sk.aggarwal
02-19 06:29 AM
Restamping is not required. But just make sure you show your new approval notice to IO at POE. Done this couple of years back
wallpaper hairstyles for prom 2011,
invincibleasian
02-17 06:02 PM
Another useful thread!
lavanya_7
05-14 06:16 AM
I got my H1-B visa on June 29, 2005 , I came to india on Jan 2009 . From Jan 2009 till now I have been staying in India , bcoz I was taking care of my new born daughter, now she is grown up and now I am planning to start working in US. Right now I got my H4 visa .
I came to know from someone that H1-B filing for this year was over in Jan 2011, so if I need to file a new H1-b , I have to file now and I will be eligible to work after Oct 1 this year. Is it true ? Is it not possible that a company files for a new H1-B under premium processing and I start working after 2 weeks of filing ? I don't want to wait that long(Oct 1) to work , I have few oppurinities coming up where I may get selected.
I have stayed in india from Jan 2009 till APril 2011. Now I am on H4 visa in US. Can I get a extension of my previous H1-B visa filed on June 2005?
I want to work ASAP.
I came to know from someone that H1-B filing for this year was over in Jan 2011, so if I need to file a new H1-b , I have to file now and I will be eligible to work after Oct 1 this year. Is it true ? Is it not possible that a company files for a new H1-B under premium processing and I start working after 2 weeks of filing ? I don't want to wait that long(Oct 1) to work , I have few oppurinities coming up where I may get selected.
I have stayed in india from Jan 2009 till APril 2011. Now I am on H4 visa in US. Can I get a extension of my previous H1-B visa filed on June 2005?
I want to work ASAP.
2011 hairstyles for prom 2011,
chanduv23
09-20 06:19 AM
Yes, Robert Sun, Sophia Li, Jane Lu, Jimmy - I only remember you all because we spoke.
Awsome job - some of you flew in from California.
And thanks to everyone - we had people from all parts of the world.
Awsome job - some of you flew in from California.
And thanks to everyone - we had people from all parts of the world.
more...
Blog Feeds
04-12 08:20 AM
Thanks to Richard Reid, we all have the extra task of removing our shoes when we go through security at airports. The "shoe bomber" from England tried to set off a bomb hidden in his shoes ten years ago, but thanks in part to Canadian born, Trinidad raised Kwame James, Reid was unable to carry out his plan. James, at 6 foot 8 inches, was then a 22 year old basketball player. An astute flight attendant woke James up and got him to help subdue Reid. Both Reid and James were in the news this week, though for very different...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/immigrant-of-the-day-kwame-james-terrorist-fighter.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/04/immigrant-of-the-day-kwame-james-terrorist-fighter.html)
Narayan
01-20 04:40 PM
I changed my employer after 9 months of filing 485 using AC21 a year ago and my new employer has reduced my workdays to 3 days a week starting this month. Can I get a second job for 2 days a week with same job description and salary etc ?
more...
Blog Feeds
09-02 10:10 PM
Pew confirms what we've already assumed is happening. The number of illegally present immigrants has dropped 8% since 2007. The number is now about 11 million, down from peaking at 12 million. The annual migration of illegally present immigrants has dropped from about 850,000 a year a few years ago to just 300,000 a year today. Why? Probably a combination of a lousy economy and much more vigorous enforcement, particularly at the border. Here is the report for your viewing pleasure: pew hispanic study 08-2010 -
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/09/pew-study-illegal-immigraton-down-sharply.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/09/pew-study-illegal-immigraton-down-sharply.html)
2010 hairstyles for prom 2011,
ajaysri
08-07 01:31 PM
Any idea guys? any one had this experience?
more...
Blog Feeds
05-10 03:00 PM
This evening, news media outlets are reporting that Solicitor General Elena Kagan will be the nominee to replace Justice John Paul Stevens on the US Supreme Court. Kagan was asked last summer by the Supreme Court to opine on whether the high court should hear a challenge to the constitutionality of the 2007 Arizona employer immigration sanctions law. Kagan has so far not provided an answer and she'll no doubt be asked about this. She'll also likely be asked about the new Arizona law.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/will-immigration-factor-in-kagan-nomination.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/will-immigration-factor-in-kagan-nomination.html)
hair Prom updo hairstyles for thick
gcisadawg
01-20 08:07 PM
Our attorney's sent an email following this procedure. Hoping for the best!
more...
chanduv23
11-01 07:35 PM
Those who came to the NJ meet - please post your experiences here.
hot prom hairstyles updos 2009.
Mayday
04-03 03:52 PM
As far as I know it does not matter what company profile is, it only matters what type of job they have and if they able to pay as required for the period of time they apply for.
more...
house prom updo hairstyles 2011.
HaveQuestions
04-07 10:11 PM
Hi,
My H1B is with USCIS and my employer has received an intent to revoke.
I am planning to go on H4 and my questions are
1) Can my employer file for a new H1B ANYTIME regardless of whether my H1B is revoked or not? I heard that since i am already counted against the cap, it doesnt matter when the H1B is filed, once approved i could start work immediately. Is this true?
Or this can be done only till my earlier H1B is not revoked? And if revoked i will have to file H1B against the 2011 quota and start work from October?
Appreciate any response!!
My H1B is with USCIS and my employer has received an intent to revoke.
I am planning to go on H4 and my questions are
1) Can my employer file for a new H1B ANYTIME regardless of whether my H1B is revoked or not? I heard that since i am already counted against the cap, it doesnt matter when the H1B is filed, once approved i could start work immediately. Is this true?
Or this can be done only till my earlier H1B is not revoked? And if revoked i will have to file H1B against the 2011 quota and start work from October?
Appreciate any response!!
tattoo medium hairstyles for prom,
eucalyptus.mp
03-13 12:37 PM
Friends,
I came to USA on H1B on Feb-07. I was working all the time except 6 months. I have pay slips with me and W2 forms. Now I am working on the project but it will be over on 15th of April-09.
I will complete my 3 years. But after this project is over, I don't know I can find the job again.
My question is,is it right time to do the visa transfer? Does it requires very recent pay stub of 3 months? I do not have pay stub for Jan and Feb-09.Does it matters?
What will be my best choice to transfer the visa(but don't know will have job after 15th so does it matters for transfer like client letter) or wait until May-June and file the 3 year extension ? But again that time I will have pay slips until April only.
I am really confused. Please give me your suggestions
I came to USA on H1B on Feb-07. I was working all the time except 6 months. I have pay slips with me and W2 forms. Now I am working on the project but it will be over on 15th of April-09.
I will complete my 3 years. But after this project is over, I don't know I can find the job again.
My question is,is it right time to do the visa transfer? Does it requires very recent pay stub of 3 months? I do not have pay stub for Jan and Feb-09.Does it matters?
What will be my best choice to transfer the visa(but don't know will have job after 15th so does it matters for transfer like client letter) or wait until May-June and file the 3 year extension ? But again that time I will have pay slips until April only.
I am really confused. Please give me your suggestions
more...
pictures short hairstyles for prom,
anilsal
03-03 03:01 AM
Work at IL State Chapter is going on. Mainly visit the lawmaker(s) via their staff / case workers on immigration.
For anyone interested in the IL State Chapter, you will have to PM me.
For anyone interested in the IL State Chapter, you will have to PM me.
dresses short hairstyles for prom,
NANO3
11-10 09:55 PM
nice pixel drawings, its still a little cut and the tree isn't 3D
nice job otherwise
nice job otherwise
more...
makeup Prom hairstyles different
prakgc
07-22 09:01 PM
When we file 485 AOS along with EAD & APL, these are three seperate forms, so we get three seperate receipt numbers?
is that correct?
What abt 485 for wife? is that also another receipt notice?
is that correct?
What abt 485 for wife? is that also another receipt notice?
girlfriend prom updo hairstyles for long
Macaca
07-31 05:23 PM
It's Time to End Or Reduce The Cloture Clog (http://rollcall.com/issues/53_15/guest/19599-1.html) By Robert Weiner and John Larmett, July 31 2007
Robert Weiner, president of Robert Weiner Associates Public Affairs, worked for 16 years in the House of Representatives and for six years in the Clinton White House. John Larmett, senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates, was legislative assistant/press secretary to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) and former Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.).
The Senate's cloture rule defeats democracy. It lets public servants hide and obfuscate behind a parliamentary quirk never intended by the framers of the Constitution. It's time to end or significantly change the cloture rule, as was last done in 1975, and move to a true democracy so that the House and Senate equally represent the American people.
There are checks and balances, the only ones the Founding Fathers stated and intended: a presidential veto, which Congress can override with two-thirds, the only supermajority specified in the Constitution; the courts; and elections. No one ever foresaw parliamentary sleight of hand as a block of the will of the majority. If Congress wants to restore Americans' confidence in its work from the current all-time lows, it needs to allow the system to work as common sense, the Constitution and the framers dictate.
During the April-May 2005 "crisis" on judicial nominations, the "Gang of 14," seven Democratic and seven Republican Senators, agreed to oppose the constitutional or "nuclear" option and to oppose filibusters of judicial nominations except in "extraordinary circumstances." However, the Senate has failed to cut off debate on other issues 57 times since then, making clear that the system has failed.
Democrats are right to scream Republican "obstructionism," but Republicans, when they were in the majority, also were right to scream Democratic obstructionism. Both sides use and abuse the rule when they are in the minority to create some supermajority fantasy the public will not understand - and then blame the other side for not getting a legislative agenda accomplished.
In last year's campaigns, House Democrats promised to change the way Congress does business - and do it within the first 100 hours they were in session. With a majority of 30-60 votes, but no supermajority requirement, the House passed its entire agenda. Despite majority support, hindered by the supermajority "cloture," the Senate has struggled all year just to pass a few bills. The American people get the feeling the Senate is a train that never quite leaves the station.
The slow train continued July 17-18 when Republicans scuttled a Democratic proposal ordering troop withdrawals from Iraq in a showdown capping an all-night debate. The 52-47 vote fell short of the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture, the 27th time this year alone that body has been unable to proceed on significant pieces of legislation. In the previous Congress (controlled by Republicans), Democrats were successful 34 times in blocking Republican legislation. Cloture has become the third rail of Congressional politics. It's time for the train to move on a different track.
Everyone has been properly complaining about obstructionism, but no one has said anything about changing the Senate rule on cloture. Since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is talking about changing Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor, then why shouldn't the Senate also start the discussion about changing the cloture rule right now? It could be the difference in getting bills passed.
In early July, the minority's decision to filibuster the amendment by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), which stated that men and women serving in the military deserved the same amount of time at home that they served overseas, died on a 56-41 failed cloture vote - a majority supporting it but the media saying it "failed."
In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, and it should change it again. If not an end outright, the best approach to guarantee the will of the majority, why not at least drop the requirement to 55 votes - necessitating just a little bit of extra consensus to end debate. Let the will of the American people, and of a majority of the Senate itself, be acted upon.
It's time to end the cloture clog, regardless of who's in charge.
Robert Weiner, president of Robert Weiner Associates Public Affairs, worked for 16 years in the House of Representatives and for six years in the Clinton White House. John Larmett, senior policy analyst at Robert Weiner Associates, was legislative assistant/press secretary to Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) and former Sen. Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.).
The Senate's cloture rule defeats democracy. It lets public servants hide and obfuscate behind a parliamentary quirk never intended by the framers of the Constitution. It's time to end or significantly change the cloture rule, as was last done in 1975, and move to a true democracy so that the House and Senate equally represent the American people.
There are checks and balances, the only ones the Founding Fathers stated and intended: a presidential veto, which Congress can override with two-thirds, the only supermajority specified in the Constitution; the courts; and elections. No one ever foresaw parliamentary sleight of hand as a block of the will of the majority. If Congress wants to restore Americans' confidence in its work from the current all-time lows, it needs to allow the system to work as common sense, the Constitution and the framers dictate.
During the April-May 2005 "crisis" on judicial nominations, the "Gang of 14," seven Democratic and seven Republican Senators, agreed to oppose the constitutional or "nuclear" option and to oppose filibusters of judicial nominations except in "extraordinary circumstances." However, the Senate has failed to cut off debate on other issues 57 times since then, making clear that the system has failed.
Democrats are right to scream Republican "obstructionism," but Republicans, when they were in the majority, also were right to scream Democratic obstructionism. Both sides use and abuse the rule when they are in the minority to create some supermajority fantasy the public will not understand - and then blame the other side for not getting a legislative agenda accomplished.
In last year's campaigns, House Democrats promised to change the way Congress does business - and do it within the first 100 hours they were in session. With a majority of 30-60 votes, but no supermajority requirement, the House passed its entire agenda. Despite majority support, hindered by the supermajority "cloture," the Senate has struggled all year just to pass a few bills. The American people get the feeling the Senate is a train that never quite leaves the station.
The slow train continued July 17-18 when Republicans scuttled a Democratic proposal ordering troop withdrawals from Iraq in a showdown capping an all-night debate. The 52-47 vote fell short of the 60 votes needed to invoke cloture, the 27th time this year alone that body has been unable to proceed on significant pieces of legislation. In the previous Congress (controlled by Republicans), Democrats were successful 34 times in blocking Republican legislation. Cloture has become the third rail of Congressional politics. It's time for the train to move on a different track.
Everyone has been properly complaining about obstructionism, but no one has said anything about changing the Senate rule on cloture. Since Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is talking about changing Senate rules to make it easier to restrict amendments on the floor, then why shouldn't the Senate also start the discussion about changing the cloture rule right now? It could be the difference in getting bills passed.
In early July, the minority's decision to filibuster the amendment by Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), which stated that men and women serving in the military deserved the same amount of time at home that they served overseas, died on a 56-41 failed cloture vote - a majority supporting it but the media saying it "failed."
In 1975, the Senate reduced the number of votes required for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, and it should change it again. If not an end outright, the best approach to guarantee the will of the majority, why not at least drop the requirement to 55 votes - necessitating just a little bit of extra consensus to end debate. Let the will of the American people, and of a majority of the Senate itself, be acted upon.
It's time to end the cloture clog, regardless of who's in charge.
hairstyles short hairstyles for prom,
hiten trivedi
01-02 06:23 PM
Friends,
I need a clarification on EAD card usage. If your spouse whio has an independent H1B visa and whose 485 and EAD application is dependent on you, changes the work status from H1B to EAD, then does the status of the primary applicant also change to EAD automatically. Since the spouse's application was not independent filed and was a dependent on the original applicant for both 485 and EAD applications. I want make sure that the primary applicant's status ( separate independent H1B ) is not changed from H1B to EAD, just because of the spouse starting to use the EAD ( who is a dependent filer on primary applicant for both AOS and EAD ). Would appreciate your inputs.
Thanks.
I need a clarification on EAD card usage. If your spouse whio has an independent H1B visa and whose 485 and EAD application is dependent on you, changes the work status from H1B to EAD, then does the status of the primary applicant also change to EAD automatically. Since the spouse's application was not independent filed and was a dependent on the original applicant for both 485 and EAD applications. I want make sure that the primary applicant's status ( separate independent H1B ) is not changed from H1B to EAD, just because of the spouse starting to use the EAD ( who is a dependent filer on primary applicant for both AOS and EAD ). Would appreciate your inputs.
Thanks.
vat
12-24 08:22 PM
I have a situation here.
I am on H1B visa and just changed my job in September.
My H1B transfer (thru my new company) was approved and according to USCIS website, they have dispatched my 797-Notice of Action. But I am yet to receive those papers.
Now, I was on extension of H1B earlier (thru my old company), as my stamped visa expired.
Now, my spouse needs to visit India urgently. Can she travel to India with her old I-94 (the one that was stapled on the passport when she entered US the last time) and the other I-94 that she has with the visa extension papers ?? Of course, once we get the new Form 797, I shall also travel to India and we both will get our visa stamping done before we travel back to USA. Please suggest...
I am on H1B visa and just changed my job in September.
My H1B transfer (thru my new company) was approved and according to USCIS website, they have dispatched my 797-Notice of Action. But I am yet to receive those papers.
Now, I was on extension of H1B earlier (thru my old company), as my stamped visa expired.
Now, my spouse needs to visit India urgently. Can she travel to India with her old I-94 (the one that was stapled on the passport when she entered US the last time) and the other I-94 that she has with the visa extension papers ?? Of course, once we get the new Form 797, I shall also travel to India and we both will get our visa stamping done before we travel back to USA. Please suggest...
Macaca
10-06 05:25 PM
Lott Looking to Form New �Gang� (http://rollcall.com/issues/53_38/news/20338-1.html) By Erin P. Billings | Roll Call Staff, October 4, 2007
In what could be a new incarnation of the successful bipartisan �Gang of 14,� Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.) hosted a meeting this week with a handful of the Senate�s most notable compromisers to figure out how to unclog the gridlock that has slowed the chamber�s progress this year.
About half a dozen moderate and independent-minded Republicans and at least one Democrat � Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.) � participated in the Members-only huddle, which was held quietly in Lott�s Capitol office Tuesday morning. Afterward, few Senators offered much detail, but several said there�s a feeling among them that the narrowly divided chamber no longer can operate at an impasse and they want to find ways to avoid the growing number of filibusters sidelining Senate legislation this year.
�We�re seeing if there�s a way to bring some people together to bring some more comity to this place,� Nelson said.
Lott declined to discuss the meeting or its goals, saying only: �I think I ought not say anything. Others are going to say too much, so I am not going to say anything.�
According to other Senators, however, the discussion focused on how the deal-minded group could help avert the growing number of standoffs in trying to clear bills through the Senate this Congress. Most particularly, Senators said they vetted ways to work through upcoming fights on such issues as appropriations bills and stalled judicial nominations such as that of Leslie Southwick, Lott�s home-state pick for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Southwick narrowly cleared the Judiciary Committee last summer but has yet to come up for full Senate consideration. The White House and Republican Senators have been trying to corral 60 votes to advance his confirmation, but are still shy of meeting that mark against powerful Democratic opposition.
�It�s about creating a better environment to get things done for the country,� said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who participated in the meeting. �We need to get back to being a deliberative body.�
�We�re going to see if we can work beyond the logjam,� said Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who also was there and described it as the �beginning of a process.�
Graham, Nelson and Snowe were members of the previous Congress� bipartisan Gang of 14, a group of seven Democrats and seven Republicans who assembled in the face of a bitter partisan Senate standoff over movement of President Bush�s judicial nominees. The group brokered a historic deal to allow for votes on certain stalled Bush picks in exchange for keeping the minority�s option to use the filibuster intact.
That group didn�t formally involve Lott as one of its members, but the then-rank-and-file Mississippi Senator was a primary force behind the scenes leading to its creation. Lott stepped away after the gang officially formed.
Nelson wouldn�t say this week whether Tuesday�s meeting was a step toward
re-creating a similar bipartisan coalition, calling the Gang of 14 �unique.� But the Nebraska Democrat did suggest there are clear parallels in terms of the two groups� goals.
�It�s just a conversation at this point,� Nelson said. �We�re trying to see if there�s an interest in building support for moving legislation and to avoid having as many cloture votes as we�ve had and moving legislation along.�
So far this year, the Democratic majority has called to invoke cloture, a lengthy procedural roadblock that has markedly slowed down Senate action on a whole host of bills, some 56 times. Democrats have argued they are forced to do so against an intransigent 49-seat GOP minority, while Republicans have insisted it shows that Democrats are trying to ram through legislation without their input.
Although not all showed up, sources indicated that about 10 Senators were asked to take part in Tuesday�s meeting. In addition to Lott, Nelson, Graham and Snowe, GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Bob Corker (Tenn.), John Warner (Va.), John McCain (Ariz.), Gordon Smith (Ore.) and Norm Coleman (Minn.) were invitees.
Although not in attendance Tuesday, Coleman said discussions abound among rank-and-file Senators about how to �fix things� and break some of the legislative stalemate. He added that it�s not a surprise that Lott � one of the Senate�s most notorious deal-makers � would lead the charge.
�It�s a legitimate concern,� Coleman said of the gridlock. �We�re all impacted by the failure of being able to do the things that people sent us here to do.�
In what could be a new incarnation of the successful bipartisan �Gang of 14,� Minority Whip Trent Lott (R-Miss.) hosted a meeting this week with a handful of the Senate�s most notable compromisers to figure out how to unclog the gridlock that has slowed the chamber�s progress this year.
About half a dozen moderate and independent-minded Republicans and at least one Democrat � Sen. Ben Nelson (Neb.) � participated in the Members-only huddle, which was held quietly in Lott�s Capitol office Tuesday morning. Afterward, few Senators offered much detail, but several said there�s a feeling among them that the narrowly divided chamber no longer can operate at an impasse and they want to find ways to avoid the growing number of filibusters sidelining Senate legislation this year.
�We�re seeing if there�s a way to bring some people together to bring some more comity to this place,� Nelson said.
Lott declined to discuss the meeting or its goals, saying only: �I think I ought not say anything. Others are going to say too much, so I am not going to say anything.�
According to other Senators, however, the discussion focused on how the deal-minded group could help avert the growing number of standoffs in trying to clear bills through the Senate this Congress. Most particularly, Senators said they vetted ways to work through upcoming fights on such issues as appropriations bills and stalled judicial nominations such as that of Leslie Southwick, Lott�s home-state pick for the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Southwick narrowly cleared the Judiciary Committee last summer but has yet to come up for full Senate consideration. The White House and Republican Senators have been trying to corral 60 votes to advance his confirmation, but are still shy of meeting that mark against powerful Democratic opposition.
�It�s about creating a better environment to get things done for the country,� said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who participated in the meeting. �We need to get back to being a deliberative body.�
�We�re going to see if we can work beyond the logjam,� said Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who also was there and described it as the �beginning of a process.�
Graham, Nelson and Snowe were members of the previous Congress� bipartisan Gang of 14, a group of seven Democrats and seven Republicans who assembled in the face of a bitter partisan Senate standoff over movement of President Bush�s judicial nominees. The group brokered a historic deal to allow for votes on certain stalled Bush picks in exchange for keeping the minority�s option to use the filibuster intact.
That group didn�t formally involve Lott as one of its members, but the then-rank-and-file Mississippi Senator was a primary force behind the scenes leading to its creation. Lott stepped away after the gang officially formed.
Nelson wouldn�t say this week whether Tuesday�s meeting was a step toward
re-creating a similar bipartisan coalition, calling the Gang of 14 �unique.� But the Nebraska Democrat did suggest there are clear parallels in terms of the two groups� goals.
�It�s just a conversation at this point,� Nelson said. �We�re trying to see if there�s an interest in building support for moving legislation and to avoid having as many cloture votes as we�ve had and moving legislation along.�
So far this year, the Democratic majority has called to invoke cloture, a lengthy procedural roadblock that has markedly slowed down Senate action on a whole host of bills, some 56 times. Democrats have argued they are forced to do so against an intransigent 49-seat GOP minority, while Republicans have insisted it shows that Democrats are trying to ram through legislation without their input.
Although not all showed up, sources indicated that about 10 Senators were asked to take part in Tuesday�s meeting. In addition to Lott, Nelson, Graham and Snowe, GOP Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Bob Corker (Tenn.), John Warner (Va.), John McCain (Ariz.), Gordon Smith (Ore.) and Norm Coleman (Minn.) were invitees.
Although not in attendance Tuesday, Coleman said discussions abound among rank-and-file Senators about how to �fix things� and break some of the legislative stalemate. He added that it�s not a surprise that Lott � one of the Senate�s most notorious deal-makers � would lead the charge.
�It�s a legitimate concern,� Coleman said of the gridlock. �We�re all impacted by the failure of being able to do the things that people sent us here to do.�
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar