perfecthill
08-09 07:48 AM
Just playing around with an old image, adding gradients and shapes etc.
Very simple really!
Very simple really!
wallpaper selena gomez who says hair
sundarpn
07-21 10:59 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?
is that correct?
Blog Feeds
11-20 03:12 AM
I usually use this space's real estate to criticize the tactics of the antis. But I'll give them some credit for the extremely effective job they did during the first two rounds of immigration reform earlier this decade. That was largely because of a well organized grass roots effort that left the pro-immigrant forces in the dust. The Reform Immigration For America coalition has sought to help the pros get caught up. And they are starting to show real muscle. Last night, an estimated 60,000 people participated in 1000 house parties across the country where they listened in to a...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/learning-from-the-antis.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2009/11/learning-from-the-antis.html)
2011 says by Selena Gomez
vikram_singh
08-03 05:02 PM
Guys,
I have created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
Also find out what people are saying at other threads..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=11235
-Vikram
I have created a search engine (http://immisearch.blogspot.com/) to help all people looking for a better way to search topics around immigration related activites. The search engine came as a result of my countless hours that I spent searching to answers around the web.
Try searching for any information with h1b, h4, Green Card, I-485, I140, citizenship etc, and the engine should give you a better result.
Leave a comment at the blog and let me know what else could be improved.
http://immisearch.blogspot.com/
Also find out what people are saying at other threads..
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/sh...ad.php?t=11235
-Vikram
more...
Karthikthiru
08-05 08:51 PM
First time they put the ad about 6 months back. They they just started to put again
Blog Feeds
10-23 09:20 AM
History teaches us a tried-and-true, gumshoe-inquisitor's method of uncovering scandal. As memorialized in the 1976 film, All the President's Men, former FBI agent, Mark Felt, unmasked as Deep Throat of Watergate fame, explained the approach to Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward: Deep Throat: Follow the money. Bob Woodward: What do you mean? Where? Deep Throat: Oh, I can't tell you that. Bob Woodward: But you could tell me that. Deep Throat: No, I have to do this my way. You tell me what you know, and I'll confirm. I'll keep you in the right direction if I can, but that's...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/09/follow-the-immigration-money.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/angelopaparelli/2009/09/follow-the-immigration-money.html)
more...
maruthip
05-31 11:01 AM
Iam on H1 and my wife and 2 kids are on H4. we have been here for 3.5 yrs now. My petition has to be extended next year. My employer is delaying my GC process (not applied yet).
My Wife's brother who is a citizen is planning to apply for I-130 for my wife (not sure if it can be applied for me and kids as well, that is a different question).
However my main questions are:
- if he applies for I-130 for my wife, will it affect her H4 status or will I-130 application be affected due to her H4 status here?
- Will we have a problem when we apply for the petition renewal next year?
- Also will it affect the employer based Green card application (whenever int he future my employer applies for me)?
Thanks in advance for your reply
Thanks
My Wife's brother who is a citizen is planning to apply for I-130 for my wife (not sure if it can be applied for me and kids as well, that is a different question).
However my main questions are:
- if he applies for I-130 for my wife, will it affect her H4 status or will I-130 application be affected due to her H4 status here?
- Will we have a problem when we apply for the petition renewal next year?
- Also will it affect the employer based Green card application (whenever int he future my employer applies for me)?
Thanks in advance for your reply
Thanks
2010 hot Selena Gomez “Who Says”
ralicag
03-27 09:43 PM
I really dig the perspectives :) :) :)
more...
shruthii_1210@yahoo.com
10-11 07:19 PM
Hi,
I have been searching in the inernet for quite some time and looks like
the following questions are still not answered properly. So any of you here who actually used the AC21 in the past can answer the below questions and it will help lot of people on this board.
1) When the employee don't have I-140 receipt number and I-140 approval copy , is it okay to use AC21 after 180 days ?
2) Do we need to have I-140 approval copy for the EAD renewal ?
Guru's please help
I have been searching in the inernet for quite some time and looks like
the following questions are still not answered properly. So any of you here who actually used the AC21 in the past can answer the below questions and it will help lot of people on this board.
1) When the employee don't have I-140 receipt number and I-140 approval copy , is it okay to use AC21 after 180 days ?
2) Do we need to have I-140 approval copy for the EAD renewal ?
Guru's please help
hair hair selena gomez in who says
kinvin
01-28 02:40 PM
Greetings,
Can fellow forum members suggest any Stamford,CT area lawyers whose services they have availed off. I am looking to get a second opinion, independent of my company�s lawyer.
Thanks.
Can fellow forum members suggest any Stamford,CT area lawyers whose services they have availed off. I am looking to get a second opinion, independent of my company�s lawyer.
Thanks.
more...
Macaca
09-29 07:54 AM
Dangerous Logjam on Surveillance (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801332.html) By David Ignatius (davidignatius@washpost.com) | Washington Post, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
hot selena gomez who says.
shernil_s
04-27 03:32 PM
Hello Friends,
I am in 7th yr of my H1B and I have got 3 yrs extension on my H1B after
completing my 6 yrs. I have got my labour appliation and I-140 approved 1 year back and filed my I-485 in MAR'2005. My PD is Jan 2002, India EB3.
In SEP'2005, I got married and my spouse came to this country on H4 Visa.
Because of retrogresion.I couldn't file I-485 for my wife. Now I am waiting for my PD to get current to file 485 for my wife.
My question is, Can I change my employer by doing H1B Transfer. So that my
spouse wont be losing H4 Status. Also, when my PD becomes current can I ask my new employer to file 485 application for my spouse.
My lawyer has told me that filing Spouse's 485 has to be done with the same
employer who filed your application. Is it true? or Can I change my employer.
Thanks for your reply in advance
I am in 7th yr of my H1B and I have got 3 yrs extension on my H1B after
completing my 6 yrs. I have got my labour appliation and I-140 approved 1 year back and filed my I-485 in MAR'2005. My PD is Jan 2002, India EB3.
In SEP'2005, I got married and my spouse came to this country on H4 Visa.
Because of retrogresion.I couldn't file I-485 for my wife. Now I am waiting for my PD to get current to file 485 for my wife.
My question is, Can I change my employer by doing H1B Transfer. So that my
spouse wont be losing H4 Status. Also, when my PD becomes current can I ask my new employer to file 485 application for my spouse.
My lawyer has told me that filing Spouse's 485 has to be done with the same
employer who filed your application. Is it true? or Can I change my employer.
Thanks for your reply in advance
more...
house selena gomez who says
jediknight
10-30 11:08 AM
One of their funny slogans is "Taxation without Representation", which should be our slogan really :)
Legal Immigrants are the only group that pays taxes without any representati
Has someone investigated the possibility of a legal challenge on the IRS withholding Medicare and Social Security Taxes? If that happens, there will be rush to pass legislation to remove barriers to legal immigration.
Legal Immigrants are the only group that pays taxes without any representati
Has someone investigated the possibility of a legal challenge on the IRS withholding Medicare and Social Security Taxes? If that happens, there will be rush to pass legislation to remove barriers to legal immigration.
tattoo by Selena Gomez#39;s Hair in
sagita
05-19 07:18 PM
Hello.
I have lived 6 yrs here & became a U.S. Citizen last Sept. 2010. Last February 2011 i was diagnosed of Breast Cancer. It's been pretty rough living alone without any relatives around. My husband works oversea and he travels frequently, he can't change his job right now, this will be the source of our income to support my health situation. In the next two months my doctor told me to do another surgery on my breast. I did fine with my first surgery as my husband stay home for a couple of weeks while waiting his next project. I'am thinking if it possible for me to petition my knee to live with me in the U.S. as i will need a assistance with all therapy and with my 11 yr. daughter. I am from the Philippines.
Please advice.
Thank you.
I have lived 6 yrs here & became a U.S. Citizen last Sept. 2010. Last February 2011 i was diagnosed of Breast Cancer. It's been pretty rough living alone without any relatives around. My husband works oversea and he travels frequently, he can't change his job right now, this will be the source of our income to support my health situation. In the next two months my doctor told me to do another surgery on my breast. I did fine with my first surgery as my husband stay home for a couple of weeks while waiting his next project. I'am thinking if it possible for me to petition my knee to live with me in the U.S. as i will need a assistance with all therapy and with my 11 yr. daughter. I am from the Philippines.
Please advice.
Thank you.
more...
pictures by Selena Gomez#39;s Hair in
sadib888
05-18 11:52 AM
So i have only been driving for 3 years, never been pulled over, and no accidents.
dresses selena gomez who says album
Sravanthimps
01-24 12:27 AM
Hi Frens,
can someone help me.
I am applying for H1 visa to the US. I got my passport in my graduation. So i donot have the ECNR clearance. So please can someone tell me if I will have a problem before applying or should I get it done now and then apply. I however have the Canadian visa stamped on the passport.
Thanks in advance
Sravanthi
can someone help me.
I am applying for H1 visa to the US. I got my passport in my graduation. So i donot have the ECNR clearance. So please can someone tell me if I will have a problem before applying or should I get it done now and then apply. I however have the Canadian visa stamped on the passport.
Thanks in advance
Sravanthi
more...
makeup hair Selena Gomez has released
rnatrajan1
03-01 12:57 AM
I work for company A which sponsored my L1B (my current visa status). Also, few years back company B sponsored my H1B which for some reason I did not utilize (did not even get it stamped) and hence company B cancelled it. Now my questions are -
1. Can L1-B be transferred to H1-B without going through a new visa application?
2. Can the cancelled H1-B be re-instated and utilized?
3. If another company C applies for my H1-B what are the chances of getting it looking at the current work visa regulations and prospective changes? Will my past petition of H1-B cause some issues with consulate?
4. My wife is on L2 and as EAD. Once I file for change of status will the EAD still be valid or it will automatically be void?
Please Help...
1. Can L1-B be transferred to H1-B without going through a new visa application?
2. Can the cancelled H1-B be re-instated and utilized?
3. If another company C applies for my H1-B what are the chances of getting it looking at the current work visa regulations and prospective changes? Will my past petition of H1-B cause some issues with consulate?
4. My wife is on L2 and as EAD. Once I file for change of status will the EAD still be valid or it will automatically be void?
Please Help...
girlfriend stylish Selena Gomez in
maash10
08-11 11:33 AM
Hello Friends
My husband was an employee of a desi company and they had withheld part of his salary, he filed a complaint at the DOL and got the pending money back.. that was 4 years back.. now he is trying to change his job and the new employer wants to do his background check..
what will show up in his background check? will the case against his employer affect him? we are really worried about this.
Thanks in advance
My husband was an employee of a desi company and they had withheld part of his salary, he filed a complaint at the DOL and got the pending money back.. that was 4 years back.. now he is trying to change his job and the new employer wants to do his background check..
what will show up in his background check? will the case against his employer affect him? we are really worried about this.
Thanks in advance
hairstyles hair Selena Gomez spent
Sravanth
10-10 01:29 AM
Hi,
H1 Company is based in Phoenix with another office in delaware.I have gievn my address from NewHampshire on my LCA and NJ on my I 140 application.I work for a client in Newyork.I have given my address in New hampshire as I was not sure that my project will be for a longterm and gave my cousins address in New Hampshire for LCA.
I got an RFE asking why I have different addresses on my LCA and I140 while my company is based out of Arizona and Delaware.Please suggest how I should be answering this.
H1 Company is based in Phoenix with another office in delaware.I have gievn my address from NewHampshire on my LCA and NJ on my I 140 application.I work for a client in Newyork.I have given my address in New hampshire as I was not sure that my project will be for a longterm and gave my cousins address in New Hampshire for LCA.
I got an RFE asking why I have different addresses on my LCA and I140 while my company is based out of Arizona and Delaware.Please suggest how I should be answering this.
raysaikat
08-04 11:36 PM
Could anyone please provide me some links that have information about future employement green cards? I am working with a consultant who is willing to work with me on this but wants more information about the process.
Thank you!!
You can do anything (including doing nothing). However it is the norm to work for the sponsoring employer (or the latest employer if you used AC21) for 6 month to 1 year to ensure that no question arises in future regarding the legitimacy of the job offer based on which your GC was approved.
Thank you!!
You can do anything (including doing nothing). However it is the norm to work for the sponsoring employer (or the latest employer if you used AC21) for 6 month to 1 year to ensure that no question arises in future regarding the legitimacy of the job offer based on which your GC was approved.
mrdelhiite
02-26 11:34 AM
yes if u do a h1 transfer (and invoke AC21)..
-M
-M
No comments:
Post a Comment