debts that could sink Medicare and Social Security.
And when this Congress had an opportunity to take a relatively simple, incremental step to extend health insurance to a vulnerable group, the members managed to make a mess of it.
It's no wonder the approval ratings of Congress are so dismal.
girlfriend ocean freight transportation
vineet_mittal
08-31 12:14 PM
My I-140 is approved. And we are planning to change my wife's status from H4 to F1 student. Is it ok to do that ? I heard that it will be problematic for my wife to go back on Green path. Please advise.
hairstyles ocean quotes famous ocean
siddhu98
07-23 12:43 PM
My daughter (5 yrs) is an US citizen and having passport valid until end of Sep 2009 and having POI card for 15 years from Indian consulate.
Now I am planning to take her to India for 3 weeks from Aug 1st week. The travel agents says her passport should have at least 6 months valid from the date of date of the return (Aug 4th week). Is that true/correct? Can she enter here in USA after her India visit with 20 days left in the passport validity?
I will be using my AP though I maintain H1B status (I-797) and work for the same employer.
Thanks for your reply.
Now I am planning to take her to India for 3 weeks from Aug 1st week. The travel agents says her passport should have at least 6 months valid from the date of date of the return (Aug 4th week). Is that true/correct? Can she enter here in USA after her India visit with 20 days left in the passport validity?
I will be using my AP though I maintain H1B status (I-797) and work for the same employer.
Thanks for your reply.
thomachan72
11-09 08:52 AM
According to the mathew ohio website. there is apparently a very hot legal battle going on between the DHS and a happless immigrant who had been arested for out of status presence. The immigrant was on an H1b and had filed an application in a timely manner and was awaiting decision on his application when the DHS official arrested him and tried to deport him. Please post more information on this issue if anybody is aware of it. His I-94 expired, however, his petition for H1b extension was pending!!!!:o:o:o
vijju123
03-22 12:47 AM
My Priority date is 1/9/2008. I tried to update this in my profile on IV but didn't know which field to populate. Please help.
No comments:
Post a Comment