svr_76
01-04 11:46 PM
Hi,
I am a July 2007 filer (EB3 India). In the coming weeks, my employer is opening up senior position in different states and has encouraged existing employees to apply.
If my employer is open to offering me a job for the new position, (and process a EB2 PERM/I-140 for the new position) what would be my option with the existing I-485.
Is it recommended to keep the existing I-485 as is an file a new one? Or should the existing one be updated with the new I-140 (EB2) when that gets approved? How does it affect AC21 portability if existing I-485 is updated.
I am a July 2007 filer (EB3 India). In the coming weeks, my employer is opening up senior position in different states and has encouraged existing employees to apply.
If my employer is open to offering me a job for the new position, (and process a EB2 PERM/I-140 for the new position) what would be my option with the existing I-485.
Is it recommended to keep the existing I-485 as is an file a new one? Or should the existing one be updated with the new I-140 (EB2) when that gets approved? How does it affect AC21 portability if existing I-485 is updated.
wallpaper More Dollar Store Crafts
raja2122
09-25 09:54 PM
Recently i have joined a new employer after my H1 transfer has been applied, today i have recieved approval notice and its approved until October 15 2007,
were has my previous h1 was valid until October 2008. Please help how should i proceed ?
were has my previous h1 was valid until October 2008. Please help how should i proceed ?
tnite
12-05 03:32 PM
I am July 2nd filer and got EAD approved.
My 485 notice has Received Date as July 19th 2007 and Notice Date as October 17th 2007.
Do i need to calculate 180 days from July 19th 2007 OR Oct 17th 2007 if i want to change the jobs?
July 19th..It's always the Receipt date
My 485 notice has Received Date as July 19th 2007 and Notice Date as October 17th 2007.
Do i need to calculate 180 days from July 19th 2007 OR Oct 17th 2007 if i want to change the jobs?
July 19th..It's always the Receipt date
2011 Dollar Store Bieber amp; The Hot
RadioactveChimp
05-01 10:04 PM
haha nice man. a few things though
1) i don't like how the sort of "radiation" coming from his face stops abruptly
2) it looks like you were going to put "1.00" but forgot the ".", it has a weird spacing
-Dean
1) i don't like how the sort of "radiation" coming from his face stops abruptly
2) it looks like you were going to put "1.00" but forgot the ".", it has a weird spacing
-Dean
more...
pamposh
08-05 02:19 PM
I sent my application to vermont based on the USCIS answering system on June 30th that folks with approved I-140s should send 485 applications to the center where it was approved. Any ideas, if there is a problem with that and if the app gets transferred how much time it will take.
anyone else in the same boat?
anyone else in the same boat?
Blog Feeds
10-09 07:30 AM
Opponents of Arizona's SB1070 immigration law scored another victory in the courts yesterday. In the case of Friendly House v. Whiting, the court overruled a motion to dismiss the case challenging the law. The judge noted that "Racial discrimination was a motivating factor for [S.B.] 1070�s enactment" which establishes a legitimate constitutional challenge to the law. While this is only the opening round in the case, it does suggest that the defenders of the law will have a tough time convincing the judge that the law is constitutional. 10-1061-447 -
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/10/arizona-loses-another-battle-in-the-courts.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/10/arizona-loses-another-battle-in-the-courts.html)
more...
smuggymba
01-19 03:48 PM
GC is for future job, is your PERM was not suspended, you can continue with the same application.
If you're on H1-B - YES - a transfer is required to work for company A becuase you resigned and left and technically company B owns your H1-B.
If you're on H1-B - YES - a transfer is required to work for company A becuase you resigned and left and technically company B owns your H1-B.
2010 BRAND NEW VARIETY STORE
bandaru9989
08-14 09:18 PM
I have a last pay check through an Employer A of August 1, 2008. Earlier before leaving Employer A I filed a H1 transfer to a new employer B and that got approved by USCIS but I didn't start working with Employer B. Now I am getting a new offer from Employer C which is better than Employer B. Attorney of Employer C says that he can file for a transfer through company A as the pay check is less than two weeks.
Now my problem is I not sure whether my transfer from A to C would be successfull or not?
Another thing I have not informed Employer B that I will not be joining him, Do I have to pay him all the H1 transfer fees?
Now my problem is I not sure whether my transfer from A to C would be successfull or not?
Another thing I have not informed Employer B that I will not be joining him, Do I have to pay him all the H1 transfer fees?
more...
admin
02-03 02:19 PM
Today, I heard back from a senator and a congressman from New Jersey regarding the webfaxes that I had sent them. Here are a few things that I learnt
The associate in the Senator's office was not aware of this issue and the one in the congressman was only partially aware of it. If this is the situation of the associates who look after immigration with the lawmakers in NJ, where there are thousands of EB-GC aspirants, the situation might much worse in other states.
The associates in the lawmaker's office do take the effort to read through the faxes, thus making it effective to bring our issues to their attention.
Our WebFax application is working fine. Previously I never got replies to my web faxes. What might have helped is the fact that the web fax did have my complete contact information. This makes it more trustworthy in their eyes.
So I request all of you to send out WebFaxes to your lawmakers. It is free for you and takes only a couple of minutes. Once you have sent it, urge your friends also to do the same.
Stand up and be heard.
The associate in the Senator's office was not aware of this issue and the one in the congressman was only partially aware of it. If this is the situation of the associates who look after immigration with the lawmakers in NJ, where there are thousands of EB-GC aspirants, the situation might much worse in other states.
The associates in the lawmaker's office do take the effort to read through the faxes, thus making it effective to bring our issues to their attention.
Our WebFax application is working fine. Previously I never got replies to my web faxes. What might have helped is the fact that the web fax did have my complete contact information. This makes it more trustworthy in their eyes.
So I request all of you to send out WebFaxes to your lawmakers. It is free for you and takes only a couple of minutes. Once you have sent it, urge your friends also to do the same.
Stand up and be heard.
hair Makeover a dollar store
ciber.couger
07-15 11:54 AM
I sign it twise one for me and one for my wife, but signature numbers didn't change :confused:
more...
omega
06-20 11:16 AM
Hi,
I know this is forum is not the correct place to discuss this topic. But I am posting this because some members of the forum must have already faced ths issue.
I ahve a one month old newborn. We are planning to go to India for vacation end of July. I have to apply for my baby's US passport. But she has not received her SSN. The instuction says that SSN is not mandatory but IRS can fine you if you dont disclose that information. I tries to contact SSN office, IRS office and Passport Office. Each one will point to the other Agency. So not sure what what to do. Anyone who was in the same boat, please let me know whether there are any issues with applying for passport without SSN number.
Thanks
I know this is forum is not the correct place to discuss this topic. But I am posting this because some members of the forum must have already faced ths issue.
I ahve a one month old newborn. We are planning to go to India for vacation end of July. I have to apply for my baby's US passport. But she has not received her SSN. The instuction says that SSN is not mandatory but IRS can fine you if you dont disclose that information. I tries to contact SSN office, IRS office and Passport Office. Each one will point to the other Agency. So not sure what what to do. Anyone who was in the same boat, please let me know whether there are any issues with applying for passport without SSN number.
Thanks
hot with dollar-store finds.
Anil777
04-14 11:09 PM
Hello Everyone,
My wife is trying to process visitor Visa for her parents and she has a problem with her mothers name in the Passport as it reads just the short name instead of her Full name.
I'm wondering if the Affidavit would be sufficient while going for Visa or would this still be a problem?
If affidavit is sufficient, can someone please kindly share the sample affidavit if you have one?
Appreciate your immediate response...!
Thanks
Anil
My wife is trying to process visitor Visa for her parents and she has a problem with her mothers name in the Passport as it reads just the short name instead of her Full name.
I'm wondering if the Affidavit would be sufficient while going for Visa or would this still be a problem?
If affidavit is sufficient, can someone please kindly share the sample affidavit if you have one?
Appreciate your immediate response...!
Thanks
Anil
more...
house shooting at dollar store
ilyaslamasse
03-11 05:09 PM
In Kirupa's tutorial about that rotating square, we eventually export our animation as a swf. Isn't there a way to export it as a fla that we can manipulate afterwards ??
pom 0] , totally new to Swift.
pom 0] , totally new to Swift.
tattoo Symak Sales - Dollar Store
cvt123
06-28 08:22 PM
My manager got an email from USCIS saying my I140 is approved and they will mail the approval notice. Online case status show that approval notice emailed. But we haven't received any emails about the approval notice. Do USCIS sent paper approval notices??
pl. reply.
CVT
pl. reply.
CVT
more...
pictures Big Ass Book of Crafts
akhilmahajan
07-09 11:19 AM
I am in boston and can definitely join...........
dresses Dollar Store Crafts is a
sameerguptha
08-06 10:37 PM
OPT Start Date: Jan 2009
OPT End Date: May 2011
Comp A (A Consulting Firm)applied for H1-B in April 2009 thru consular Processing and got approved. I worked for Client X in the month of April but lost my job in a week itself.(thus I dont have any pay Stubs from Comp A)Since Comp A was not able to find me a job. I found A full time job in Comp B in June 2009 , I somehow convinced Comp B to hire me as a contractor as I already have my H1-B approved thru Comp A. Thus from july 2010 I started working for Comp A again as my employer and Comp B as its Client. I am planning to go for VISA stamping in Dec 2010. My Question is
1) If they Ask for my Tax Returns and W2 for 2009 what should I answer as I just have my W2 frm Comp B
2) would there be a question of something like why havent I've been working for Comp A Since my H1 approval.
Please advice. I appreciate any kind of answer
OPT End Date: May 2011
Comp A (A Consulting Firm)applied for H1-B in April 2009 thru consular Processing and got approved. I worked for Client X in the month of April but lost my job in a week itself.(thus I dont have any pay Stubs from Comp A)Since Comp A was not able to find me a job. I found A full time job in Comp B in June 2009 , I somehow convinced Comp B to hire me as a contractor as I already have my H1-B approved thru Comp A. Thus from july 2010 I started working for Comp A again as my employer and Comp B as its Client. I am planning to go for VISA stamping in Dec 2010. My Question is
1) If they Ask for my Tax Returns and W2 for 2009 what should I answer as I just have my W2 frm Comp B
2) would there be a question of something like why havent I've been working for Comp A Since my H1 approval.
Please advice. I appreciate any kind of answer
more...
makeup Download Dollar Store Stencil
lobstars
04-06 05:02 AM
no I don't think there is, I could be wrong though so don't hold me to it :)
girlfriend and the Dollar Store.
Macaca
11-09 04:54 PM
A Failure to Lead (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010843) The Democratic Congress is more interested in acting out than in taking positive action BY KARL ROVE | Wall Street Journal, November 9, 2007
Mr. Rove is a former adviser to President George W. Bush.
This week is the one-year anniversary of Democrats winning Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably aren't in a celebrating mood. The goodwill they enjoyed after their victory is gone. Their bright campaign promises are unfulfilled. Democratic leadership is in disarray. And Congress's approval rating has fallen to its lowest point in history.
The problems the Democrats are now experiencing begin with the federal budget. Or rather, the lack of one. In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better. Instead, they did worse. The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill. It's been at least 20 years since Congress has gone this late in passing any appropriation bills, an indication of the mess the Pelosi-Reid Congress is now in.
Even worse, the Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. And the opening wedge of this binge is $22 billion more in spending proposed for the coming year. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a "relatively small" difference.
Let's also be clear about what it means to roll back the president's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as the Democrats want to do. Every income-tax payer will pay more as all tax rates rise. Families will pay $500 more per child as they lose the child tax credit. Taxes on small businesses would go up by an average of about $4,000. Retirees will pay higher taxes on investment retirement income. And now we have the $1 trillion tax increase proposed as "tax reform" by the Democrats' chief tax writer last month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failing to pass a budget, proposing a huge spike in federal spending and offering the biggest tax increase in history are not the only hallmarks of this Democratic Congress.
Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq by the surge, diminished the efforts of our military, and wasted precious time with failed attempts to force an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. They continue to try to implement this course, which would lead to chaos in the region, the creation of a possible terror state with the third largest oil reserves in the world, and a major propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden as well as for Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.
After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. For 19 Senate Democrats, this was simply a bridge too far, so they voted against their own leadership's proposal. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members. Now the party's leaders are stalling an emergency supplemental bill with funding for body armor, bullets and mine-resistant vehicles.
After pledging a "Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to protect our people from terrorism," Democrats have refused to make permanent reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the Director of National Intelligence said were needed to close "critical gaps in our intelligence capability." Their presidential candidates fell all over each other in a recent debate to pledge an end to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Then Senate Democratic leaders, thinking there was an opening for political advantage, slow-walked the confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general. It's obvious that this is a man who knows the important role the Justice Department plays in the war on terror. Delaying his confirmation is only making it harder to prosecute the war.
Democrats promised "civility and bipartisanship." Instead, they stiff-armed their Republican colleagues, refused to include them in budget negotiations between the two houses, and have launched more than 400 investigations and made more than 675 requests for documents, interviews or testimony. They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points. Instead, it left them looking cynical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences.
Democrats had a moment after the 2006 election, but now that moment has passed. They've squandered it. They have demonstrated both the inability and unwillingness to govern. Instead, after more than a decade in the congressional minority, they reflexively look for short-term partisan advantage and attempt to appease the party's most strident fringe. Now that Democrats have the reins of congressional power, their true colors are coming out and the public doesn't like what it sees.
The Democratic victory in 2006 was narrow. They won the House by 85,961 votes out of over 80 million cast and the Senate by a mere 3,562 out of over 62 million cast. A party that wins control by that narrow margin can quickly see its fortunes reversed when it fails to act responsibly, fails to fulfill its promises, and fails to lead.
Mr. Rove is a former adviser to President George W. Bush.
This week is the one-year anniversary of Democrats winning Congress. But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid probably aren't in a celebrating mood. The goodwill they enjoyed after their victory is gone. Their bright campaign promises are unfulfilled. Democratic leadership is in disarray. And Congress's approval rating has fallen to its lowest point in history.
The problems the Democrats are now experiencing begin with the federal budget. Or rather, the lack of one. In 2006, Democrats criticized Congress for dragging its feet on the budget and pledged that they would do better. Instead, they did worse. The new fiscal year started Oct. 1--five weeks ago--but Democrats have yet to send the president a single annual appropriations bill. It's been at least 20 years since Congress has gone this late in passing any appropriation bills, an indication of the mess the Pelosi-Reid Congress is now in.
Even worse, the Democrats have made clear all their talk about "fiscal discipline" is just that--talk. They're proposing to spend $205 billion more than the president has proposed over the next five years. And the opening wedge of this binge is $22 billion more in spending proposed for the coming year. Only in Washington could someone in public life be so clueless to say, as Sen. Reid and Rep. Pelosi have, that $22 billion is a "relatively small" difference.
Let's also be clear about what it means to roll back the president's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as the Democrats want to do. Every income-tax payer will pay more as all tax rates rise. Families will pay $500 more per child as they lose the child tax credit. Taxes on small businesses would go up by an average of about $4,000. Retirees will pay higher taxes on investment retirement income. And now we have the $1 trillion tax increase proposed as "tax reform" by the Democrats' chief tax writer last month.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Failing to pass a budget, proposing a huge spike in federal spending and offering the biggest tax increase in history are not the only hallmarks of this Democratic Congress.
Beholden to MoveOn.org and other left-wing groups, Democratic leaders have ignored the progress made in Iraq by the surge, diminished the efforts of our military, and wasted precious time with failed attempts to force an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. They continue to try to implement this course, which would lead to chaos in the region, the creation of a possible terror state with the third largest oil reserves in the world, and a major propaganda victory for Osama bin Laden as well as for Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah.
After promising on the campaign trail to "support our troops," Democrats tried to cut off funding for our military while our soldiers and Marines are under fire from the enemy. For 19 Senate Democrats, this was simply a bridge too far, so they voted against their own leadership's proposal. Democrats also tried to stuff an emergency war-spending bill with billions of dollars of pork for individual members. Now the party's leaders are stalling an emergency supplemental bill with funding for body armor, bullets and mine-resistant vehicles.
After pledging a "Congress that strongly honors our responsibility to protect our people from terrorism," Democrats have refused to make permanent reforms of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that the Director of National Intelligence said were needed to close "critical gaps in our intelligence capability." Their presidential candidates fell all over each other in a recent debate to pledge an end to the Terrorist Surveillance Program. Then Senate Democratic leaders, thinking there was an opening for political advantage, slow-walked the confirmation of Judge Michael Mukasey to be the next attorney general. It's obvious that this is a man who knows the important role the Justice Department plays in the war on terror. Delaying his confirmation is only making it harder to prosecute the war.
Democrats promised "civility and bipartisanship." Instead, they stiff-armed their Republican colleagues, refused to include them in budget negotiations between the two houses, and have launched more than 400 investigations and made more than 675 requests for documents, interviews or testimony. They refused a bipartisan compromise on an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, instead wasting precious time sending the president a bill they knew he would veto. And they did this knowing that they wouldn't be able to override that veto. Why? Because their pollsters told them putting the children's health-care program at risk would score political points. Instead, it left them looking cynical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The list of Congress's failures grows each month. No energy bill. No action on health care. No action on the mortgage crisis. No immigration reform. No progress on renewing No Child Left Behind. Precious little action on judges and not enough on reducing trade barriers. Congress has not done its work. And these failures will have consequences.
Democrats had a moment after the 2006 election, but now that moment has passed. They've squandered it. They have demonstrated both the inability and unwillingness to govern. Instead, after more than a decade in the congressional minority, they reflexively look for short-term partisan advantage and attempt to appease the party's most strident fringe. Now that Democrats have the reins of congressional power, their true colors are coming out and the public doesn't like what it sees.
The Democratic victory in 2006 was narrow. They won the House by 85,961 votes out of over 80 million cast and the Senate by a mere 3,562 out of over 62 million cast. A party that wins control by that narrow margin can quickly see its fortunes reversed when it fails to act responsibly, fails to fulfill its promises, and fails to lead.
hairstyles Assorted Dollar Store Pallets!
waitin_toolong
04-21 10:17 AM
Yes, you can. present the new I-797 to get I-94 till the new H1 date
Dhundhun
11-01 11:55 PM
My son came to USA on H4 Visa. He completed his studies on F1 Visa and worked for some time on H1B Visa.
Then he went to Canada for higher studies. He holds Canada PR.
I am in US. If I apply for his I 130, would there be probem him visiting US on B2 Visa.
Thanks
Then he went to Canada for higher studies. He holds Canada PR.
I am in US. If I apply for his I 130, would there be probem him visiting US on B2 Visa.
Thanks
NeedMiracles
06-17 12:55 PM
Please give me an argument why we should not include this...
(I am just trying to play a devil's advocate)
(I am just trying to play a devil's advocate)
No comments:
Post a Comment