muthiahmerchant
08-28 01:53 PM
Hi All,
I am trying to change my wife from H1B to H4. There is this question in I539 for which I am not sure how to reply,
If you answered "Yes" to Question 3g in Part 4 on Page 3 of this form, fully describe the employment. Include the name of theperson employed, name and address of the employer, weekly income and whether the employment was specifically authorized byUSCIS.
would something of this sort be enough
I, xyz am working as a Systems Analyst with abc Inc. My job responsibilities include blah blah.
abc Inc is located at blah.
I am drawing a monthly salary of $xxx. A weekly income based on monthly salary would be $xxx
The employment was authorized by USCIS, the receipt number is EAC-xxxx
I am trying to change my wife from H1B to H4. There is this question in I539 for which I am not sure how to reply,
If you answered "Yes" to Question 3g in Part 4 on Page 3 of this form, fully describe the employment. Include the name of theperson employed, name and address of the employer, weekly income and whether the employment was specifically authorized byUSCIS.
would something of this sort be enough
I, xyz am working as a Systems Analyst with abc Inc. My job responsibilities include blah blah.
abc Inc is located at blah.
I am drawing a monthly salary of $xxx. A weekly income based on monthly salary would be $xxx
The employment was authorized by USCIS, the receipt number is EAC-xxxx
wallpaper hair Call of Duty: Black Ops
GCcomesoon
02-25 11:31 PM
Hi
I received my 485 approval back in April 2008 & also received my physical card in next few months. I applied for my parents extension last month ( I-539) who are here for visit. It was filed in CA. My last H1B was approved in Oct 2007 from CA. Today to my surprise I see updates in extension case with no message change but update in my H1B approved case, with message saying that this case is reopened & the decision is being reviewed.
I think this is some kind of error. Has anyone experienced this ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
I received my 485 approval back in April 2008 & also received my physical card in next few months. I applied for my parents extension last month ( I-539) who are here for visit. It was filed in CA. My last H1B was approved in Oct 2007 from CA. Today to my surprise I see updates in extension case with no message change but update in my H1B approved case, with message saying that this case is reopened & the decision is being reviewed.
I think this is some kind of error. Has anyone experienced this ?
Thanks
GCcomesoon
broadcaster
01-23 01:17 PM
Your attorney must have the answer. When you file an I-485, you should include a copy of the I-140 approval or receipt, so your better ask your attorney.
2011 lack ops nazi zombies
aspadda
06-22 03:14 PM
I am in 7th year of H1b. I joined comany A in May-2003 and filed EB3 base in Nov-2003. I had approve labor and I-140.
I moved a big company (Company B) in 06/08/2007 (just few days before the EB categories got current).
Company A has agreed to help me file I-485
Company B is ready to file new PERM (Earlier it was agreed that after PERM approval PD will be transferred).
What would be the best bet now?
Is it OK to file I-485 myself with approved I-140 from comany A (With intention to join them later)to be safe and
File new PERM with Company B..later (after PERM approval) transfer PD from my old case and file I-485 again (It would take approx 6 months min).
Any comments / suggestion will be greatly appreciated.
I moved a big company (Company B) in 06/08/2007 (just few days before the EB categories got current).
Company A has agreed to help me file I-485
Company B is ready to file new PERM (Earlier it was agreed that after PERM approval PD will be transferred).
What would be the best bet now?
Is it OK to file I-485 myself with approved I-140 from comany A (With intention to join them later)to be safe and
File new PERM with Company B..later (after PERM approval) transfer PD from my old case and file I-485 again (It would take approx 6 months min).
Any comments / suggestion will be greatly appreciated.
more...
gccrazy007
11-18 12:56 PM
Employer A - LC applied in Dec 07, Currently on 7th year extension till Jan 2010. Stamped visa.
Employer B wishes to recruit me by transfer H1-B and utilize recapture time. The total time they would get is till Apr 2010 (which includes recpature time) along with 7th year I-797.
Employer B wishes to file LC 1 month after I join them.
Assuming that I join them by end of Dec 2008, I have the following questions about my H1-B extension
Lets consider Dec 30th as the date to start the LC application.
What I understand is that based on the LC from Employer B,
Can I get extension on my H1-B beyond APR 2010.
for 1 yr - Based on LC from employer B being pending/approved until Apr 2010
for 3 yr - Based on LC from employer B being approved and I-140 approved.
Apply for premium processing of I-140 before 60 days of Apr 2010 if LC is approved and I-140 is pending.
Your response is appreciated.
Employer B wishes to recruit me by transfer H1-B and utilize recapture time. The total time they would get is till Apr 2010 (which includes recpature time) along with 7th year I-797.
Employer B wishes to file LC 1 month after I join them.
Assuming that I join them by end of Dec 2008, I have the following questions about my H1-B extension
Lets consider Dec 30th as the date to start the LC application.
What I understand is that based on the LC from Employer B,
Can I get extension on my H1-B beyond APR 2010.
for 1 yr - Based on LC from employer B being pending/approved until Apr 2010
for 3 yr - Based on LC from employer B being approved and I-140 approved.
Apply for premium processing of I-140 before 60 days of Apr 2010 if LC is approved and I-140 is pending.
Your response is appreciated.
Macaca
09-29 07:54 AM
Dangerous Logjam on Surveillance (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/28/AR2007092801332.html) By David Ignatius (davidignatius@washpost.com) | Washington Post, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
The writer is co-host of PostGlobal, an online discussion of international issues.
When a nation can't solve the problems that concern its citizens, it's in trouble. And that's where America now finds itself on nearly every big issue -- from immigration to Iraq to health care to anti-terrorism policies.
Let us focus on the last of these logjams -- over the legal rules for conducting surveillance against terrorists. There isn't a more urgent priority for the country: We face an adversary that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans if it could. But in a polarized Washington, crafting a solid compromise that has long-term bipartisan support has so far proved impossible.
People who try to occupy a middle ground in these debates find that it doesn't exist. That reality confounded Gen. David Petraeus this month. He thought that as a professional military officer, he could serve both the administration and the Democratic Congress. Guess what? It didn't work. Democrats saw Petraeus as a representative of the Bush White House, rather than of the nation.
Now the same meat grinder is devouring Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence. He's a career military intelligence officer who ran the National Security Agency under President Bill Clinton. As near as I can tell, the only ax he has to grind is catching terrorists. But in the vortex of Washington politics, he has become a partisan figure. An article last week in The Hill newspaper, headlined "Democrats question credibility, consistency of DNI McConnell," itemized his misstatements and supposed flip-flops as if he were running for office.
What's weird is that the actual points of disagreement between the two sides about surveillance rules are, at this point, fairly narrow. McConnell seemed close to brokering a compromise in August, but the White House refused to allow him to sign off on the deal he had negotiated. The Bush strategy, now as ever, is to tar the Democrats as weak on terrorism. That doesn't exactly encourage bipartisanship.
A little background may help explain this murky mess. Last year, after the revelation that the Bush administration had been conducting warrantless wiretaps, there was a broad consensus that the NSA's surveillance efforts should be brought within the legal framework of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). And in January, with a new Democratic Congress sharpening its arrows, the administration did just that. It submitted its "Terrorist Surveillance Program" to the FISA court. The heart of that program was tapping communications links that pass through the United States to monitor messages between foreigners. A first FISA judge blessed the program, but a second judge had problems.
At that point, the Bush administration decided to seek new legislation formally authorizing the program, and the horse-trading began. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a team of Democrats bargaining with McConnell. The administration had two basic demands -- that Congress approve the existing practice of using U.S. communications hubs to collect intelligence about foreigners, and that Congress compel telecommunications companies to turn over records so they wouldn't face lawsuits for aiding the government.
The Democrats agreed to these requests on Aug. 2. They also accepted three other 11th-hour demands from McConnell, including authority to extend the anti-terrorist surveillance rules to wider foreign intelligence tasks. Pelosi and the Democrats thought they had a deal, but that evening McConnell told them that the "other side" -- meaning the White House -- wanted more concessions. The deal collapsed, and the White House, sensing it had the upper hand, pushed through a more accommodating Senate bill that would have to be renewed in six months.
The summer negotiations left bruised feelings on both sides -- that's the definition of political negotiations in Washington these days, isn't it? McConnell fanned the flames when he told the El Paso Times that "some Americans are going to die" because of the public debate about surveillance laws. The Democrats threw back spitballs of their own.
Now McConnell and the Democrats are back in the cage. A key administration demand is retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that agreed to help the government in what they thought was a legal program. That seems fair enough. So does the Democratic demand that the White House turn over documents that explain how these programs were created.
A healthy political system would reach a compromise to allow aggressive surveillance of our adversaries. In the asymmetric wars of the 21st century, the fact that America owns the digital communications space is one of the few advantages we have. The challenge is to put this necessary surveillance under solid legal rules. If the two sides can't get together on this one, the public should howl bloody murder.
Surveillance Showdown (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110010670) "Privacy" zealots want America to forgo intelligence capabilities during wartime. BY DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY | Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2007
more...
Blog Feeds
05-17 12:40 PM
There have been many op-ed pieces discussing the GOP's suicidal alienation of Latino voters. There is no evidence that Republicans will even get a short term boost from anti-immigration voters (the relatively small number of people who make that their major electoral issue) since these folks overwhelmingly vote Republican anyway. And the long term harm in terms of getting votes from the country's fastest growing electoral group will be massive. The Washington Post's Michael Gerson piece this morning does a good job summing up the stakes: Ethnic politics is symbolic and personal. Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kennedy gained African...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/the-gops-damaged-brand.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/05/the-gops-damaged-brand.html)
2010 For Sale Black Ops Soldier
hebron
09-15 02:29 PM
YES, Get the receipt # from the notice and use the following link to check case status.
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/Dashboard.do;jsessionid=cabTYmh5ZqYIQ5dsqWwSs
:)
Thanks veni!
https://egov.uscis.gov/cris/Dashboard.do;jsessionid=cabTYmh5ZqYIQ5dsqWwSs
:)
Thanks veni!
more...
desigirl
04-23 11:41 AM
I sent my I-140 on Apr 16, premium processing. How long does the premium processing take? I have to leave for India in a weeks time, and wanted to know if I would receive it in time.
hair Lego Black Ops
ram2nag
03-14 09:09 PM
Hello:
I am on L1A at present and my full 7 year term is expiring in DEC-2012. My company could not file EB1-Int'l Executive or manager due to ownership changes etc. But they are considering EB2 and I was told that it will be risky as I would be required to convert to H1B before that and I would lose one year of stay.
Can someone advise whether my company can apply for extension of my L1A beyond the 7 years, if it files for EB2 and would be pending for approval, instead of going through the issue of converting to H1B?
Thanks
Raman
I am on L1A at present and my full 7 year term is expiring in DEC-2012. My company could not file EB1-Int'l Executive or manager due to ownership changes etc. But they are considering EB2 and I was told that it will be risky as I would be required to convert to H1B before that and I would lose one year of stay.
Can someone advise whether my company can apply for extension of my L1A beyond the 7 years, if it files for EB2 and would be pending for approval, instead of going through the issue of converting to H1B?
Thanks
Raman
more...
pd052009
03-30 11:51 AM
Bump
This is a supporting thread to the "Want to File I-485 without Current Priority Date? Gather here" thread started by pappu.
As suggested by pappu/starsun, this supporting thread provides impacted members with additional information and tools to help the initiative.
Visit Immigration Voice Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Employment_Based_Green_Card#Process_.28EB1.2C_EB2. 2C_and_EB3.29) - for overview of Employment Based - Green Card process
Visit I485 Filing w/o current PD Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date) - for overview of this initiative
As pappu stated in the first post of the above referenced thread - some of the ongoing efforts include finding how many IV members would get benefit from such a provision and get basic details such as username/Priority Date of impacted members. Future action items might include drafting documents and letters to support this provision. There maybe actions such as sending emails etc. However we would not be able to open a public action item unless we can have thousands of our members willing to participate in a grassroots action item. This survey intends to understand the needs of our membership for this provision and collect grassroots information.
The fact is we have a dedicated group of volunteers (and we need more) who have been trying their best to spread the message about this initiative so that a strong grass-roots support can be created leading up to launch of the public action items. So far we have around 1100 people who have responded. Based on quick calculations carried out using PERM data, it is estimated that there are at least 60K-70K EB applicants waiting to file I-485/EAD/AP (this is a very conservative estimate..the actual number could be much more). Grass-roots initiatives require time and patience and we request maximum number of impacted folks to participate actively.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What can you do to participate?
1) Vote on the poll/survey created by Pappu.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here.html
Then please send an email to ivcoordinator@gmail.com (starsun) with subject - "I485 filing without current PD - Impacted Member". Include your a) IV username b) Email address c) Phone #, d) State of Residence e) Priority Date - so that grassroot efforts can be coordinated
2) Print out below Flier and circulate at all asian/indian malls/groceries/theaters. Forward the flier to your friends/co-workers and ask them to do the same.
I485 Filing Initiative Flier (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/images/a/a8/Flier_I485_latest2.pdf)
3) Volunteers have created a facebook community and an Immigration Voice WIKI page to spread the message about this initiative. Please circulate these links among your friends/co-workers who will be helped.
Please "Share" and "Link" and "send to friend" the facebook community via your Facebook account. Also include these two links when you post on the IV forum.
Facebook - IV I485 filing w/o current PD initiative community (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/Immigration-Voice-Grass-roots-Campaigns/150562351660693?v=info)
(Just FYI that you might have to be logged in for the above link to direct to the facebook community. Alternately, search for "Immigration Voice Grass-roots Campaigns" to find the community after logging in. Search "Immigration Voice" to go to the IV's main facebook page)
Immigration Wiki -
I485 Filing Initiative - IV Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM these members for additional info:
nmdial ; geevikram ; vbkris77 ; ashwin_27 ; snathan
Dedicated members can also join the leaders group: http://groups.google.com/group/485-filing-iv-initiative
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a supporting thread to the "Want to File I-485 without Current Priority Date? Gather here" thread started by pappu.
As suggested by pappu/starsun, this supporting thread provides impacted members with additional information and tools to help the initiative.
Visit Immigration Voice Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Employment_Based_Green_Card#Process_.28EB1.2C_EB2. 2C_and_EB3.29) - for overview of Employment Based - Green Card process
Visit I485 Filing w/o current PD Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date) - for overview of this initiative
As pappu stated in the first post of the above referenced thread - some of the ongoing efforts include finding how many IV members would get benefit from such a provision and get basic details such as username/Priority Date of impacted members. Future action items might include drafting documents and letters to support this provision. There maybe actions such as sending emails etc. However we would not be able to open a public action item unless we can have thousands of our members willing to participate in a grassroots action item. This survey intends to understand the needs of our membership for this provision and collect grassroots information.
The fact is we have a dedicated group of volunteers (and we need more) who have been trying their best to spread the message about this initiative so that a strong grass-roots support can be created leading up to launch of the public action items. So far we have around 1100 people who have responded. Based on quick calculations carried out using PERM data, it is estimated that there are at least 60K-70K EB applicants waiting to file I-485/EAD/AP (this is a very conservative estimate..the actual number could be much more). Grass-roots initiatives require time and patience and we request maximum number of impacted folks to participate actively.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What can you do to participate?
1) Vote on the poll/survey created by Pappu.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/forum14-members-forum/1599353-want-to-file-485-when-pd-is-not-current-gather-here.html
Then please send an email to ivcoordinator@gmail.com (starsun) with subject - "I485 filing without current PD - Impacted Member". Include your a) IV username b) Email address c) Phone #, d) State of Residence e) Priority Date - so that grassroot efforts can be coordinated
2) Print out below Flier and circulate at all asian/indian malls/groceries/theaters. Forward the flier to your friends/co-workers and ask them to do the same.
I485 Filing Initiative Flier (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/images/a/a8/Flier_I485_latest2.pdf)
3) Volunteers have created a facebook community and an Immigration Voice WIKI page to spread the message about this initiative. Please circulate these links among your friends/co-workers who will be helped.
Please "Share" and "Link" and "send to friend" the facebook community via your Facebook account. Also include these two links when you post on the IV forum.
Facebook - IV I485 filing w/o current PD initiative community (http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/pages/Immigration-Voice-Grass-roots-Campaigns/150562351660693?v=info)
(Just FYI that you might have to be logged in for the above link to direct to the facebook community. Alternately, search for "Immigration Voice Grass-roots Campaigns" to find the community after logging in. Search "Immigration Voice" to go to the IV's main facebook page)
Immigration Wiki -
I485 Filing Initiative - IV Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Current_Grass-Roots_Initiative_-_I-485_Filing_without_Current_Priority_Date)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM these members for additional info:
nmdial ; geevikram ; vbkris77 ; ashwin_27 ; snathan
Dedicated members can also join the leaders group: http://groups.google.com/group/485-filing-iv-initiative
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hot Lego Black Ops
webr
07-02 07:14 PM
Edison residents, officials outraged by Time magazine column about Indian immigrants | NJ.com (http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2010/07/edison_residents_officials_out.html)
more...
house Lego Black Ops Characters.
rexjenn
07-19 08:23 PM
...
tattoo Lego-Black-Ops-480x280.jpg
cagil
08-04 08:15 AM
I am really confused and I really need information about my situation.
I have graduated from Culinary Institute of America on June 18 and I had an application for OPT for July15. In normal process, I have received my OPT card and begin to work at the restaurant on July 15. However, because of an important family situation I have to go back to my country for one week between September 15- 22.
Now,my situation is; -I have an OPT card
-I have a job
-I am in my OPT year
BUT: on my OPT card, it says that, I can not leave the country during my OPT year
HOWEVER: I have to go back to my country for one week and there is no problem about taking off from my job.
I can not be sure about leaving the country,my question is: During the OPT period, IF you have a job and all your documents are done about OPT period, are you still should not leave the country? If you leave the USA, how can you come back?
I have graduated from Culinary Institute of America on June 18 and I had an application for OPT for July15. In normal process, I have received my OPT card and begin to work at the restaurant on July 15. However, because of an important family situation I have to go back to my country for one week between September 15- 22.
Now,my situation is; -I have an OPT card
-I have a job
-I am in my OPT year
BUT: on my OPT card, it says that, I can not leave the country during my OPT year
HOWEVER: I have to go back to my country for one week and there is no problem about taking off from my job.
I can not be sure about leaving the country,my question is: During the OPT period, IF you have a job and all your documents are done about OPT period, are you still should not leave the country? If you leave the USA, how can you come back?
more...
pictures Lego Black Ops Characters.
dallas
09-28 02:44 AM
Hi Seniors/Lawyer,
My brother is US Citizen and my parents visited US, my brother want to apply green card for my parents. What all the documents from India are needed from my parents to apply for GC?
1.What forms/applications do we have to apply?
2.What is the first step should we have to take?
3.Do we need to apply form I130 and along with that can we apply I485?
4.What all documents should my brother submit along with the forms/applications?
Please Seniors/Lawyers help me.
Thanks in advance.
Dallas
My brother is US Citizen and my parents visited US, my brother want to apply green card for my parents. What all the documents from India are needed from my parents to apply for GC?
1.What forms/applications do we have to apply?
2.What is the first step should we have to take?
3.Do we need to apply form I130 and along with that can we apply I485?
4.What all documents should my brother submit along with the forms/applications?
Please Seniors/Lawyers help me.
Thanks in advance.
Dallas
dresses Call Of Duty: Black Ops
catchupvijay
01-30 01:34 PM
My H1 is valid untill Aug 2010 and AP is pending. My spouse is on EAD and her AP approved. We plan to return back to US from a trip overseas in few weeks from now. Is there any issue if I use my H1 and spouse uses her AP. My AP is pending over 3 months now.
My H1 LCA has two work locations. Primary being NJ and PA secondary. NJ is the port of re-entry. I have letter from my company, which is based out of NJ and a client letter based in PA to support my continual services.
Help appreciated.
My H1 LCA has two work locations. Primary being NJ and PA secondary. NJ is the port of re-entry. I have letter from my company, which is based out of NJ and a client letter based in PA to support my continual services.
Help appreciated.
more...
makeup Black Ops
Blog Feeds
03-10 07:20 AM
St. Jude Children's Hospital is known throughout the world for its groundbreaking research relating to childhood cancer. One of their stars is Australian-born Charles Mullighan who has gained attention for discovering what is described as "the missing piece" in the puzzle of genetic mutations that contribute to the onset of childhood leukemia. Mullighan recently described his work to the Memphis Business Journal: �The most common childhood cancer,� says Mullighan, �is ALL, a genetic disease.� He explains that ALL stops normal white blood cells, which constitute the body�s natural immune system, from growing; without adequate natural immunity, infections eventually overwhelm and...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/immigrant-of-the-day-charles-mullighan-cancer-researcher.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/03/immigrant-of-the-day-charles-mullighan-cancer-researcher.html)
girlfriend Lego Black Ops Rapes Faces
silent_k
05-14 01:30 PM
Hi,
I had a H1-b visa until September 2008 from Company A. I transferred the H1-B to Company B and it was approved in December 2008. When I went for my stamping in March 2009 it was denied under 221(g). My employer then withdrew the H1-B petition because of lack of projects. I am now planning to apply for a B1/B2 visa at the Mumbai Consulate. Any one have a similar experience to share or have an idea on my chances of sucess?
Thanks
I had a H1-b visa until September 2008 from Company A. I transferred the H1-B to Company B and it was approved in December 2008. When I went for my stamping in March 2009 it was denied under 221(g). My employer then withdrew the H1-B petition because of lack of projects. I am now planning to apply for a B1/B2 visa at the Mumbai Consulate. Any one have a similar experience to share or have an idea on my chances of sucess?
Thanks
hairstyles lack ops
Bpositive
10-31 10:47 PM
sorry in advance if this seems too obvious...if anyone has first hand experience, I really appreciate your response
i am planning to travel through UK to India from US. I have a valid 5 yr tourist visa. Do I still need a transit visa?
i am planning to travel through UK to India from US. I have a valid 5 yr tourist visa. Do I still need a transit visa?
wc_user
10-27 04:24 PM
I asked my attorney if we could anything about the delay in the issuance of EAD. My attorney mentioned that she would send an e-mail to USCIS. Is there an e-mail id that attorneys use to contact USCIS ? Offcourse, I could have asked my attorney, but I thought I would post the question here first.
StuckInTheMuck
07-11 10:28 AM
There are multiple threads on this topic running already.
No comments:
Post a Comment