chanduv23
12-24 08:44 PM
This thread has to stay on top
wallpaper girls tattooed their lips
chanduv23
08-06 10:02 AM
I will be there
chaks7
01-19 04:10 PM
My wife's co. provides health insurance for both of us. We are both on H1-B.
If my wife quits her job, can we still be eligible for COBRA because at that point she will be doing COS to H4. If someone has any experience or knowledge about this please reply. It will help us deal things better as we are better prepared with what could be our options.
Does COBRA depend on H1-B status? Also recently Obama administration has worked a plan where the payments on COBRA are less than the usual amounts, COBRA subsidy? Can you provide details regarding that?
If my wife quits her job, can we still be eligible for COBRA because at that point she will be doing COS to H4. If someone has any experience or knowledge about this please reply. It will help us deal things better as we are better prepared with what could be our options.
Does COBRA depend on H1-B status? Also recently Obama administration has worked a plan where the payments on COBRA are less than the usual amounts, COBRA subsidy? Can you provide details regarding that?
2011 Lip tattoo Lip tattoo,
desi485
09-27 04:32 PM
mine was filed NSC but transferred to TSC. I called my lawyer and just heard this news. lawyer received notices today.
For anyone still waiting, do not worry. this process is not very streamlined. It may get delayed but it will come. be patient.
AFAIK -> one day after the receipt date, my checks were still not encashed.
For anyone still waiting, do not worry. this process is not very streamlined. It may get delayed but it will come. be patient.
AFAIK -> one day after the receipt date, my checks were still not encashed.
more...
lagsam
04-10 11:20 PM
Hi I am planning for self filing EAD. I want to do e-file, but I heard that that if you are e-filing you need to go for finger printing. At the same time I also heard that no matter whether you go for e-filing or sending application to USCIS, if your finger printing is expired than you may need to go for the finger printing. Please suggest the best way to file for the EAD(I-765 form).
Als one more thing "Which USCIS Office?" section which date I need to put there.
I sent mine on April 5th and I sent it to the filing address in Arizona because I live in Colorado. Please check the new filing address. Good luck.
Als one more thing "Which USCIS Office?" section which date I need to put there.
I sent mine on April 5th and I sent it to the filing address in Arizona because I live in Colorado. Please check the new filing address. Good luck.
wandmaker
10-24 02:46 PM
Some one left me this comment with disapproval :)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gifone-way ticket (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=298791#post298791)10-24-2008 10:56 AMYou donot know any thing
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gifone-way ticket (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=298797#post298797)10-24-2008 10:15 AM.
Whomsover it may be - I beleive, it is slow day (/ no work ) at work for you!
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gifone-way ticket (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=298791#post298791)10-24-2008 10:56 AMYou donot know any thing
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gifone-way ticket (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=298797#post298797)10-24-2008 10:15 AM.
Whomsover it may be - I beleive, it is slow day (/ no work ) at work for you!
more...
srkumar_2k
07-25 11:27 PM
Hi
I have a H1B visa valid till Apr 2009(still i can extend 3 more years). I am going to file I-140 and I-485 together on EB2 category. Along with this I am going to apply EAD for me and my wife.
What will be the status of my H1B if my EAD got approved and I-140 is still pending. In case if my I-140 get rejects, will i be out of status or I can continue with same H1B if i don't change company?
Or better to apply EAD for me (not to my wife) after the I-140 approval?
Please help me..
Thanks in advance.
--Raj
I have a H1B visa valid till Apr 2009(still i can extend 3 more years). I am going to file I-140 and I-485 together on EB2 category. Along with this I am going to apply EAD for me and my wife.
What will be the status of my H1B if my EAD got approved and I-140 is still pending. In case if my I-140 get rejects, will i be out of status or I can continue with same H1B if i don't change company?
Or better to apply EAD for me (not to my wife) after the I-140 approval?
Please help me..
Thanks in advance.
--Raj
2010 Lips Tattoo!
raamskl
10-04 08:30 PM
Thanks for sharing.
more...
pbuckeye
06-25 02:45 PM
If you can get the email from the client mentioning that they can't give a letter, then I feel that could be enough reason for MTR (but check with an attorney). Have you explored about filing again in premium with new or more documents (see below)?
Could you confirm if you already submitted:
1. MSA/SOW/PO (all or any of these). Does the SOW/PO have your name on it?
2. Contact info of your supervisor at client site. I think this is very important.
Was the denial solely based on the client letter?
Could you confirm if you already submitted:
1. MSA/SOW/PO (all or any of these). Does the SOW/PO have your name on it?
2. Contact info of your supervisor at client site. I think this is very important.
Was the denial solely based on the client letter?
hair ME” tattooed on her lips,
Green_Always
09-22 10:18 PM
Any News about how is Real Estate Prices / Home Prices in Indian Metros now ?
Will we see problems over there ? or Problem is already there ? Look forward to hear some views in this regard.
Will we see problems over there ? or Problem is already there ? Look forward to hear some views in this regard.
more...
johnamit
07-18 09:47 AM
this window of opportunity to file 485 till August 17th will provide some interim benefits to most of us but we are destined to see long long wait before 485 approval. So I suggest we keep doing our efforts to get achieve other goals like recapture of unused visa number and things of that nature. We need a course of action to raise our voice which could include interaction with congresswoman, rally, letters from Hitech industry leaders and other things of this nature. I am hoping Core will come up with a plan soon.
hot lip tattoos. vintage heart
dealsnet
08-04 12:07 PM
We will forget many legal requirement after getting GC due to the excitment.
But we need to do these things to finish our GC journey.
Thank you for this information. Never realized that this should be done.
But we need to do these things to finish our GC journey.
Thank you for this information. Never realized that this should be done.
more...
house A PAIR OF LIPS TATTOOED ON
ameryki
09-23 07:59 PM
i am waiting for response from my lawyer in atlanta. i was wondering if people have gone through similar situation where they take a promotion with same employer or change jobs. Since AC21 leaves a lot of room for interpretation, it would be helpful to know past cases.
thanks
mate i took a promotion even before applying for 485. if you are in a similar role with at least 50% of your new job duties the same as what your labor certification states you should have no problems.
thanks
mate i took a promotion even before applying for 485. if you are in a similar role with at least 50% of your new job duties the same as what your labor certification states you should have no problems.
tattoo horrible tattoo designs
shankar_thanu
07-27 09:10 AM
Very helpful man, thanks.
and yes, it would be helpful to have this somewhere in a prominent spot on IV..
and yes, it would be helpful to have this somewhere in a prominent spot on IV..
more...
pictures Posted by admin in Lip Tattoos
Siboo
07-28 07:22 PM
My prediction for this year..
EB1 = Current
EB2 = Jan 2003 (Because of BEC cases coming out, chance for them to file I-485 in October)
EB3 = U
This looks like September 13 bulletin.
What about October 02, 2007 update??:D :D
EB1 = Current
EB2 = Jan 2003 (Because of BEC cases coming out, chance for them to file I-485 in October)
EB3 = U
This looks like September 13 bulletin.
What about October 02, 2007 update??:D :D
dresses tattoo of lips.
nonimmi
05-29 03:58 PM
Early 2004 Priority date (EB3 India) may still be possible considering the huge movement happened last month. Who knows?? :)
more...
makeup Tattoos enter the realm of
browncow
03-12 10:31 PM
congrats.
girlfriend employs tattoos (permanent
vedicman
01-04 08:34 AM
Ten years ago, George W. Bush came to Washington as the first new president in a generation or more who had deep personal convictions about immigration policy and some plans for where he wanted to go with it. He wasn't alone. Lots of people in lots of places were ready to work on the issue: Republicans, Democrats, Hispanic advocates, business leaders, even the Mexican government.
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
Like so much else about the past decade, things didn't go well. Immigration policy got kicked around a fair bit, but next to nothing got accomplished. Old laws and bureaucracies became increasingly dysfunctional. The public grew anxious. The debates turned repetitive, divisive and sterile.
The last gasp of the lost decade came this month when the lame-duck Congress - which struck compromises on taxes, gays in the military andarms control - deadlocked on the Dream Act.
The debate was pure political theater. The legislation was first introduced in 2001 to legalize the most virtuous sliver of the undocumented population - young adults who were brought here as children by their parents and who were now in college or the military. It was originally designed to be the first in a sequence of measures to resolve the status of the nation's illegal immigrants, and for most of the past decade, it was often paired with a bill for agricultural workers. The logic was to start with the most worthy and economically necessary. But with the bill put forward this month as a last-minute, stand-alone measure with little chance of passage, all the debate accomplished was to give both sides a chance to excite their followers. In the age of stalemate, immigration may have a special place in the firmament.
The United States is in the midst of a wave of immigration as substantial as any ever experienced. Millions of people from abroad have settled here peacefully and prosperously, a boon to the nation. Nonetheless, frustration with policy sours the mood. More than a quarter of the foreign-born are here without authorization. Meanwhile, getting here legally can be a long, costly wrangle. And communities feel that they have little say over sudden changes in their populations. People know that their world is being transformed, yet Washington has not enacted a major overhaul of immigration law since 1965. To move forward, we need at least three fundamental changes in the way the issue is handled.
Being honest about our circumstances is always a good place to start. There might once have been a time to ponder the ideal immigration system for the early 21st century, but surely that time has passed. The immediate task is to clean up the mess caused by inaction, and that is going to require compromises on all sides. Next, we should reexamine the scope of policy proposals. After a decade of sweeping plans that went nowhere, working piecemeal is worth a try at this point. Finally, the politics have to change. With both Republicans and Democrats using immigration as a wedge issue, the chances are that innocent bystanders will get hurt - soon.
The most intractable problem by far involves the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants currently living in the United States. They are the human legacy of unintended consequences and the failure to act.
Advocates on one side, mostly Republicans, would like to see enforcement policies tough enough to induce an exodus. But that does not seem achievable anytime soon, because unauthorized immigrants have proved to be a very durable and resilient population. The number of illegal arrivals dropped sharply during the recession, but the people already here did not leave, though they faced massive unemployment and ramped-up deportations. If they could ride out those twin storms, how much enforcement over how many years would it take to seriously reduce their numbers? Probably too much and too many to be feasible. Besides, even if Democrats suffer another electoral disaster or two, they are likely still to have enough votes in the Senate to block an Arizona-style law that would make every cop an alien-hunter.
Advocates on the other side, mostly Democrats, would like to give a path to citizenship to as many of the undocumented as possible. That also seems unlikely; Republicans have blocked every effort at legalization. Beyond all the principled arguments, the Republicans would have to be politically suicidal to offer citizenship, and therefore voting rights, to 11 million people who would be likely to vote against them en masse.
So what happens to these folks? As a starting point, someone could ask them what they want. The answer is likely to be fairly limited: the chance to live and work in peace, the ability to visit their countries of origin without having to sneak back across the border and not much more.
Would they settle for a legal life here without citizenship? Well, it would be a huge improvement over being here illegally. Aside from peace of mind, an incalculable benefit, it would offer the near-certainty of better jobs. That is a privilege people will pay for, and they could be asked to keep paying for it every year they worked. If they coughed up one, two, three thousand dollars annually on top of all other taxes, would that be enough to dent the argument that undocumented residents drain public treasuries?
There would be a larger cost, however, if legalization came without citizenship: the cost to the nation's political soul of having a population deliberately excluded from the democratic process. No one would set out to create such a population. But policy failures have created something worse. We have 11 million people living among us who not only can't vote but also increasingly are afraid to report a crime or to get vaccinations for a child or to look their landlord in the eye.
�
Much of the debate over the past decade has been about whether legalization would be an unjust reward for "lawbreakers." The status quo, however, rewards everyone who has ever benefited from the cheap, disposable labor provided by illegal workers. To start to fix the situation, everyone - undocumented workers, employers, consumers, lawmakers - has to admit their errors and make amends.
The lost decade produced big, bold plans for social engineering. It was a 10-year quest for a grand bargain that would repair the entire system at once, through enforcement, ID cards, legalization, a temporary worker program and more. Fierce cloakroom battles were also fought over the shape and size of legal immigration. Visa categories became a venue for ideological competition between business, led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and elements of labor, led by the AFL-CIO, over regulation of the labor market: whether to keep it tight to boost wages or keep it loose to boost growth.
But every attempt to fix everything at once produced a political parabola effect. As legislation reached higher, its base of support narrowed. The last effort, and the biggest of them all, collapsed on the Senate floor in July 2007. Still, the idea of a grand bargain has been kept on life support by advocates of generous policies. Just last week, President Obama and Hispanic lawmakers renewed their vows to seek comprehensive immigration reform, even as the prospects grow bleaker. Meanwhile, the other side has its own designs, demanding total control over the border and an enforcement system with no leaks before anything else can happen.
Perhaps 10 years ago, someone like George W. Bush might reasonably have imagined that immigration policy was a good place to resolve some very basic social and economic issues. Since then, however, the rhetoric around the issue has become so swollen and angry that it inflames everything it touches. Keeping the battles small might increase the chance that each side will win some. But, as we learned with the Dream Act, even taking small steps at this point will require rebooting the discourse.
Not long ago, certainly a decade ago, immigration was often described as an issue of strange bedfellows because it did not divide people neatly along partisan or ideological lines. That world is gone now. Instead, elements of both parties are using immigration as a wedge issue. The intended result is cleaving, not consensus. This year, many Republicans campaigned on vows, sometimes harshly stated, to crack down on illegal immigration. Meanwhile, many Democrats tried to rally Hispanic voters by demonizing restrictionists on the other side.
Immigration politics could thus become a way for both sides to feed polarization. In the short term, they can achieve their political objectives by stoking voters' anxiety with the scariest hobgoblins: illegal immigrants vs. the racists who would lock them up. Stumbling down this road would produce a decade more lost than the last.
Suro in Wasahington Post
Roberto Suro is a professor of journalism and public policy at the University of Southern California. surorob@gmail.com
hairstyles Trendy Lip Tattoos Designs For
bingl
04-15 11:47 PM
My Driving license is expiring soon (the day my I94 expires ) ....I have been on H4 till now ....but my husband is on EAD now . When I went to renew my license they asked me to get EAD since my I94 will expire soon . Is that the only way to renew ? Can I file for AP and use that, since I will have to travel to India anyways ?
n_2006
02-10 12:21 AM
Infact, I got good news today. My MTR approved after 3 months. My 485 was denied due to withdrawal of I140 by previous employer (AC21 case).
So I had applied MTR and approved today. Looks like USCIS understood the error and approving all MTR (I didn't hear a single MTR rejection on AC21 case )
Did you work during this period?
So I had applied MTR and approved today. Looks like USCIS understood the error and approving all MTR (I didn't hear a single MTR rejection on AC21 case )
Did you work during this period?
perm2gc
01-08 04:34 PM
How did you guys manage to get H1's so recently from H4?
Is there a way that H4 are exempt from the H1 quota?
The H4 to H1 applied in 2006 quota is very slow.Some cases are getting approval even in jan(one of my friends wife got approval last week).
No rule yet to exempt H4 from H1 quota.
Is there a way that H4 are exempt from the H1 quota?
The H4 to H1 applied in 2006 quota is very slow.Some cases are getting approval even in jan(one of my friends wife got approval last week).
No rule yet to exempt H4 from H1 quota.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét