jonty_11
05-15 10:27 AM
Good going IV..
Yes I agree being current means NOTHING...if it retrogresses again befor eyo uhave your GC in hand...u will be in a waiting game again like always...so reform is the only solution.
Yes I agree being current means NOTHING...if it retrogresses again befor eyo uhave your GC in hand...u will be in a waiting game again like always...so reform is the only solution.
wallpaper makeup Funny Poetry
cool_guy_onnet1
06-01 01:28 PM
New Immigration Bill Amendment Could Help Keep Foreign Tech Workers In U.S.
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
A proposal to create a dual green-card system that favors high tech talent has bi-partisan support in the Senate.
By Marianne Kolbasuk McGee
InformationWeek
May 31, 2007 04:50 PM
A bi-partisan group of U.S. senators next week is expected to introduce to the immigration reform bill an amendment that proposes to retain a pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored green cards for foreign workers seeking permanent residence in the United States.
Amendment S.1249, being co-sponsored by senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash), John Cornyn (R-Tex.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Orrin Hatch (R-Pa.), and Robert Bennett (R-Utah) proposes that the U.S. create a dual green-card system that, in addition to a new merit-point green card system that's proposed in the main bill, would also keep an annual pool of 140,000 employer-sponsored based green cards for foreign workers.
The revised legislation also proposes the United States establish no limit on H-1B visas for foreign professionals with masters or doctoral degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM fields.
"This would set up a complementary and parallel employer-sponsored system to the merit system" said Robert Hoffman, Oracle VP of government affairs and co-chair of Compete America, a coalition of technology companies. "This system would be more like Australia's" where immigration is granted in dual programs that includes employer-based sponsorship and merit points.
By the U.S. retaining a system allowing employer-based green cards to be issued each year, businesses would have better control over the talent they'd like to keep in the U.S., say tech employers.
One of the biggest criticisms that tech employers have about the current immigration reform bill being hammered out in the Senate is the proposed merit-based green card system. The process awards individuals with points based on the person's education, skills, and other factors.
Tech companies complain that a point-based system would shift to government bureaucrats too much control about the kind of talent pool that's available to employers in U.S. Amendment S.1249 proposes retaining employer-based immigration and expanding permanent residency to those foreigners with advanced STEM degrees, said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes eliminating caps on H-1B visas issued to foreign students who have advanced degrees from U.S. universities. Right now, in addition to the 65,000 H-1B visas issued each year by the United States, an additional 20,000 H-1B visas are available to foreign students with advanced degrees from U.S. universities. The new amendment would eliminate that annual ceiling for advanced U.S. degrees.
In addition, the amendment also proposes providing 20,000 H-1B visas annually to foreigners with advanced degrees in STEM fields from foreign schools.
"Masters and PhDs would be exempt from the cap on H-1Bs and green cards," said Hoffman.
The amendment also proposes retracting a provision in the immigration reform bill that H-1B visa holders must have degrees that match their jobs. However, under the amendment, an H-1B visa holder with a degree in mathematics could continue to apply for work in a software engineering job, even without the software engineering degree.
"We're strongly in favor of this amendment," said Hoffman. "It's the single most important amendment in this [immigration] bill," he said.
Not everyone feels the same way. In a statement, U.S tech-professional advocacy group the Programmers Guild, called the amendment "a declaration of war on American tech workers."
kaisersose
08-06 09:19 AM
capturing visa numbers would put an end to our misery. and increasing the employment based visa will pave way for future immigrants. handling a few thousand more cases is not a big deal for USCIS(there may be performance issues but not like difficulty of hiring more people to do the stuff!). don't get panicky about the number. it should be lot less than you would think.
I think 700K is an exaggeration too. One top attorney was saying that he has filed only a few hundred cases in July. if you assign an average of 250 cases for every attorney in the US, we need two thousand attorneys to arrive at 500K.
If DOS/USCIS can recapture unused visa numbers and stop assigning visa numbers to family members of EB category applicants, I think that will work very well without increasing EB quota.
I think 700K is an exaggeration too. One top attorney was saying that he has filed only a few hundred cases in July. if you assign an average of 250 cases for every attorney in the US, we need two thousand attorneys to arrive at 500K.
If DOS/USCIS can recapture unused visa numbers and stop assigning visa numbers to family members of EB category applicants, I think that will work very well without increasing EB quota.
2011 nice poems for mums. funny
TheCanadian
11-26 04:38 AM
I will? That's surprising!
oh you minx you
oh you minx you
more...
sumansk
10-03 10:04 PM
I am sure you are a latest filers...so just relax and forget abt it for many yrs to come unless there is a serious effort by the Govt. to reduce backlog...till then elax and dotn let your blood boil over it leading to deterioration in health and wealth....
NJOY !!!
NJOY !!!
GLIX
02-22 06:14 AM
it was already at july 13, 2006, now it's back at june? how could that happen?:confused:
more...
mjULTRA
05-27 06:42 PM
i voted for golgi, cuz it had a theme, but festers site deserves an honorable mention.
2010 A wonderfully embellished poem
sagittariusarm
08-27 01:47 PM
We cannot get the passport renewed anywhere, if you are in south most probably you need to get it renewed from Houston. So any one ............who went in person for non-emergency case.
Thanks
When did this change? I got it renewed from Washington DC a year back
Thanks
When did this change? I got it renewed from Washington DC a year back
more...
mrdelhiite
08-08 07:59 AM
Yes, its good to file I-134 especially when she is on H4. Paystubs and tax returns are not required documents though a lot of people tend to submit them. Just an employment letter from your employer would suffice. You dont need to include your I-20 with your wife's application....However, do include her medicals, though its not part of the initial evidence......
Thank you.
-M:)
Thank you.
-M:)
hair funny poems for teenagers.
life99f
05-14 07:02 PM
Thank you!
more...
gc_chahiye
09-26 07:50 PM
also it puts things in perspective. Seeing this family getting torn apart (amazingly in their case there is no country where all can live together) makes my own H1 and GC related problems appear very tiny.
hot Girls (Urdu funny poetry)
gcwait2007
07-20 11:37 AM
I am in Austin
more...
house Advanced Search funny poems
royus77
07-17 10:29 PM
Hi,
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
My I-140 approved in TSC( premium processing)
My Attorney sent my I-485 on July 2 to TSC
my labor approved from Wisconsin
but I read somewhere all applications needs to go to NSC , is it true?
I greatly appreciate your help
You are fine. I 485 should go where I 140 was approved.USCIS will internally transfer the applications until Aug 30 if they were sent to wrong processng center( Check the accuracy of date)
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrele...ling062107.pdf
tattoo funny valentine poems.
dontcareaboutGC
03-19 11:24 AM
Ignore this if this is a repost!
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on the Judiciary
Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security,
and International Law
Hearing on Comprehensive Immigration Reform: Government Perspectives
on Immigration Statistics
Testimony of Charles Oppenheim
Chief, Immigrant Control and Reporting Division
Visa Services Office
U.S. Department of State
June 6, 2007
2:00 p.m.
2141 Rayburn House Office Building
Chairman Lofgren, Ranking Member King, and distinguished members of
the Committee, it is a pleasure to be here this afternoon to answer
your questions and provide an overview of our immigrant visa control
and reporting program operated by the U.S. Department of State. The
Department of State is responsible for administering the provisions of
the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) related to the numerical
limitations on immigrant visa issuances. At the beginning of each
month, the Visa Office (VO) receives a report from each consular post
listing totals of documentarily-qualified immigrant visa applicants in
categories subject to numerical limitation. Cases are grouped in three
different categories: 1) foreign state chargeability, 2) preference,
and 3) priority date.
Foreign state chargeability for visa purposes refers to the fact that
an immigrant is chargeable to the numerical limitation for the foreign
state or dependent area in which the immigrant's place of birth is
located. Exceptions are provided for a child (unmarried and under 21
years of age) or spouse accompanying or following to join a principal
to prevent the separation of family members, as well as for an
applicant born in the United States or in a foreign state of which
neither parent was a native or resident. Alternate chargeability is
desirable when the visa cut-off date for the foreign state of a parent
or spouse is more advantageous than that of the applicant's foreign
state.
As established by the Immigration and Nationality Act, preference is
the visa category that can be assigned based on relationships to U.S.
citizens or legal permanent residents. Family-based immigration falls
under two basic categories: unlimited and limited. Preferences
established by law for the limited category are:
Family First Preference (F1): Unmarried sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their minor children, if any.
Family Second Preference (F2): Spouses, minor children, and unmarried
sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents.
Family Third Preference (F3): Married sons and daughters of U.S.
citizens and their spouses and minor children.
Family Fourth Preference (F4): Brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens
and their spouses and minor children provided the U.S. citizen is at
least 21 years of age.
The Priority Date is normally the date on which the petition to accord
the applicant immigrant status was filed, generally with U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). VO subdivides the annual
preference and foreign state limitations specified by the INA into
monthly allotments. The totals of documentarily-qualified applicants
which have been reported to VO are compared each month with the
numbers available for the next regular allotment. The determination of
how many numbers are available requires consideration of several
variables, including: past number use; estimates of future number use
and return rates; and estimates of USCIS demand based on cut-off date
movements. Once this consideration is completed, the cutoff dates are
established and numbers are allocated to reported applicants in order
of their priority dates, the oldest dates first.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy
all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is
considered "Current." For example: If the monthly allocation target is
10,000, and we only have 5,000 applicants, the category can be
"Current.� Whenever the total of documentarily-qualified applicants in
a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for
the particular month, the category is considered to be
"oversubscribed" and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
The cut-off date is the priority date of the first
documentarily-qualified applicant who could not be accommodated for a
visa number. For example, if the monthly target is 10,000 and we have
25,000 applicants, then we would need to establish a cut-off date so
that only 10,000 numbers would be allocated. In this case, the cut-off
would be the priority date of the 10,001st applicant.
Only persons with a priority date earlier than a cut-off date are
entitled to allotment of a visa number. The cut-off dates are the 1st,
8th, 15th, and 22nd of a month, since VO groups demand for numbers
under these dates. (Priority dates of the first through seventh of a
month are grouped under the 1st, the eighth through the 14th under the
8th, etc.) VO attempts to establish the cut-off dates for the
following month on or about the 8th of each month. The dates are
immediately transmitted to consular posts abroad and USCIS, and also
published in the Visa Bulletin and online at the website
www.travel.state.gov. Visa allotments for use during that month are
transmitted to consular posts. USCIS requests visa allotments for
adjustment of status cases only when all other case processing has
been completed. I am submitting the latest Visa Bulletin for the
record or you can click on: Visa Bulletin for June 2007.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SYSTEM AND CLARIFICATION OF SOME
FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS:
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified
at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every
applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date
been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, visa allotments
are made only on the basis of the total applicants reported
�documentarily qualified� (or, theoretically ready for interview) each
month. Demand for visa numbers can fluctuate from one month to
another, with the inevitable impact on cut-off dates.
If an applicant is reported documentarily qualified but allocation of
a visa number is not possible because of a visa availability cut-off
date, the demand is recorded at VO and an allocation is made as soon
as the applicable cut-off date advances beyond the applicant's
priority date. There is no need for such applicant to be reported a
second time.
Visa numbers are always allotted for all documentarily-qualified
applicants with a priority date before the relevant cut-off date, as
long as the case had been reported to VO in time to be included in the
monthly calculation of visa availability. Failure of visa number
receipt by the overseas processing office could mean that the request
was not dispatched in time to reach VO for the monthly allocation
cycle, or that information on the request was incomplete or inaccurate
(e.g., incorrect priority date).
Allocations to Foreign Service posts outside the regular monthly cycle
are possible in emergency or exceptional cases, but only at the
request of the office processing the case. Note that, should
retrogression of a cut-off date be announced, VO can honor
extraordinary requests for additional numbers only if the applicant's
priority date is earlier than the retrogressed cut-off date. Not all
numbers allocated are actually used for visa issuance; some are
returned to VO and are reincorporated into the pool of numbers
available for later allocation during the fiscal year. The rate of
return of unused numbers may fluctuate from month to month, just as
demand may fluctuate. Lower returns mean fewer numbers available for
subsequent reallocation. Fluctuations can cause cut-off date movement
to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly
possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches
the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7 percent is a
cap, which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed.
Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The
country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the
annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This
limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled,
however. A portion of the numbers provided to the Family Second
preference category is exempt from this per-country cap. The American
Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) removed the
per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant
demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of
such numbers available.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by
documentarily-qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds
the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation,
that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may
require the establishment of a cut-off date which is earlier than that
which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The
prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same
percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual
limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off
dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off
dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
The committee submitted several questions that fell outside of VO�s
area of work, therefore, I have provided in my written testimony today
the answers only to those questions that the Department of State can
answer. Thank you for this opportunity.
more...
pictures The poem#39;s title might give
rubinop
04-15 03:33 PM
Again your LC approval has no direct connection with what you are being paid currently. LC is for future job so I find it unlikely that DOL will factor your current salary in any way. They may consider your employer's ability to pay the stated salary on LC based on their finacial situation but your current pay stub should not matter.
Does that answer your question?
Yes, it heps a lot! Thank you! And thanks to mann7 as well.
Does that answer your question?
Yes, it heps a lot! Thank you! And thanks to mann7 as well.
dresses Cake Poems – Funny Happy
morchu
05-14 12:09 PM
Thanks for pointing this out (Hernandez letter).
It is new information to me.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
It is new information to me.
H-1B is approved from Oct/1/2009. Currently I should be on L-1B. As per this article, I think I can travel without jeopardizing my future status. They call it the 'Hernandez letter'. Is this true?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_cosapp.html
Thanks..
more...
makeup filed under: Funny Poetry
qualified_trash
11-15 01:27 PM
you have a expired I-94 and a h1B which is valid
How can you have an expired I94 and valid H1B? It is technically not possible.
When your H1B expires when you are in the US and you apply for an extension of the H1B along with an extension of the stay of the person(s) since they now hold this status, you get a I797 where the right bottom part is your NEW I94. You are supposed to staple this to the old I94 in your passport and surrender the same when you fly out of the country to a non contiguous territory
That is how you were able to travel!!!!!!!
As for Automatic revalidation here is the link to the State Dept site:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegrams/telegrams_1441.html
How can you have an expired I94 and valid H1B? It is technically not possible.
When your H1B expires when you are in the US and you apply for an extension of the H1B along with an extension of the stay of the person(s) since they now hold this status, you get a I797 where the right bottom part is your NEW I94. You are supposed to staple this to the old I94 in your passport and surrender the same when you fly out of the country to a non contiguous territory
That is how you were able to travel!!!!!!!
As for Automatic revalidation here is the link to the State Dept site:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/telegrams/telegrams_1441.html
girlfriend Funny Urdu Poetry
Sunx_2004
08-01 11:17 AM
Her H1 is valid from Oct. onward, You can still file her status as H4. Apply for EAD and AP also. Hope this help.
Cheers
My wife's current H4 is valid till Nov. She got her H1 also approved from Oct'2007. She checked the status this morning only on USCIS.
I'm applying for I-485 and adding her as spouse. Should I file for her advance parole and put her status as H4 in it? What happens to to her H1 approval, if advanced parole gets approved also. Will she loose her H1 status?
any ideas??
Cheers
My wife's current H4 is valid till Nov. She got her H1 also approved from Oct'2007. She checked the status this morning only on USCIS.
I'm applying for I-485 and adding her as spouse. Should I file for her advance parole and put her status as H4 in it? What happens to to her H1 approval, if advanced parole gets approved also. Will she loose her H1 status?
any ideas??
hairstyles poems for friends. funny poems
zCool
12-04 02:42 AM
You were supposed to get 92$ / hr for a LC you applied for in 2001??
exactly what is it that you do/did?
exactly what is it that you do/did?
jonty_11
01-15 01:49 PM
ielts.org refers you to els.edu....
els.edu has a locationin my State/city. However, that location is not listed in the ielts.org website. I am trying to get in touch with my local els.edu office, but does anyone know if all els.edu offices (locations) can conduct this English Test for Canadian Immigration??
els.edu has a locationin my State/city. However, that location is not listed in the ielts.org website. I am trying to get in touch with my local els.edu office, but does anyone know if all els.edu offices (locations) can conduct this English Test for Canadian Immigration??
sameer2730
06-21 09:28 AM
@sameer2730 : So when you made the mistake "Country Of Citizenship" on your EAD eFile, how did you get that corrected? Did you send in a "Request For Correction" along with your supporting documentation to USCIS? Did they send you an RFE or did they accept your docs and approved your EAD?
Sent the request for correction with my supporting documents.
Sent the request for correction with my supporting documents.
No comments:
Post a Comment