gchopefull
10-03 12:45 PM
what is the best bet after I-140 denied?
I mean does it make any difference far as 485/EAD if the employer does appeal or MTR?
I mean is there a possibility of keeping the 485 and EAD alive after I-140 denied if employer appeal or Motion to Reopen?
need help.
thanks
I mean does it make any difference far as 485/EAD if the employer does appeal or MTR?
I mean is there a possibility of keeping the 485 and EAD alive after I-140 denied if employer appeal or Motion to Reopen?
need help.
thanks
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
Bobby Digital
November 13th, 2005, 10:50 AM
How do I post to the monthly contest and keep the pictures in my albums? If I copy the images it posts them again in the "today's photos". Is there a way to post to just your album without them going to "today's photos"?
syzygy
01-11 02:55 AM
On yahoo groups join the group "NC_Immigration_Voice"
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
martinvisalaw
07-31 12:24 PM
You may be eligible. CIS usually requires 4 years of university-level education for a degree, or 3 years experience for every one year missing from a 4-year degree. An educational evaluator could say for certain if you have the equivalent of a US bachelor's degree.
more...
little_willy
04-30 02:48 AM
Hi,
I am in the process of changing employers and the new employer applied for the H-1B transfer on 4/11 at California Service Center (CSC). I haven't received my receipt number yet. Just wanted to find out how long it takes now a days to issue a receipt number because of the new H-1B rush during the first week of April.
If anyone has applied for H-1B transfer at CSC after April 1st, please update your status here to help others in the same boat.
Also, my start date is May 19th. Is it safe to join the new employer based on proof of delivery to USCIS instead of waiting for the receipt #.
Thanks.
I am in the process of changing employers and the new employer applied for the H-1B transfer on 4/11 at California Service Center (CSC). I haven't received my receipt number yet. Just wanted to find out how long it takes now a days to issue a receipt number because of the new H-1B rush during the first week of April.
If anyone has applied for H-1B transfer at CSC after April 1st, please update your status here to help others in the same boat.
Also, my start date is May 19th. Is it safe to join the new employer based on proof of delivery to USCIS instead of waiting for the receipt #.
Thanks.
lost
04-28 02:10 PM
What is the difference been EB2 Vs EB2 NIW and when does one qualify for NIW
more...
birdwing
10-10 11:53 PM
this is hilarious :lol:
i know im late ... shuddup
i know im late ... shuddup
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
maniac
07-22 02:49 PM
Priority date of old EB3 case: Jan 2003 (140 approved). Started new EB2 case (PD Feb 2007) without notifying uscis of old priority date. Now EB2 140/485 pending since three months. Can I get early EB2-140/485 approvals if I notify uscis of my old priority date now? I belong to "other charge-ability areas" group.
more...
rajpath
01-10 03:08 AM
Hi All,
My H1B(8+ year) is expiring, and my company is willing to file H1B with Engg manager role. My previous H1B or extension was files for software engineer. My GC(EB2) is filed as Software engineer, with PD as Jan 2006.
Questions
1) Now is it ok to file H1B with new title? What if H1B gets rejected?
2) How does this title change affect GC? Can the GC be cancelled because the title has changed or H1B gets rejected? The engg manager role is similar to software engneer role, except people responsiblities.
3) If the H1B gets accepted, then is there still a danger to GC? Do they verify GC papers before approving H1B?
Thank you, Raja
My H1B(8+ year) is expiring, and my company is willing to file H1B with Engg manager role. My previous H1B or extension was files for software engineer. My GC(EB2) is filed as Software engineer, with PD as Jan 2006.
Questions
1) Now is it ok to file H1B with new title? What if H1B gets rejected?
2) How does this title change affect GC? Can the GC be cancelled because the title has changed or H1B gets rejected? The engg manager role is similar to software engneer role, except people responsiblities.
3) If the H1B gets accepted, then is there still a danger to GC? Do they verify GC papers before approving H1B?
Thank you, Raja
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
vxg
10-12 02:29 PM
I am listening to the call. Debra Rogers from USCIS stated:
1. Approx 300 k EB cases received in Jul AUG.
2. All Family based cases entered and receipts issued.
3. All EB based AOS applications will be entered and receipts issued by End of this month.
1. Approx 300 k EB cases received in Jul AUG.
2. All Family based cases entered and receipts issued.
3. All EB based AOS applications will be entered and receipts issued by End of this month.
more...
Dj-Studios
03-08 04:33 PM
I did this thinking it was like that one thread but I was wrong but I'm putting this here anyway... 5 min worth.
http://wacreative.com/12HourDays.jpg
http://wacreative.com/12HourDays.jpg
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
sunny1000
12-20 06:33 PM
I have a work related travel (2 days max) coming up in January. Do I need a canadian visa. I am on AP and my US visa on my passport has expired. My H1 is valid till 2009 (not stamped on the passport).
My question is Do I need a canadian visa? Let me know if anyone had a similar experience.
Thanks
If you are from a country who is not exempt from a canadian visa (especially for work), you should definitely get one. your AP does not entitle to enter any other country other than the U.S.
My question is Do I need a canadian visa? Let me know if anyone had a similar experience.
Thanks
If you are from a country who is not exempt from a canadian visa (especially for work), you should definitely get one. your AP does not entitle to enter any other country other than the U.S.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
microbe
February 17th, 2004, 11:25 PM
this was a snapshot, but i think it turned out well. i reduced quality for posting.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
sobers
02-10 06:40 PM
Guys, an excellent find!
This information should all be collated and presented to QGA.
This information should all be collated and presented to QGA.
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
jonty_11
07-19 05:09 PM
please post articles in News Article thread..
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
Tarheel1997
07-08 09:24 AM
Hi, this might not be the right forum for my question but at least I am hoping that I can either can an answer or steered to the correct direction. So I quit my job in the US about a month ago because I was immigrating to another country. My job was located in Arizona and I immigrated to Israel. My company knew this was the reason I was quitting. So I am wondering if I should have received a severance package or unemployment benefits because of the reason of immigrating to another country.
Thanks!
Thanks!
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
chanduv23
06-17 12:47 PM
I don't think there is a need to.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
jai_immigration
04-28 02:33 PM
Bumped, I know many of you would have done AC21, Please advise.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
eyeswe
03-04 01:45 PM
http://www.immigrationboards.com/
for all UK related visa issues
for all UK related visa issues
Macaca
07-29 06:03 PM
Bet on India (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/28/AR2007072800999.html) The Bush administration presses forward with a nuclear agreement -- and hopes for a strategic partnership. July 29, 2007
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
IN LARGE PART, modern U.S. nuclear nonproliferation policy began with India. India received U.S. aid under the "Atoms for Peace" program of the early Cold War era -- only to lose its U.S. fuel supply because India, which had refused to sign the 1968 nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), exploded a nuclear "device" in 1974. Decades of U.S. noncooperation with India's civilian atomic energy program were intended to teach India, and the world, a lesson: You will not prosper if you go nuclear outside the system of international safeguards.
Friday marked another step toward the end of that policy -- also with India. The Bush administration and New Delhi announced the principles by which the United States will resume sales of civilian nuclear fuel and technology to India, as promised by President Bush in July 2005. The fine print of the agreement, which must still be approved by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group and by Congress, has not yet been released. But the big picture is clear: The administration is betting that the benefits to the United States and the world of a "strategic partnership" with India outweigh the risks of a giant exception to the old rules of the nonproliferation game.
There are good reasons to make the bet. India is a booming democracy of more than 1 billion people, clearly destined to play a growing role on the world stage. It can help the United States as a trading partner and as a strategic counterweight to China and Islamic extremists. If India uses more nuclear energy, it will emit less greenhouse gas. Perhaps most important, India has developed its own nuclear arsenal without selling materials or know-how to other potentially dangerous states. This is more than can be said for Pakistan, home of the notorious A.Q. Khan nuclear network.
You can call this a double standard, as some of the agreement's critics do: one set of rules for countries we like, another for those we don't. Or you can call it realism: The agreement provides for more international supervision of India's nuclear fuel cycle than there would be without it. For example, it allows India to reprocess atomic fuel but at a new facility under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision, to protect against its diversion into weapons. The case for admitting India to the nuclear club is based on the plausible notion that the political character of a nuclear-armed state can be as important, or more important, than its signature on the NPT. North Korea, a Stalinist dictatorship, went nuclear while a member of the NPT; the Islamic Republic of Iran appears headed down the same road. Yet India's democratic system and its manifest interest in joining the global free-market economy suggest that it will behave responsibly.
Or so it must be hoped. The few details of the agreement released Friday suggest that it is very favorable to India indeed, while skating close to the edge of U.S. law. For example, the United States committed to helping India accumulate a nuclear fuel stockpile, thus insulating New Delhi against the threat, provided for by U.S. law, of a supply cutoff in the unlikely event that India resumes weapons testing. Congress is also asking appropriate questions about India's military-to-military contacts with Iran and about New Delhi's stubborn habit of attending meetings of "non-aligned" countries at which Cuba, Venezuela and others bash the United States. As Congress considers this deal, India might well focus on what it can do to show that it, too, thinks of the new strategic partnership with Washington as a two-way street.
amitr2k
09-19 03:42 AM
Hi, i would like to know the fees to get the L1-B transferred to L1-A.
Thanks.
Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment