paris2007
02-08 09:54 AM
Hello everybody,
I need some information. I am on h1b right now. My fiancee is in india and we are planning to marry in May. After that he will come here on H4 visa.
How can he apply for H4 to H1 transfer after comming here ?
and how long it will it take for H4 to h1 transfer......
when can he apply for h4 to h1 transfer , any time after his comming here or only in April month...
Please anybody reply me as soon as possible.
I need some information. I am on h1b right now. My fiancee is in india and we are planning to marry in May. After that he will come here on H4 visa.
How can he apply for H4 to H1 transfer after comming here ?
and how long it will it take for H4 to h1 transfer......
when can he apply for h4 to h1 transfer , any time after his comming here or only in April month...
Please anybody reply me as soon as possible.
wallpaper planking. compaq logo bmp.
istrategist
05-03 02:56 PM
So on 4/23 they sent it back to TSC, and today, May 3, I got an update saying that it is now transferred to a USCIS office.
Any ideas why?
my EAD app was delivered to tx on 3/29, and I got a text on 4/6 saying it was accepted and routed to VSC. A few days later, I got the notice in the mail.
Any ideas why?
my EAD app was delivered to tx on 3/29, and I got a text on 4/6 saying it was accepted and routed to VSC. A few days later, I got the notice in the mail.
barsha
06-29 03:08 PM
Right!
My logic is, they know LOT(thousands) of PPL will be filing. I think they must have a plan. Cause I don't think they opened the gate to reject the applications. There must be a plan.
noone can predist USCIS.....on ly pray that they do not retrogress on July5th..like they did for EB3_OTHER category on June 5th.
My logic is, they know LOT(thousands) of PPL will be filing. I think they must have a plan. Cause I don't think they opened the gate to reject the applications. There must be a plan.
noone can predist USCIS.....on ly pray that they do not retrogress on July5th..like they did for EB3_OTHER category on June 5th.
2011 Please use the BMP if you try
sheela
08-15 08:59 PM
I got the card production ordered email today. I dont know if the infopass appointment that I had yesterday made any difference or not. But for the time being Im very relieved and happy.
Case Details:
May 23rd eFile TSC
FP: 6/19/2008
LUD: 7/22/2008
CPO: 8/15/2008
My spouse (EB2i derivative) got CPO this evening
e-filed: 6/17
FP: 7/14
CPO: 8/15
Primary EAD filed 5/27, still waiting
EB2i, PD: 10/05
I-140 approved, LUD 7/13
I-485 (luds: 8/13, 8/14) still waiting approval
Case Details:
May 23rd eFile TSC
FP: 6/19/2008
LUD: 7/22/2008
CPO: 8/15/2008
My spouse (EB2i derivative) got CPO this evening
e-filed: 6/17
FP: 7/14
CPO: 8/15
Primary EAD filed 5/27, still waiting
EB2i, PD: 10/05
I-140 approved, LUD 7/13
I-485 (luds: 8/13, 8/14) still waiting approval
more...
shantak
07-22 06:13 PM
EAD renewal filed for my spouse
Filed on May 29 at TSC
Last Update Date June 6 (for FP notice)
FP done June 21
No updates since then.. showing "case received and pending". It's been exact 1 month since FP but there is no change to the last update date. It is still showing June 6th. Any idea what could be happening?
what is a soft LUD btw?
pappusheth
soft LUD aka LUD are one and the same, only the last updated date changes and nothing else
hard LUD is one where the date changes along with the status message
Filed on May 29 at TSC
Last Update Date June 6 (for FP notice)
FP done June 21
No updates since then.. showing "case received and pending". It's been exact 1 month since FP but there is no change to the last update date. It is still showing June 6th. Any idea what could be happening?
what is a soft LUD btw?
pappusheth
soft LUD aka LUD are one and the same, only the last updated date changes and nothing else
hard LUD is one where the date changes along with the status message
srikondoji
09-21 11:07 AM
Dilip,
You are smart. Pappu will continue to work on H1-B, even after receiving EAD.
It was pappu who said that 'Working on EAD is one-way street".
So, you will get your training and still don't have to pay penny unless pappu accepts cash.
--sri
Folks if you want to know how to handle an interview... learn it from Pappu!! He was smooth (read slippery) as... soap?... hell anything that is smooth :)
Pappu... any training you can give me? :eek:
I may even be able to pay you... once you get your EAD! :)
You are smart. Pappu will continue to work on H1-B, even after receiving EAD.
It was pappu who said that 'Working on EAD is one-way street".
So, you will get your training and still don't have to pay penny unless pappu accepts cash.
--sri
Folks if you want to know how to handle an interview... learn it from Pappu!! He was smooth (read slippery) as... soap?... hell anything that is smooth :)
Pappu... any training you can give me? :eek:
I may even be able to pay you... once you get your EAD! :)
more...
desigirl
10-28 09:45 AM
Well it is against the law to employ illegals and this is enforced strictly, so we can forget about tax deduction at source, SS, etc. It will be minuscule. These so called publications are from their supporters which they have numerous of.
Yes, there lies 1/2 the problem. Illegal immigrants will come as long as there is somebody ready to provide them a job. If the business owners are held accountable with heavy fines and punishment - half the problem is solved and the other half of the problem will gradually come to an end. But such enforcements are not there and are not widely talked about. Easy to blame the illegals when they are looking for betterment of life, while the business owners are lapping in luxury!
Bring the border control, and add in tough enforcement on business that hire illegals - and then you still will have to address the people who are still here illegally. It may not be 12 million, but millions will still remain. That issue has to be addressed. The current president has said that they are to be a given a "path to legality" - pay the fine (yes, it may be trivial in our standards, but not theirs) and get in line. It is not blanket amnesty either.
Most of us in this forum don't support law breaking, at the same time, we have to be practical.....
There is no proof that the new bill will reduce costs at all! It will take many years to realize it anyway. Reform was needed but not at this moment when there were bigger issues that needed fixing in 6-12 months.
What reform was needed first? immigration reform before health reform? lets fix the problems of the foreigners first, and then lets take care of the dying? Does that sound right? Even otherwise, which ever reform the president and the congress had taken, would it have gotten support?
economy is doing well = tax break; economy is not doing well = tax break - does that make sense?
big govt is bad! please vote for me, I want to run for the govt!
education - we don't have much money. defense - we are always under attack, so lets spend more money on 20th century war craft!
list goes on an on.......
Citizenship is not the answer and I'm tired of seeing all immigration bills partial to illegals.
agreed
They should go to the back of the queue and get reform only after legal immigration is fixed.
They should go to the back of the queue and get reform along with legal immigration.
Their supporters are hampering our efforts.
absolutely! wouldn't you? they play the game of leverage and we would do the same.
There are millions of poorer people in Africa and India who need more help. These countries have better farmers too.
If they shared borders with the US, they would have done exactly what the mexicans are doing.
The sad thing that separates our community from theirs is that they stand up for their own people irrespective of wealth. Take our community - of the hundreds who got the green card/citizenship - how many stay to help us? Why are the older generation of Indian immigrants fighting the new comers?
Yes, there lies 1/2 the problem. Illegal immigrants will come as long as there is somebody ready to provide them a job. If the business owners are held accountable with heavy fines and punishment - half the problem is solved and the other half of the problem will gradually come to an end. But such enforcements are not there and are not widely talked about. Easy to blame the illegals when they are looking for betterment of life, while the business owners are lapping in luxury!
Bring the border control, and add in tough enforcement on business that hire illegals - and then you still will have to address the people who are still here illegally. It may not be 12 million, but millions will still remain. That issue has to be addressed. The current president has said that they are to be a given a "path to legality" - pay the fine (yes, it may be trivial in our standards, but not theirs) and get in line. It is not blanket amnesty either.
Most of us in this forum don't support law breaking, at the same time, we have to be practical.....
There is no proof that the new bill will reduce costs at all! It will take many years to realize it anyway. Reform was needed but not at this moment when there were bigger issues that needed fixing in 6-12 months.
What reform was needed first? immigration reform before health reform? lets fix the problems of the foreigners first, and then lets take care of the dying? Does that sound right? Even otherwise, which ever reform the president and the congress had taken, would it have gotten support?
economy is doing well = tax break; economy is not doing well = tax break - does that make sense?
big govt is bad! please vote for me, I want to run for the govt!
education - we don't have much money. defense - we are always under attack, so lets spend more money on 20th century war craft!
list goes on an on.......
Citizenship is not the answer and I'm tired of seeing all immigration bills partial to illegals.
agreed
They should go to the back of the queue and get reform only after legal immigration is fixed.
They should go to the back of the queue and get reform along with legal immigration.
Their supporters are hampering our efforts.
absolutely! wouldn't you? they play the game of leverage and we would do the same.
There are millions of poorer people in Africa and India who need more help. These countries have better farmers too.
If they shared borders with the US, they would have done exactly what the mexicans are doing.
The sad thing that separates our community from theirs is that they stand up for their own people irrespective of wealth. Take our community - of the hundreds who got the green card/citizenship - how many stay to help us? Why are the older generation of Indian immigrants fighting the new comers?
2010 click to see details
espoir
07-11 06:40 PM
I agree as well
Projecting her as our champion is a BAD STRATEGY at this point. It's not like she is emotionally very upset about our situation. As a Congresswoman and the chair of Immig subcmt she is investigating irregularities and wrongdoings at the federal govt. She also probably thinks immigrants have been treated unfairly.
We shouldn't make her the target of anti-immigrationists; could hurt her, and hurt us.
Projecting her as our champion is a BAD STRATEGY at this point. It's not like she is emotionally very upset about our situation. As a Congresswoman and the chair of Immig subcmt she is investigating irregularities and wrongdoings at the federal govt. She also probably thinks immigrants have been treated unfairly.
We shouldn't make her the target of anti-immigrationists; could hurt her, and hurt us.
more...
chanduv23
07-11 09:06 PM
Congresswoman Lofgren on Visa Bulletin Debacle
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 07071165 (posted Jul. 11, 2007)"
For Immediate Release: July 11, 2007
CONTACT: Pedro Ribeiro
202-225-3072, pedro.ribeiro@mail.house.gov
Rep. Lofgren Requests Written Response to Questions on Updated Visa Bulletin
Washington, D.C. - Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) today sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance" of the "Update to July Visa Availability" on July 2, 2007. The letter contains thirteen separate questions and requests for information relevant to the issuance of the updated Visa Bulletin.
"The Department's unprecedented decision to reject adjustment of status applications has caused needless hardship and disruption to countless immigrants," noted Rep. Zoe Lofgren. "It has also come to my attention that USCIS began returning visa numbers to the State Department as early as Thursday, July 5, 2007, due to their inability to review applications effectively. The Department of Homeland Security has once again demonstrated its inability to complete even its core missions. This debacle demonstrates the need for more transparency and oversight of the department's operations and procedures."
The full text of the letter is included below:
July 11, 2007
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Chertoff:
On July 2, 2007, the Department of State (DOS) issued an "Update to July Visa Availability," which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) apparently relied on to suspend its acceptance of adjustment of status applications based on employment-based immigrant petitions. DOS and DHS acted on these matters despite my request that the agencies provide the Subcommittee with certain information before taking such actions.
At no point since my letter to you dated July 2, 2007, have I received any information in writing from the Department. Given this failure, I am now requesting that you provide to me, within three days of the date of this letter, the following information:
1. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the July Visa Bulletin, which made all employment-based immigrant visa categories (except the "other worker" category) current. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
2. All e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
3. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation between the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, the Department of Justice and/or the Federal Bureau of Investigation relating to the availability of visa numbers for the month of July 2007, the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007, the processing of security or name checks in connection with visa number requests through the end of FY 2007, and/or the determination to suspend or reject the acceptance of adjustment of status applications. The terms "Department of Homeland Security," "Department of State," "Department of Justice" and "Federal Bureau of Investigation" include DHS, DOS, DOJ, FBI or any components of those agencies.
4. A detailed description of any existing or proposed understanding, arrangement and/or agreement between DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) and the FBI (or any component thereof) relating to name checks or other security checks conducted with respect to immigration applications or petitions.
5. A detailed description of how DHS and/or the FBI expect the processes for such name or security checks to change through the end of FY 2007, and, in particular, within the month of July 2007.
6. A detailed description, including, but not limited to, a statistical tallying, of all employment-based immigration cases, petitions, applications or other files for which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) requested a visa number between May 2007 and July 2, 2007, inclusive, for which any name or security check was pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action on a security or name check. (Hereinafter, such cases will be referred to as cases for which visa numbers were "pre-requested.")
7. The specific legal authority on which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) relied to "pre-request" visa numbers for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action. The response to this question shall include copies of the specific legal authority, including statutory provisions, regulations, field manuals, policy memoranda, policy guidance or other documentation relied upon, as well as the date or dates on which such authority was last revised or issued, the substance of any revision and the original text that was revised.
8. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, field guidance, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's decision to "pre-request" visa numbers for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action.
9. Any and all field guidance, e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's plans, policies or other proposed or expected actions in the event security or name checks for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which the agency "pre-requested" visa numbers are not or do not get completed during July 2007 or the remainder of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, whether the agency has proposed or intends to return, or has discussed returning, visa numbers for such cases to DOS.
10. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes or other documentation between DHS (including any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) and DOS regarding the availability of visa numbers for June 2007, July 2007, or any remaining month of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, the anticipated numbers available during such months, the expected or anticipated usage of or requests for such numbers and/or the update, revision, restatement or alteration of the July Visa Bulletin.
11. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of overtime ordered for work on weekends, including specifically the weekend leading up to July 2, 2007, and the reasons in each case that prompted the overtime, for the past three years.
12. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of adjudication of adjustment of status cases, including a breakout for adjustment of status cases based on employment-based immigrant petitions, on a monthly basis for the past three years.
13. Any and all records, analyses, spreadsheets, related e-mails, memoranda, correspondence or other documentation evaluating the potential financial effects to DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) if adjustment of status cases eligible for filing under the initial July 2007 Visa Bulletin were filed before, on or after July 30, 2007.
Thank you for your immediate consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security & International Law
cc: Secretary Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Department of State
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren is serving her seventh term in Congress representing most of the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County. She serves as Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. She also Chairs the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections and serves on the House Homeland Security Committee. Congresswoman Lofgren is Chair of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation consisting of 34 Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives from California.
Cite as "AILA InfoNet Doc. No. 07071165 (posted Jul. 11, 2007)"
For Immediate Release: July 11, 2007
CONTACT: Pedro Ribeiro
202-225-3072, pedro.ribeiro@mail.house.gov
Rep. Lofgren Requests Written Response to Questions on Updated Visa Bulletin
Washington, D.C. - Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose) today sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Chertoff requesting "all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance" of the "Update to July Visa Availability" on July 2, 2007. The letter contains thirteen separate questions and requests for information relevant to the issuance of the updated Visa Bulletin.
"The Department's unprecedented decision to reject adjustment of status applications has caused needless hardship and disruption to countless immigrants," noted Rep. Zoe Lofgren. "It has also come to my attention that USCIS began returning visa numbers to the State Department as early as Thursday, July 5, 2007, due to their inability to review applications effectively. The Department of Homeland Security has once again demonstrated its inability to complete even its core missions. This debacle demonstrates the need for more transparency and oversight of the department's operations and procedures."
The full text of the letter is included below:
July 11, 2007
The Honorable Michael Chertoff
Secretary
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, DC 20528
Dear Secretary Chertoff:
On July 2, 2007, the Department of State (DOS) issued an "Update to July Visa Availability," which the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) apparently relied on to suspend its acceptance of adjustment of status applications based on employment-based immigrant petitions. DOS and DHS acted on these matters despite my request that the agencies provide the Subcommittee with certain information before taking such actions.
At no point since my letter to you dated July 2, 2007, have I received any information in writing from the Department. Given this failure, I am now requesting that you provide to me, within three days of the date of this letter, the following information:
1. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the July Visa Bulletin, which made all employment-based immigrant visa categories (except the "other worker" category) current. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
2. All e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation relating to the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007. The term "Department of Homeland Security" includes DHS or any component thereof.
3. All correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes, field guidance or other documentation between the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of State, the Department of Justice and/or the Federal Bureau of Investigation relating to the availability of visa numbers for the month of July 2007, the issuance of or the Department of Homeland Security's actions regarding the "Update to July Visa Availability" issued on July 2, 2007, the processing of security or name checks in connection with visa number requests through the end of FY 2007, and/or the determination to suspend or reject the acceptance of adjustment of status applications. The terms "Department of Homeland Security," "Department of State," "Department of Justice" and "Federal Bureau of Investigation" include DHS, DOS, DOJ, FBI or any components of those agencies.
4. A detailed description of any existing or proposed understanding, arrangement and/or agreement between DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services) and the FBI (or any component thereof) relating to name checks or other security checks conducted with respect to immigration applications or petitions.
5. A detailed description of how DHS and/or the FBI expect the processes for such name or security checks to change through the end of FY 2007, and, in particular, within the month of July 2007.
6. A detailed description, including, but not limited to, a statistical tallying, of all employment-based immigration cases, petitions, applications or other files for which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) requested a visa number between May 2007 and July 2, 2007, inclusive, for which any name or security check was pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action on a security or name check. (Hereinafter, such cases will be referred to as cases for which visa numbers were "pre-requested.")
7. The specific legal authority on which DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) relied to "pre-request" visa numbers for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action. The response to this question shall include copies of the specific legal authority, including statutory provisions, regulations, field manuals, policy memoranda, policy guidance or other documentation relied upon, as well as the date or dates on which such authority was last revised or issued, the substance of any revision and the original text that was revised.
8. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, field guidance, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's decision to "pre-request" visa numbers for which security or name checks were pending, uncompleted or otherwise awaiting action.
9. Any and all field guidance, e-mails, correspondence, memoranda, notes or other documentation discussing or referencing the agency's plans, policies or other proposed or expected actions in the event security or name checks for cases, applications, petitions or other files for which the agency "pre-requested" visa numbers are not or do not get completed during July 2007 or the remainder of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, whether the agency has proposed or intends to return, or has discussed returning, visa numbers for such cases to DOS.
10. Any and all correspondence, e-mails, memoranda, notes or other documentation between DHS (including any component thereof, including, but not limited to, USCIS) and DOS regarding the availability of visa numbers for June 2007, July 2007, or any remaining month of FY 2007, including, but not limited to, the anticipated numbers available during such months, the expected or anticipated usage of or requests for such numbers and/or the update, revision, restatement or alteration of the July Visa Bulletin.
11. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of overtime ordered for work on weekends, including specifically the weekend leading up to July 2, 2007, and the reasons in each case that prompted the overtime, for the past three years.
12. Any and all records or other documentation (with a summary for ease of analysis) regarding historic patterns of adjudication of adjustment of status cases, including a breakout for adjustment of status cases based on employment-based immigrant petitions, on a monthly basis for the past three years.
13. Any and all records, analyses, spreadsheets, related e-mails, memoranda, correspondence or other documentation evaluating the potential financial effects to DHS (or any component thereof, including, but not limited to USCIS) if adjustment of status cases eligible for filing under the initial July 2007 Visa Bulletin were filed before, on or after July 30, 2007.
Thank you for your immediate consideration of this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Zoe Lofgren
Chairwoman
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship,
Refugees, Border Security & International Law
cc: Secretary Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Department of State
Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren is serving her seventh term in Congress representing most of the City of San Jose and Santa Clara County. She serves as Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law. She also Chairs the House Administration Subcommittee on Elections and serves on the House Homeland Security Committee. Congresswoman Lofgren is Chair of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation consisting of 34 Democratic members of the U.S. House of Representatives from California.
hair hot compaq logo bmp. compaq
sdrblr
09-03 05:05 PM
probably that explains why I did not get any email yesterday and the status today changed as approved on 9/2.
Guys keep an eye on your online account and dont just wait for the email.
I had an Infopass appointment this morning with a very helpful and informative IO, and he confirmed that my dependants' cases were also approved on 09/01. Looks like TSC email system doesn't work properly as there were no emails for my dependants. I belive that some of you folks may have already been approved with no status change and CPO emails. Good luck again for all you who are current and have been waiting for approvals.
Regards.
Guys keep an eye on your online account and dont just wait for the email.
I had an Infopass appointment this morning with a very helpful and informative IO, and he confirmed that my dependants' cases were also approved on 09/01. Looks like TSC email system doesn't work properly as there were no emails for my dependants. I belive that some of you folks may have already been approved with no status change and CPO emails. Good luck again for all you who are current and have been waiting for approvals.
Regards.
more...
santb1975
04-16 12:32 PM
Thanks for your support Bharat Premi.
Clicking the mouse for 30 mins after 8 spoons of sugar ..wonder what that does :confused:..Let's see. Each spoon of sugar has about 15 calories. 8 spoons = 120 calories. 60 minutes of walking at a moderate pace burns about 120 - 150 calories. Clicking a mouse uses like 3 fingers and some wrist movements..I should stop now..LOL..Just a way to keep this thread on Top.
Clicking mouse constantly for half an hour after having 8 spoons of sugar.. :)By the way, i got your emails and will work out application form this weekend.. I had a plan to send it last weekend but could not do it.. Sorry for little delay.
Clicking the mouse for 30 mins after 8 spoons of sugar ..wonder what that does :confused:..Let's see. Each spoon of sugar has about 15 calories. 8 spoons = 120 calories. 60 minutes of walking at a moderate pace burns about 120 - 150 calories. Clicking a mouse uses like 3 fingers and some wrist movements..I should stop now..LOL..Just a way to keep this thread on Top.
Clicking mouse constantly for half an hour after having 8 spoons of sugar.. :)By the way, i got your emails and will work out application form this weekend.. I had a plan to send it last weekend but could not do it.. Sorry for little delay.
hot 2010 hp logo bmp. old compaq
sheela
08-13 11:46 AM
I was current per the june VB and the Texas processing dates were current tat that time too.... but no change in status.
This all is so frustrating. Good luck
This all is so frustrating. Good luck
more...
house compaq logo bmp.
gc_check
06-28 07:39 AM
I am manily concerned as USICS rejected the 485 petitions for "Other Worker s" last june ,they can also do the same now if they received huge number of applications ( 40K) in the first few days .
It is pretty obvious they will surely receive more than 40K petitions. Who knows, they must have already got the same in June when they advanced the dates in June VB. Visa numbers are allocated at the time of approval and not at the time the petition is made. Even if they get million petition in July, that does not mean all the Visa numbers are consumed. It is an indicator they have enough petitons to meet the demand to use all the available numbers and alter the VB Cutoff dates for PD in future months. It depends on the approvals too and it is not likely the petitions made in June/july will get approved now... So we must be okay.. but you never know with USCIS/DOL/DOS... Any thing can happen... for instance like the VB is Current for all categories in July.
It is pretty obvious they will surely receive more than 40K petitions. Who knows, they must have already got the same in June when they advanced the dates in June VB. Visa numbers are allocated at the time of approval and not at the time the petition is made. Even if they get million petition in July, that does not mean all the Visa numbers are consumed. It is an indicator they have enough petitons to meet the demand to use all the available numbers and alter the VB Cutoff dates for PD in future months. It depends on the approvals too and it is not likely the petitions made in June/july will get approved now... So we must be okay.. but you never know with USCIS/DOL/DOS... Any thing can happen... for instance like the VB is Current for all categories in July.
tattoo vector. compaq logo bmp.
roseball
09-01 09:22 PM
I am in India right now - Can i take the card production ordered page and get back in?
You should ONLY use AP to re-enter. Do not re-enter on H1. In the secondary inspection, the IO will know that your GC has been approved. Congratulations !!!
You should ONLY use AP to re-enter. Do not re-enter on H1. In the secondary inspection, the IO will know that your GC has been approved. Congratulations !!!
more...
pictures 2010 hot hp logo bmp. compaq
chaituk
05-15 01:23 PM
Can you also post what decision you have made regarding changing employers or if you are waiting till next month for PD availability?
In the same situation as you are in.
In the same situation as you are in.
dresses Model: 463553-002 compaq logo
Saralayar
04-10 05:31 PM
I think CITIZENShip years Credit or Reduction in the years is Make most sense for the highly skilled immigrant from India and China as those are the people who suffers most because of backlog and name check.
I also think we should stick to the "five year federal taxes paid" beacuse that is what they expect from normal family based GC holder. Also adding Masters and Higher degrees in the STEM fields attract possible more support.
We should not talk any where close to 10 /15 years waiting time as that is not what current system of citizesnship talks about.
Also marriage based GC already has 3 years after GC rule so it may beeasy to get it.
Making it more complicated like Percent credit for before GC filing, after GC filing, after getting GC May become hard and complicated to convenince politicains who might be amending those rules.
So Keeping it simple - 5 yr federal taxes, MS or higher in STEM, 3 years after GC - you get citizenship (all of these has precedents)
IV Core team, have a look into the valid and genuine ideas on citizenship in this thread and try to include them in the phase 2 campaign. For our long term vision & goal, this should also be a part of our campaign.
I also think we should stick to the "five year federal taxes paid" beacuse that is what they expect from normal family based GC holder. Also adding Masters and Higher degrees in the STEM fields attract possible more support.
We should not talk any where close to 10 /15 years waiting time as that is not what current system of citizesnship talks about.
Also marriage based GC already has 3 years after GC rule so it may beeasy to get it.
Making it more complicated like Percent credit for before GC filing, after GC filing, after getting GC May become hard and complicated to convenince politicains who might be amending those rules.
So Keeping it simple - 5 yr federal taxes, MS or higher in STEM, 3 years after GC - you get citizenship (all of these has precedents)
IV Core team, have a look into the valid and genuine ideas on citizenship in this thread and try to include them in the phase 2 campaign. For our long term vision & goal, this should also be a part of our campaign.
more...
makeup Compaq-DLT-IV-10.jpg
gccovet
08-01 01:23 PM
I'm from ATL and the latest i could get an infopass at ATL local office is on August 12th. My EAD expires Aug 22nd. I will have to ask him what to . Does anbody know if there is an interim EAD and if so, will they give it immediately or is there a "process" for that also.
Hi
Could someone please help me? I was trying to schedule an InfoPass appointment, ontheir website,
I clicked on
You need Service on a case that has already been filed
Then next page clicked on
EAD inquiry appointment - If your I-765 employment authorization application has been pending for more than 90 days.
Give me following message:
At this time, there are no information appointments available for the office in your area. Please try back again later.
Return to USCIS On-Line
I was wondering how you were able to schedule an appointment? I would appreciate if you could help me in this.
Regards,
GCCovet
Hi
Could someone please help me? I was trying to schedule an InfoPass appointment, ontheir website,
I clicked on
You need Service on a case that has already been filed
Then next page clicked on
EAD inquiry appointment - If your I-765 employment authorization application has been pending for more than 90 days.
Give me following message:
At this time, there are no information appointments available for the office in your area. Please try back again later.
Return to USCIS On-Line
I was wondering how you were able to schedule an appointment? I would appreciate if you could help me in this.
Regards,
GCCovet
girlfriend compaq logo wallpaper. hair hp
logiclife
05-16 04:30 PM
Hi Folks,
My PD is current but my lawyer is saying that I CANNOT file I-485.
Reason:
My labor cert / EB2 was originated in Illinois and then amended for Virginia by G-28.
Since my labor cert approval, i moved to Califonia - same job, same company.
Now my lawyer is saying that I need to go back to Virginia so i can apply for I-485.
Question:
1. Do i have to go back to the same state/location at I-485 filing stage where my Labor was originally approved?
2. Doesnot Green Card is for a future job?
3. Can i file I-485 while I am in California and my labor was approved for VA?
Please advise - thanks
I have asked Rajiv Khanna the same question when I moved to new location after GC was filed in Phoenix, AZ.
I moved to Reno, NV and the opinion of Rajiv Khanna was :
You can work in Reno and file your 140 and 485 also while working in Reno. If it takes longer than 180 days to process your 485 (which most likely will be the case) then you can invoke your AC21 portability options and continue working in Reno upto the end of 485 processing and even after that.
If it takes less than 180 days for USCIS to process my 485 file, then the AC21 portability option is not available to me and as soon as 485 is approved, I have to move back to the original location (Phoenix) in my case where my GC was filed.
Most likely, in my case and in your case, 485 is going to take a lot longer than 180 to process and the AC21 portability option will be available so we would never have to go back to original location to work from there the GC was filed.
In this case, you should almost wish that your 485 takes longer than 180 days (may be 190 days ideally) so that you dont have to go back.
Your lawyer seems to be not very experienced and you should get a second opinion.
Also sent you a PM.
My PD is current but my lawyer is saying that I CANNOT file I-485.
Reason:
My labor cert / EB2 was originated in Illinois and then amended for Virginia by G-28.
Since my labor cert approval, i moved to Califonia - same job, same company.
Now my lawyer is saying that I need to go back to Virginia so i can apply for I-485.
Question:
1. Do i have to go back to the same state/location at I-485 filing stage where my Labor was originally approved?
2. Doesnot Green Card is for a future job?
3. Can i file I-485 while I am in California and my labor was approved for VA?
Please advise - thanks
I have asked Rajiv Khanna the same question when I moved to new location after GC was filed in Phoenix, AZ.
I moved to Reno, NV and the opinion of Rajiv Khanna was :
You can work in Reno and file your 140 and 485 also while working in Reno. If it takes longer than 180 days to process your 485 (which most likely will be the case) then you can invoke your AC21 portability options and continue working in Reno upto the end of 485 processing and even after that.
If it takes less than 180 days for USCIS to process my 485 file, then the AC21 portability option is not available to me and as soon as 485 is approved, I have to move back to the original location (Phoenix) in my case where my GC was filed.
Most likely, in my case and in your case, 485 is going to take a lot longer than 180 to process and the AC21 portability option will be available so we would never have to go back to original location to work from there the GC was filed.
In this case, you should almost wish that your 485 takes longer than 180 days (may be 190 days ideally) so that you dont have to go back.
Your lawyer seems to be not very experienced and you should get a second opinion.
Also sent you a PM.
hairstyles wallpaper Tekstur compaq logo
amitjoey
12-13 01:39 PM
I just sent another email to friends, inviting them to Join IV. Please raise awareness amongst your friends.
GCard_Dream
02-06 04:21 PM
The reporter doesn't know what he/she is talking about. I have seen a lot of inaccurate information coming from Indian media about visa increases but this has to be the worst one. It not only claims that the visa increase amendment has passed in the Senate but also that minimum wage bill is yet to be considered by the house. This bill was passed by the house in the first 100 hour marathon.
I don't know from where this reporter gets his information from .. may be from immigration-law.com. :)
I saw this in economic Times today
Any comments:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/US_may_hike_H-1Bs_unveil_new_visa_for_the_unskilled/articleshow/1569190.cms
I don't know from where this reporter gets his information from .. may be from immigration-law.com. :)
I saw this in economic Times today
Any comments:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/US_may_hike_H-1Bs_unveil_new_visa_for_the_unskilled/articleshow/1569190.cms
sravani
05-16 10:17 AM
Someone mentioned that all vaccines except for Hepatitis B can be completed in 2 days...Hepatitis B takes 6 months. My PD has become current and I haven't had my medical examination yet. I have to take Hepatitis B since don't have immunization records from India.
Does this mean that I can't apply for my I-485 for the next 6 months until I am done with all my Hepatitis B shots?
Thanks,
Jayant
I am not sure if you need Hepatitis B though. I didn't have Hepatitis B either. The physician did blood work and certified that I satisfied all immunization requirements.
Does this mean that I can't apply for my I-485 for the next 6 months until I am done with all my Hepatitis B shots?
Thanks,
Jayant
I am not sure if you need Hepatitis B though. I didn't have Hepatitis B either. The physician did blood work and certified that I satisfied all immunization requirements.
0 comments:
Post a Comment